N Scale T-Trak

For N Scale, club layouts push your curves out... into the 24" to 30 " radius curves. If you are playing with toy train curves (9" to 11") you will have problems. Take advantage of the fact you can. As you'll hear me say from time to time, "Wider Curves are the Best Curves."

 

The purpose behind T-trak and its 11" and 12 3/8" curves is that those radii are the smallest that can be set up on a 30" wide table. The "T" in T-trak stands for Table Top. To go to wider curves in the unitrack system requires the use of tables being doubled, placed next to each other with modules set up on both. I have seen some corner modules using 15" and 13 3/4" curves and that helps some. My club is considering using the super elevated unitrack that is 18 7/8" and 17 5/8" for corners that are basically 21"x21". This means that all tables have to be set up to be 60" across (subtract 42" and that leaves 18" or 9" per side to protect the modules from little fingers, not enough space so you would need stanchions) or we use 3 tables for 90" across, (subtract 42" and that leaves 48", I believe that you need a minimum 15" per side to keep little fingers off the modules and trains, so, that leaves 18" for the module between the corners which is not a standard t-trak module length. So you either go with a non standard width, using 2 248mm straights between the 21" corners or you use a single or double and have either 18" or 12" space per side.). Or you can center the 21" corners in the middle of a 6' table leaving 15" to each 30" end. You would then set up the tables side to side, every 2 tables is 5' of length. 4 tables are 10', 6 tables are 15' and so on. Just remember, the math may not out correctly for an "L" layout using inside corners. But, for a rectangle it will work.

 

Exactly...
We're considering 4 corners ( or 2 endcaps) built to larger radius, but the rest of our modules will adhere to the T-Trak standard, love it or hate it...
After all, it is a standard and because our modules are built to that standard, we have ZERO issues...
We also want to be able to set up with other T-Trak clubs, so the standards serve us very well...
T-Trak is T- Trak...if it's not for you, then FreeMo might interest you. Personally, I do it all.
Bruce

 

What do you use for inside corners to get away with larger radius on outside corners? Or do you end up using cheater modules to make it all work out?

Does the super elevated curves from kato fall into the 33mm spacing?

FWIW - I do like t trak over the other modular standards - i did n trak and one trak, I like the t trak as I am one of the younger members of the group and I dont have as big of a dedicated space for trains.

 

First, the super elevated curves are 33mm on center and do mate with the rest of their track.

MasterPiece Modules offers an inside corner package (3 modules) using their 19R corner. I have roughly worked out with the 3 module set on paper and you need about 6" more or less on each side of the 3 module set to use in an "L" layout. However, further down the same page is what they call 19" radius tee layout, using 8 19R corners with 2 as inside corners, just reversed. Take a look. Using a single in place of the double (at the top) and a corner, this would then be a triple and single between 2 19R corners, a triple between that new corner and the quad coming off the bottom then looks like it would work for a "L", go to their web site and see for yourself. I hope I have explained it well. Since their drawing is copyrighted, I would not try and copy it here. Perhaps if the owner of Master Piece modules would post it no problem. I hope this helps you with your question.

I have not tried to figure out an inside corner using the Kato 15" and 13 3/4" radius curved track, I did work out the size of a junction, using the 13 3/4" for the curved track. I cannot find the drawing right now, but I think it was around 18x32. 18x18 is the approximate size of a corner using 15" and 13 3/4" radius curves. The 19R corner referred to above uses the super elevated track that is 18 7/8" and 17 5/8" radius curves, and is approximately 21x21. A junction would have to use 19" radius flat curves as the super elevated track is not available in single track sizes. Roughly that would be 40x22, almost the size of an N-trak module.

I hope I have given you the answer you were looking for. later, Craig

 

That answers the question perfectly. I always get thrown off on the conversion from mm to inches


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

UC92 question--does this device need to be on the skyboard of a t-trak module or can you mount it in the base of a module and still have reception? thanks, Craig

 

OK, well, I've decided to charge ahead on my noT-trak bridge module that come off of West Hickory. Plywood got cut up Sunday.

So here's what I'm trying to do. I've already built West Hickory, it comes from this Val Map:
http://www.randgust.com/West Hickory Valmap Extract.jpg

The bridge is what comes off of the diamonds and directly crossed the Allegheny River (641 feet) on a four-span truss bridge that was a dual highway-railroad toll bridge. (that bridge survived as a one-lane highway bridge until 2007 even though the tracks were taken out in 1940). See http://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=truss/hickory/

I've looked at scratchbuilding that bridge for years, finally decided that the Central Valley #1810 Pratt Truss was close enough to modify even if I have to essentially scratchbuild the wood road deck. More on that later. So 3-spans of that bridge instead of four works out to 450 feet of bridge, and that still fits into the space envelope of a T-trak triple.

I have to curve the approach off the 60-degree crossing and decided that will be on a little 4" adapter. The central bridge span works out to 33 5/8 inches on a 36 5/8 footprint, just long enough to get clear of the abutments. It's a single track bridge, so technically it's NOT actually T-track. But I'm making it T-trak module dimensionally, both in length (triple) and height (standard top of rail to top of table) and connectors (Kato) so that it COULD work or fits into a single-track reversing loop or something like that as a stand-alone. In my grand plan this connects West Hickory with all my logging modules, but in the process if I can fit it to T-trak I will, and it will also make a dandy photo diorama as I've shot the upriver views hi-res with a panorama lens right from the center of the bridge. Same day and light conditions as I shot West Hickory backdrop above. It really hasn't changed much.

