The INDIANA RAILWAY is a double tracked, heavy duty mainline railroad. Using a center track between both mainlines for a passing track and crossover between tracks. Using #10 turnouts on the mainlines for entrance into the center track. Want to use a #10 [or equivalent] at end of each center track. Since there are NO #5 wye turnouts available, would you use a #10 r/l turnout or get going with the HANDLAYING? Am I right in saying that a #5 wye turnout would be to equal to a #10 turnout? The INRY uses 2-6-6-2's, 2-8-8-2's, 4-6-6-4's, 2-8-8-4's and 2-10-2's for mainline coal haulage. I have the room and want #10 [mailine] #7 [yard] turnouts with large radius, easement included curves to handle this motive power. COMMENTS?
I'll be interested to what others say but my feeling is that #5 wye would be equal to a #5 turnout. FastTracks shows their #5 with a 11.31 degree divergent route and the #10 turnout with a 5.71 degree divergent route. The wye looks like it has the divergent routes going off at equal angles on both sides of the center-line vs. off the center-line to one side or the other which is the case of a right-hand or left-hand turnout. I'll wait on other's opinion though, Sumner
Update: Under their specs for the #5 wye they show the divergent track radius equal to 25". They show the divergent track radius for a #10 right-hand or left-hand at 64". Sumner
Officially: No. Pine is right. The number refers to the angle of the crossing frog, and if neither track is straight, that angle changes. Do all the model track makers conform to the Official Line? Obviously not.
http://www.pcrnmra.org/pcr/clinics/Kolm-TurnoutsWhatYouNeedtoKnow-PCR2008-handout.pdf It depends upon whether you're comparing frog angle or closure radius.
That make sense. The subject got me intriged so spent more time on Fast Tracks site comparing straight vs. wye turnout and here are the numbers comparing some of their straight and wye code 55 turnouts and as acptulsa pointed out not all design theirs the same even though the turnout number might be the same. We can see that their #5 wye and straight have the same diverging route ratio and angle at the frog. The difference is the diverging route radius. Since the wye curves away from both sides of the 1:5 frog the radius of the curvature on both sides is split and thus there is a larger diverging route radius than a straight turnout where all of the curvature is on one side only. With the wye the diverging route is now both routes vs. a straight turnout where one route is straight and the train is more unlikely to have a problem taking the turnout at speed if it stays on the straight route. The #5 wye does have a larger diverging route radius than a #5 straight but still the diverging routes angles are almost twice that of a #10 straight and the diverging route radius is much tighter at 25" vs. the #10's 64" radius. If your choice of turnouts were the ones above a #7 (which they don't have) would probably have a diverging route radius of close to a #10 straight. The #6 and #8 wye's have smaller and larger radiuses and both sill have a larger diverging route angle than the #10 straight. The following is from the article that 'Point353' gave a link to above. The #5 frog would match the frog angle of the #10 that the train would see coming to it from the straight route into the turnout. It would still be a #5, with that angle but since the diverging routes diverge equally at the frog it would appear as a shallower angle vs. a #5 on a straight turnout. However, the diverging radius of the wye turnout is much smaller than the diverging radius of the #10 turnout which could present an operational problem vs. a train going through a #10. The above is comparing Fast Tracks to Fast Tracks. What happen with different manufacture's turnouts of the same number addressing acptulsa's point "Do all the model track makers conform to the Official Line? Obviously not."? Above is an example of a #5 turnout. They both have a #5 (1:5) frog angle so are the same in the area of the frog with the same diverging angle there. I made one longer than the other in the area from the points to the frog (the lead area). The longer one has a longer distance for the curvature area of the turnout between the points and the frog so the curve is shallower here. This will result in a larger diverging route radius which is good as far as keeping the train on the tracks at a higher speed. The drawback is that it makes the turnout longer. So as acptulsa pointed out manufactures can take different approaches to building a turnout with the same frog number. Back to the original question of "Am I right in saying that a #5 wye turnout would be to equal to a #10 turnout?". I'd still have to say no as the diverging radius will be much less. A #5 wye could be designed to probably have the same diverging radius but the turnout would have to then be made much longer which could present a problem depending on your track plan, so you may as well then consider a higher number wye or a different approach. From the Sumner
You have to remember to divide the diverging angle of the Wye in half. The 11.31 deg is the angle between the two tracks, but from the tangent, each track is diverging 5.66 degrees. Not quite a #10, but very close. The attached shows what I think @porkypine52 is looking for. Uses 3 #5 wyes at each end. As shown, track spacing (n scale) is 1.125" in the 3 track section, and 1.3" at the double track areas. If the double main needs to be closer, one can simply ease the flex tracks beyond the wyes back to the correct spacing. And, if you want wider spacing in the central section, just lengthen the transition between the facing wyes at each end. And, of course, the central track area will be MUCH longer, I presume. I used FastTracks templates in AnyRail, but this could be built using any set of wyes. If needing to use #10s, then the decision comes to how to curve out the mainline into the switches, and the necessary assymetry at each end.
