I’ve designed a Christmas layout of the Polar express for my granddaughter in N scale. My thought is to make the benchwork modular, so I may break it down and store it if I wish, as the layout will consume most of my workbench areas. To be clear, the modules will only fit together one way, as an exhibition layout would. I have explored with interest other modeler"s approaches to maintaining track alignment between modules in these setups. Many involve brass screws at the cut track ends, which the rails are soldered. I fear this may be difficult in N gauge, and question if it is even necessary. My question is whether it is feasible to glue/tack the track down for the entire setup, and then use a track saw to sepate the track along module boundries (wiring appropriately). Would this not work?
My method is to clamp the modules securely together so the joint cannot move. Then the track doesn’t need any special affixing. A short piece of removable track is laid across the joint.
Take a look at how Woodland Scenics bolts together their Modurail units with hardboard strips and 2 3/4" bolts, washers and wing nuts. It works very well. If you’re building with wood then only the bolts are necessary as long as the boltholes are precisely sized. Alternatively there are steel dowels and dowel receptors readily available for alignment and then the bolts are just to fasten the modules together.
https://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/item/ST4780/page/1
If I were doing this I would do it with a Dremel cut-off disc. Not sure how thick a track saw is. I think it would be just fine.
Yes it will work, and in N scale.
That is almost exactly what the Orlando N-Trak club did for their new modular N scale (not N-Trak) layout.
They did solder the 2" section of rail across the joints to PC Board clad sheets for added durability. The layout is a few years old now and still works perfectly when they set it up at train shows.
We are all eagerly waiting to see demonstration pictures of any of these “My method(s)” you speak of. Will we ever?
-Kevin
Really? Give it a break already.
Thanks so much for your input. The Woodland Scenics system is close to what I was planning, but it looks a bit flimsy. You have used this system? If so, how durable has it been over the years?
Thanks for that point Batman!
Kevin thanks for the tip about the PC board. I’ve since checked out Free-moN, and that is exactly the system they use. The advantage of that approach over a short removable section of track would be the ability to ballast all the track permanently. I would imagine permanent ballast would also increase the stability of the track.
I am building my own version. I bought one corner module and built it into two straight modules. The connector strips are the key to the system. These are similar in concept to other devices used in plywood or other wood based modular systems. WS prices these very reasonably so I bought additional sets. For building and connecting modules constructed entirely from foam the WS connector packs complete with hardware are very convenient and efficiently priced, in my opinion.
WS connectors are cheap, reliable, easy to assemble and sufficiently rigid because you glue them to the ribbed 1" thick profile boards. If you use plywood or other materials as your “end plates” then you don’t need these connector plates. If you use foam then you need the added rigidity of hardboard, plywood or dimension lumber to create rigid and durable joints that can be taken apart and reassembled as required. I use hardboard strips to face the edge of each module for added rigidity and ease of mounting switches and do on.
To create sufficient structural rigidity without adding the weight of traditional wooden benchwork WS depends on the use of foam risers under all of the track and plaster cloth to close in the top of the modules creating an internally reinforced box out of each module. Other popular modular designs make the box out of lumber and build the supporting box section under the layout surface. The WS foam system is very well designed but also completely designed. Use the whole design or the result will be less than adequate. I’m impressed by the skilled work that went into WS otherwise pretty radical design.
I am still building my layout so do not yet know
Why use a picture when 10,000 words will do?
Besides, since I am using the WS connector kits to connect my modules you can see a much better illustration in moving picture format here:
https://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/video/ModURail
I don’t need to create my own photo version. It might not be as accurate.
I point out that our hosts have included a handy “quote” button which will save you the effort of creating your own versions of my posts…
The “quote” button also has the notable advantage of reproducing only my exact words, complete with all the context, and although my quoted words could be edited the resulting edit would be obvious to the reader.
Your photo technique can lead to errors you know…
At least when I designed and built my new layout, I build and assembled the sections first. (If the pieces can be assembled one way, they are sections rather than modules which can be assembled in any configuration.) Then as I laid the track out, I made note of where the track sections overlapped the section breaks and changed pieces as needed. Once I attached the track, any “joint track” I put gray (or grey as the case may be) duck tape on the bottom. (My ballast is gray/grey color.) That way the track can be ballasted without having to be attached to the framework and the piece doesn’t have to be cut. This was adapted from the idea of putting duck tape on turnouts to make sure that the ballast doesn’t gum up the points. The layout has moved once in the process (I hope never again.) without a problem.
