Rich's Grade Test Results

Great Rich. I can see that you have done this before and like a prototypical railroad you understand that there are tradeoffs when ever a system is built. In your case it's length of train verses minimum grade.  

 

I have one small section on my viaduct that climbs between levels that is almost a 10% grade for a few feet and I have no problems with it at all with DCS. With TMCC or conventional I have to be careful on a down hill run to drive the train through that section due to a O-42 turn at it's bottom. Of course I keep my consist at or less then six passenger cars or twelve freight cars.

 

I know many of our posters swear by the two percent grade rule but I always ask one simple question. How bad to you wont to get there. In our world of precious real estate aesthetic compromise must be made as long as it dose not effect operation.

 

I can't wait to see your video, it sounds like it's going to be great looking.

 

 

Thanks,

Mario E

What type of can motors are you using? One in each truck horizontally mounted with the can motor below the frame? Or vertical mounted can motor thru the frame? My experience with horizontal mounting below the frame is not a good puller.

Points to keep in mind, lessons learned from tests I did:

 

Some locos are more sensitive than others.  

 

Curves create additional load, just as do slopes, the amount depending on the loco.

My tests showed that 36" curves were the equivalent of about a 2% straight grade all by themselves, so a 3% sloped 36" curve equalled a 5% sloped straight, etc.  However, the impact varied from loco to loco.  Still, I try to cut my slope on curves to about half when I have to climb and curve at the same time. 

Rich,

 

Have you thought about making the "staging track" so that it can be raised/lowered automatically?

 

I'm just throwing this out there, but I'm imagining something like a motorized screw jack on one end (or both ends) that would lower the track enough so you could get to the train for handling, then raise the track into position for use.

 

Screw jacks at each end (or some other method to raise/lower the track smoothly) would allow for a less severe incline.  In the lowered position you'd have enough room to get in and access the trains.  In the raised position all you'd need is enough head room so the train wouldn't hit anything above.

 

A screw jack at one end, with a pivot in the middle of the track length, would give you the incline plus, in the down position, a solid, level position to access the train.  For that matter the pivot could be at the opposite end from the screw jack.  This would prevent roll-aways while changing out cars.

 

Of course I don't even know if something like this exists.

A helix is a good way for sure, but they have their drawbacks too. They're much harder to build, and they take up a lots of space!. It just wasn't practical for me. But as far as grades go, they tend to be much more gradual which enables you to go much higher

GIFTV, I'm talking about the standard vertical truck mounted can motors that have, for better or worse, become the standard for diesels in O gauge. I'll get out my 4-8-4 later and see how much a horizontally mounted motor can pull.

This is an interesting thread. Bob, that's a real outside the box idea for gaining access to the hidden staging yard. I am working on my design which includes a hidden staging yard and this thread prompted me to lower the yard a few more inches. On my plan that meant adding another grade but I was able to do that and keep the total grade to around 3%.

 

For more on my layout design and the evolution of the hidden staging yard go to this thread:

 

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/d...ent/2415514336494336