Yes agree with that and tried to say the same but your choice of words was better. A problem that he might have is the wye still won't be as easy for the train to go through at speed vs. the #10 if that is a concern as the curvature in the turnout between the points and the frog will be a much smaller radius than the #10's is on the divergent route and will be there regardless of the route through the turnout vs. being able to also choose the straight route on the #10. Might not be a problem in a yard area or other area where trains are operating slower but on the mainline it could be, Sumner
You can like in Italy, where the two main track diverge with a very shallow curve before the crossovers thus allowing normal turnouts on the main (therefore track speed is allowed), and leave the diverging route to the passing Siding at reduced speed. Therefore in this case keep the 10s on the main, and use the wyes you like on the siding. Inviato dal mio BLN-L21 utilizzando Tapatalk
The reason some sidings require reduced speed is there's a reverse curve there. Trains go through both left and right turns in a short distance, which is bad. The setup with wye switches eases the curvature of the reverse curve by splitting it between the two crossovers. With straight switches on a straight track, the main has no curve at all and the siding has a pretty sharp reverse curve; with this setup every route involves a reverse curve, but they're all less sharp. But there's a way to go from two to three tracks, or from three to two, with no reverse curve on any track. Each route involves a right turn or a left turn, not both. The trick is, go from two to three tracks at the very spot where the tracks come out of a curve: IMG_20200125_151807875 by acptulsa posted Jan 25, 2020 at 3:23 PM By using the transition from straight to curve, this setup eliminates both reverse curves and wye switches. What you see here is two left hand switches and one right hander. And with no train swinging right and immediately left (or vice versa), you could use number eight switches and it'll still be smoother and more trouble-free. None of the tracks requires a speed restriction.
The image that POINT353 posted is what I'm looking at. The C & O, UP, N & W, and other DOUBLE TRACKED Roads used them. Would want mainline to be straight, so a thru train could maintain it's speed. So I guess that I am looking at a nice big frog number wye turnout at each end of the center track in this situation. Time to get going with the HANDLAYING turnout building on INDIANA RAILWAY.
I think I'll build one next myself later today or tomorrow probably. It will be a #4 to go in my small staging yard. I'll take pictures and add them to my Trackwork pages here... http://1fatgmc.com/RailRoad/Trackwork/Trackwork-Index.html Sumner
Yesterday I went ahead and ... ... build a code 55 #4 wye turnout and will try it on the small staging yard I'm building. There is also a short video of it here.... ... and I have a lot more pictures of it under construction here... http://1fatgmc.com/RailRoad/Trackwork/page-13.html It will be a while before I actually put it in the layout for a real world workout, Sumner
I just recently redesigning my future layout similar to what you are talking about. I am using a center siding between the two main tracks in the yard. This is listed in this same category under the triple or quadruple continue loop, I have significantly redesigned this to a double continuous loop. Though I will be using Tomix n scale track. Plus this will be the siding in the middle of my classification yard. This is a 15 degrees wye. Probably not the same style you are looking for. https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10037825
In this situation the divergent track specs on the #10 are going to be the ruling numbers. As long as the wye had as good as or better specs you would be in good shape I would think. If you are handlaying using Fast Tracks templates or fixtures the #10 has a frog angle of 5.71 degrees and a diverging route radius of 64". Their #8 wye has a frog angle of 7.13 but we need to divide that in half since it is a wye giving us 3.57 degrees and it has a diverging route radius of 70". Both of those numbers are better than the #10 so I'd probably go with that myself. They have a #7 template but don't give the specs and the #6 had a good enough frog angle at 4.73 degrees ( 9.46/2) but the radius is 35" so not as good as the #10's 64". I have a feeling the #7's radius is also under the #10's, Sumner
Yes pine you are correct. An #10 wye is equivalent to a #5. I researched the Tomix Wye and their 15 degree wye is about equivalent to a number 8 frog. Actually a little more like a 7.75 frog this is just my calculations by using the NMRA page 74 of their turnout PDF write up. https://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/tn-12_2015.03.05.pdf