So I'll post some progress shots here, I'm on the fringes here as it's still T-trak sorta. I'm using an 8" width with a 4" track center because it 'fits' with the West Hickory module, as I previously decided that width would allow a track behind the backdrop if I ever decided to make adapters to T-trak. After hostling around the West Hickory T-trak module, I really like the T-trak module sizes - they fit crosswise, in a carry box, in about any car or truck out there. 48" plus a carry box has proven to be in the hernia range.

The track on the bridge itself is going to be Micro-Engineering bridge flex with decking on it, code 70, which 'should' solder up to shortened Kato unitrack sections just off the abutments. We'll see.

I'm also probably going to do a 'single' t-trak to close the West Hickory siding off to the PRR main on the north side. That's kind of featureless as a design, but just north of this West Hickory siding was another tiny oil boom town called "Trunkeyville" with a classic PRR flagstop, and a culvert under the tracks, would make a really sweet single, that closed the spur onto the main in the same fashion. Take a look at this depot: http://www.west2k.com/papix/trunkeyville.jpg
Just the right size for a single, eh?

 

OK, here's a progress shot - the adapter from the T-trak over to the bridge module got built:

 

I have a full construction thread on this bridge project going on Railwire, but the T-track specific stuff I'll cross-post here.

This is the 'triple-length' single track 8" wide module I've done here, which looking at some of the informal single-track T-track standards, is surprisingly compliant....



This is the 'upside-down deck' idea. I put leveling bolts in it that will get cut back later. That's 3/4" plywood as it is 8x36, more or less, so preventing any center flex on something like this is pretty important. That's three Central Valley 1810 spans modified back to pin-connected truss construction, on Chooch cut-stone abutments and piers.

 

Very cool! Looks good, cant wait to see the finished product!

 

I've been wrestling with developing a pair of adapters to move the inside main to the far back on a double module. I think it will work after studying 'front to back' T-trak designs. One of them would also solve my 'Trunkeyville' module problem by adding a diverging track to the back, so I could use it either to close the PRR siding on the RH side of West Hickory operationally for my interchange, or use it with the bridge module so that the bridge would work in a conventional T-trak setup instead of a branch sticking off the front, with the second main track running behind the scenic divider on a 'plug'. Now designing this bridge as a one-track triple module may be the smartest thing I've done here.

More I study it the more I like it. I'd need another double module to bring it back in, but I also thing that could close the other end of West Hickory off the distant tannery track, or close in the other end of the bridge, either option. The more I study T-trak the more I like it. If I'm careful on design, I can use these modules in a wide variety of ways with each other.

This whole thing is growing like a virus! Lets see, that would be the West Hickory triple, the bridge single-track triple with a second main plug running behind it, and then two more doubles. 8 module lengths. Huh. Bruce, is this how you got hooked into building a better part of Oklahoma?

I was also trying to figure out what the heck I'd do with all the empty space on a 'Trunkeyville' double and got the idea to do (someday) an operating rocker-and-rod oil well powerhouse, which was all over the valley in the 1920's. That would be a very cool piece of N animation and not impossible to do. There's a handful of those still operational today, as well as the one at the Drake Well museum. Motorized pump jacks weren't even invented until about 1925, this is how it was done until then:

 

Now Randy that would be a super cool module for sure.

 

The Canyon consists of two triple T-Trak modules...the build is documented in previous posts in this thread.
~Bruce

 

The West Hickory Bridge module is now operational if not finished, did the priming on the skyboard last night. I'll do a rough draft print of the backdrop out on it before I decide exactly how the scenery has to blend into it here, and particularly the water. While the module can serve its original purpose of connecting the Hickory Valley logging modules to PRR on a 'branch', I still want to make sure I can incorporate it into a standard T-trak display. And I still have the unsolved problem of the 'right side' of West Hickory without enough interchange track space on the siding and no turnout back to the inside main.

I've been playing with the geometry and discovered that it is possible to do a 'front to back' location of the inside main line on a double T-trak module and maintain Kato #4 turnouts and 481mm (19"?) radius curves throughout. So.... you can essentially split a module in half, moving one track to the back and another to the front, developing the single-track module concept.

Originally I was going to just put an unsceniced 'bypass' track around the back of the West Hickory skyboard, now its looking more like a 7-8" width single-track triple module is possible here. Have some ideas, one that surfaced is the scene directly across from my childhood home, the PRR built onto a shelf running beside the Allegheny River, with the steep hillside behind it. That's also a pretty generic scene in Pennsylvania that is not era-specific. This is a shot 'downriver' from West Hickory at East Brady - it was fully signaled south of Oil City, but the general scenic situation is identical all the way up the valley: http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1913584

And two adapter modules - both doubles - to split the main tracks to single track actually appears possible. And if I'm careful, they'll serve dual duty as properly extending West Hickory to more prototype-correct track configuration at the same time so that they are multi-functional - can be used either to extend West Hickory on both ends, or used to 'split the mains' and use the West Hickory Bridge as a conventional T-track triple module with a single track and a 'bypass track' behind it for the second main.

I do have to say that the more I tinker with the concept and modular geometry here the more I like T-trak. I'm still not in love with the Kato unitrack except at the connections, and particularly not the switches, but I can work around that with Peco C55. West Hickory had some issues at the Altoona show with the vertical alignment of the Atlas C80 60-degree diamonds (since fixed) but none with the Peco C55 or the Peco electrofrog.

 

Here's a progress update.





I've checked the dimensions and geometry, and two doubles 'splitting the mains' can put the inner main on its own single-track module behind the skyboard on the bridge and everything still works out.