Hi all, First post here and I was looking for some help on a layout I would like to build. First a little background. The room in which the layout will be is in the basement and currently 13' x 6' and will be framed out and insulated. So being conservative, let's call it 12 1/2' x 5 1/2' when ready. I want to build on on the 12 1/2' and on the two 5 1/2' walls, basically creating an unused staple profile. I have been reading a lot of books on design and all and one topic I came across I am considering is the double decker layout. I have a few questions regarding this: 1.) How much of a rise from the the top of the lower deck to the bottom of the upper deck is needed so they do not "compete against each other"? 2.) With a depth of 30" on the main sections of the layout, will an 11" radius do well for a helix? 3.) How much depth should the upper deck be? I would think about 16" to 18"? Just looking for some input as this would almost double the size of my empire.:bear-shocked: By the way, N scale is my choice due to space constraints. Any help would be appreciated.
1. This depends on the height and the depth of both levels. Because of the nature of double decking, neither level is likely to end up an your 'optimum' height, so you end up compromising a lot, though I think it is worth it. Anyway, what I would do is draw a sideview picture with a set of eyes at eye height, about as far from the layout as you expect to stand, and start messing with options. I ended up with a 9 inch wide upper level at roughly eye level (it is changing elevation so it starts lower than that, ends higher). The 18 inch lower level is at mid/low chest level. Even though they are only around a foot apart, the upper really stays out of the way when looking at the lower. 2. You are going to need a lot bigger radius than 11 inches on your helix. Here's some math. to get clearance between turns, you need at least 2.5 inches (and you are going to need to be pretty clever to have that little). And you really don't want a grade of more than 2.5%. So, to go up 2.5 inches with a 2.5% grade takes 2.5"/2.5%=100 inches. Since the circumerference of the circle is pi times the diameter, and we just figured the circumference is 100 inches, the diameter is 31.8 inches, so the radius is about 16". That's pretty much the minimum. Mine has a radius of of 18 and 19.5 if I remeber right. 3. How deep the upper dick should be ties back into the height and depth of the lower deck as well. There's no one answer. Jeff
Welcome to Trainboard and to the Layout Design forum. Regarding your questions about two decks interfering with each other. There is a dynamic interaction between your eye level, each shelf height, each shelf depth, the thickness of each shelf (a 4 inch thick and 18" deep shelf obscures less of a lower level than a 6 inch thick shelf), and aisle width (yes! aisle width too, because it affects how far back you can comfortably stand from the layout which affects how deeply you can see into lower decks without bending). Establishing the ideal for you personally will take lots of trial and error...WARNING: Believing the numbers that worked for someone else will work for you because you are the same height, will lead to disappointing results! Others' numbers will get you to a decent starting point, but play with some adjustable shelving and varying shelf depths and thicknesses (just tape a flap of paper to hang across the front to simulate different shelf thicknesses). If you put structures and trains on each shelf, vary how close to the front or back of the shelf they can be located and yet still be fully visible, because the tops of buildings at the back of lower shelves will be obscured by upper decks. Some people don't mind missing building tops as long as they see the trains; others what to see the trains centrally framed by beautiful scenery/buildings in front, in back, and above. When you test spacing between decks, also test how high or low both levels will be, because a 12 inch difference at 48 and 60 inches is dramatically different to work on (MUCH easier on the back) than a 12 inch difference at 36 and 48 inches. Test the spacing with the actual heights AND DEPTHS of the shelves so you can tell how much of the lower deck you can see and comfortably work on without having to bend under the forward front edge of the upper deck. Remember that the upper deck also has a thickness to it that will interfere with seeing to the back of the lower level: if the front edge of the upper deck is 2 inches thick, you will be able to see more of the lower deck without bending down than if the front edge of the upper deck is 4 inches thick. (Note that you can have a thicker shelf in the middle or at the back of the upper deck without visually blocking the lower deck.) FWIW, the fascia on my upper deck is 4 inches and on my lower deck is 6 inches, even though I'm using 1x2 stringers on L-girders to support the surface of both decks. The upper fascia is narrower to let me see deeper into the lower deck without bending. The width of aisles affects how much you can see of the lower deck because the upper deck blocks your view more when you stand upright in the middle of a 24 inch aisle than when you stand in the middle of a 36 inch aisle. Tell us a little more about how you plan to get from one deck to the other...is an 11 inch radius stacked helix your only option? That could be very frustrating to construct, maintain, or make major repairs on.