Slightly off-topic but related: I would also suggest putting some quick disconnects of some sort on any wiring that cfrosses sections. Makes it a lot easier to keep electrical connections together for mobile layouts.
For electrical connections at the joints and track feeders I’ve used crimp-on bullet fittings. They conduct well, are fairly easy to grip and just twist gently to pull apart.
With the current layout I intend to experiment with other types of two pin connections since I do not intend to rely on any common rail effects. All power districts will be double isolated and I will have at least two reversing sections which must be double isolated.
The distinction made between “modules” and “sections” is useful. Although the WS system refers to them as modules they are not designed in a way that makes them necessarily interchangeable in position. For that you’d need to also build each section as a module with track connections in preset positions at the joins. You can build the WS sections to be also modular but more usually you would not for a home layout.
I’m building a sectional shelf layout around the room. The sections I built aren’t even the same size. About 72"x20" seems to be the largest practical size for a section. I have two of those. I have built the two 36" x 18" “straight modules” from the WS corner module kit, a 48"x20" and a 48"x24" with two “custom” length 29"x20" connections to create a loop. Maximum height is around 8".
For those interested an Excel razor saw blade is 0.019" thick including tooth set. The teeth are set for cutting on the pull stroke, Japanese style. Having used a number of Japanese hand saws I can vouch for their superiority in that they use a pull stroke to cut which means the blade can be very thin.
The standard Dremel cut off for metal is 0.044" thick.
The “thin cut” Dremel blade is 0.032" thick.
Dremel makes smaller cut off blades from some sort of ceramic which are thinner but quite fragile in my experience.
Xacto has discontinued making these razor saws.
Zona makes good ones.
Atlas sells a robust looking track cutting razor saw, with a plastic spine rather than metal, and an offset handle which is clever. I do not know the kerf width but I intend to buy one and will measure it.
Well, I was interested, it was lingering in the back of my mind since I posted. Thanks for looking into it.
The smaller ceramic type cut off discs are 0.023 and 0.038 thick for standard and heavy duty respectively. I find you need to take exceptional care when cutting metals with these smaller ceramic discs as they shatter more easily than I would like. I have tried these discs on nickel silver rail and find the razor saw easier to use. Of course there isn’t always enough room for the saw blade.
I want to thank all of you for your exceptionally detailed posts. I also appreciate the distinction made between a “module” and a “section”, and will thus ammend my vocabulary moving forward.
After reading your responses, and doing quite a bit of internet wanderning, I am going to use a dimentional lumber/plywood “under box” benchwork for each section with foam attached above as the base. Additional layers of foam and/or WS grade ramps will be used for, well the grades. I’ve laid this project out on a CAD program, and after considering your experience and what I have read on the internet, have subsequently modifiied the layout several times for ease of construction and the least complicated track connections between sections.
I’ve decided to use a butt joint for the track at the break between each section, with PC boards glued to the base on either side of the butt joint and the track soldered to the PC board at each butt joint. Alignment between sections will be accomplished with aluminium dowels, and each section will be fastened to the next with bolts.
All sections will be wired with fast-connectors for the main bus and aux bus lines (excellent point).
I too have planned to make each section and fasten them together, THEN lay the track roadbed. The track itself wont be laid until the roadbed from adjoining sections have been separated and a 1/16-1/8" spacer has been placed between the two adjoining sections. With that prepared I will lay the track across the gap and cut the butt joints into the rails. Using this approach, when the spacers are removed and the sections aligned normally, there should be nice tight butt rail junctions (after some flat file work).
Seeing as how you will have dowels for alignment, may I suggest 10/32 machine screws and T-nuts to secure the joints. They can be undone in a flash with a drill. I have used this method on several projects with great success. The T-nuts will always be in place and it will be fewer bits to lose.
Thanks for that suggestion!
From your description you are headed for success. You’ve covered off the tricky part which is securing the sections together with accurate alignment. Once that is done your track sections crossing the joints will be fully supported so no derailment issues.
Having built sections both ways my preference now is for the supporting box structure to be underneath. WS system for building the box above the base works only if you include the top surface of plaster cloth as part of the box structure. The strength of that is dependent on the total depth of the section.
I’d also be inclined now to build the supporting box out of wood products to support the foam and plastercloth rather than relying on the WS style super lightweight structure.