Welcome to the Layout design Forum! I would like to secons ppuinn's recommendations: Build some mockups, variying shelf height, depth and thickness. There are indeed a lot of variables that will determine what works for you! Also I suggest to have some considerations how you plan to light the decks: If the upper shelf has a certain depth you might want to install lights under the upper deck to get sufficient light to the lower deck. It adds to the thickness of the upper deck and might influence your construction methods, so it is worthwhile to consider early on. For what it is worth, I use flourescent tubes under the upper deck, you can see the effect in the top left hand corner: On the radius of the Helix: Use the largest diameter you can fit. Do not skimp here, as it can lead to troubles. Do not make the helix the ruling grade, as a stalling train in the helix is no fun (experience talking!!). Also if it is too steep you might have troubles getting down the helix: Bucking engines, light cars derails as they get pushed by the following train, truck-mounted couplers derails the cars and so on.... A helix is not a bad thing ( I got 3 of them on my layout), but make sure you use the largest possible radius. Do a search here on the layout forum for "Helix" and you will find a lot of good guidance and examples. Cheers Dirk
Suppose you put a bowl-shaped spiral helix in one arm of the "staple". On the lower deck, you could have a 3 or 4 track yard (maybe mostly hidden so you have room for more industries) that serves industries on the lower level. On the upper deck would be more industries and an interchange track. You would run trains from the yard to the lower level industries, up the helix, to the upper level industries and the interchange track, then around a reversing loop and back down the helix to the yard. You would have the option of also designing 2 separate loops...one on each level...so you could do some continuous running, if you just want to sit and watch trains orbit. Advantages: 1. 2 levels, The lower deck would have about 11 or 12 feet of 30 inch shelving for industries, with the possibility of extending 6 to 10 inches of scenery and industries for an additional 3 feet along the front of the helix. The upper deck would have about 11 to 12 feet with 12 to 24 inch deep shelving and the possibility of 4 feet of 6 to 10 inches of scenery containing the last 1/2 of the top loop of the helix as it rises onto the upper deck. This double deck yields a little less than twice as much linear modeling space as a single deck arrangement. 2. Maximum grade in the helix = 2%. For a 12 inch radius stacked helix, the grade needed to achieve 2 inches between railheads is 2.65% 3. A bowl-shaped spiral helix (continually increasing radius from 12 inches to 17 and 5/8ths inch radius as the track climbs the helix) offers ease of construction, maintenance and operation not found in a stacked helix. Disadvantages: 1. The spiral helix is a voracious space hog. A 12 inch radius cylinder-shaped stacked helix would occupy a little over a 2 x 2 foot space instead of the 3 x 5.5 feet taken up by a spiral helix 2. The actual square footage of sceniced layout, given this 12.5 by 5.5 benchwork, will be slightly more than a single deck because of the real estate grabbing spiral helix and because the depth of shelving is reduced by more than half...On 2 decks with a spiral helix, you will only have a total of about 50 square feet (upper under 20, lower over 30) as opposed to 46 square feet on a single deck. In this size room, the spiral helix does not offer as much benefit as would be provided in a larger space. The stacked helix will be much more efficient space-wise, but construction and maintenance will be problematic, and the 2.65% or greater grade will adversely affect operations.
If you plan on running anything longer than 70 scale feet long, a lot of equipment will hate that 11" radius helix. Mine's built at a min 15.5" radius. It is a spiral helix, exactly as Dave H described. He practically built the darned thing for me; doing so much work assisting me! Here's a couple views: Overall: The helix not only connects the levels, but it also allows continuous runing from Plain to Crescent and back, and to staging, via this wye arrangement:
I didn't use a helix. I used what it termed a "nolix." Basically I ran more or less level along the front side of the layout, then climbed along the back wall. On one decl I had to climb along the front edge to gain the height needed to reach the second deck. I considered a helix as a space waster in a 11 x 23 foot room. Take a look at my railimages album (link below) and you'll find my ideas about getting from deck to deck. And, welcome to Trainboard!
My layout is actually a helix and a nolix. There is a helix at one "end". From the other "end" tje layout gradually climbs back to the top of the helix.
Hi StrasburgNut, and welcome to TrainBoard. Firstly, I am in the process of building an N scale layout in a spare room only slightly bigger that your area, the length is the same but I have 3 extra feet in width (check out "My layout" in the signature line). My thoughts on doing a double deck... yeah... go for it. A helix is do-able. As for deck separation, that is something that you need to decide for your own needs, but less than 12" won't work, and over 18" is probably too much. My deck separation is set at 16" with the upper deck width at 17" and the lower deck at 30". The lower deck is 44" from the floor and the upper at 60" from the floor. The raduis with in my spiral helix minimum 16". I think 11" radius is maybe too tight. I am happy with the way the layout has come together as it suits my height and reach, although I do need to stand on a low stool to reach the back of the upper level. As Dave H. mentioned you will need to tailor the layout to suit you. Have fun, and keep asking questions here, you will receive a lot of good advise.
This would be my primary concern, in the room you've outlined as useable. A fair amount of available space will be dedicated to that helix. As suggested previously, this is where using a mockup will be a very valuable tool. Welcome to TrainBoard! Boxcab E50
Everyone has brought up some real good points. Thanks to everyone. I am thinking a helix of a connected double decker may not be the best idea for the space I have. I do have some thoughts on what I would like to model, and any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Industries: Coal Mines Logging Camp Power Plant Paper Mill Lumber Yard Furniture Plant Other LDE's: (Thanks Tony Koester!) Engine Yard Switching / Staging Yard Branch Line to the "outside world" Optional Items: Two small Towns Trolley Line connecting towns Light Rail connecting towns Trolley Line & Light Rail connecting towns What would be the minimum distance you would use between the small towns? I was thinking 3' to 4' at the minimum and 6' to 7' at the most. I was thinking of a river or rocky out cropping between the towns to simulate a longer distance if I use the 3' to 4' distance, but if I use the longer distance, I could put the yards between them. Any suggestions?
It looks like you want to have industries that are related, so you can run trains between them, correct? Like Logs from the camp to the Lumber yard (maybe a sawmill in between) and finished wood products to the furniture plant... In my view to get all this into the available space you should consider a double decker. The helix is a concern, but not a big waste of space as you can scenic the top of it. You can put a removable "lid" on the helix (it is still useful to be able to stand in the helix so you can access all tracks easily) that can hold one or two of your industries. I would only put buildings on the "lid", no tracks (as it is more cumbersome to remove all cars from the industrie to open the lid). So if the top of the helix is used, it is not space wasted, but makes all of the second level a net gain. How about this: Lower Level: Yard Engine Facility Power Plant Paper Mill Larger City (as this would be a logical place for a power plant and a mill) Upper Level More rural character One smaller town (so you can run passenger trains) Furniture Plant (could be the reason the town exist...) Lumber Camp (could use a small branch from the town to the camp...) Coal Mine The track on the upper level could be a branch that terminates in the town, so all trains would need to be turned and send back "down". I would always try to get some continous running option as well, either on the lower level from staging (hidden) to the yard / city and back to staging. Alternatively from staging to the yard, up the helix, to the small town and to upper level hidden staging. Food for thought.... Cheers Dirk
