Does anyone have or know of a Design Matrix for planning a layout. I’ve tried making one in excel, but it is becoming a little tedious and a tad overwhelming.
Thanking you in advance.
GUB
They make CAD programs. From Track to Structures, they’ve got them, and if you buy the higher end ones they have a scenery feature. I really don’t know about the Payware, but here are freeware:
Atlas’s Right Track Software Version 7.0
Demo of 3rdPlanIt(Limited to 100 objects)
Demo of TrainPlayer/Track Layer(Limited abilities)
Unfortunatly, thats all the freeware I can think of at the moument. I would recommend Atlas RTS, since it is much easier to use than the others, as long as you read the directions first.
Hope I helped,
Spit
Thank you Spit for the links. I have tried the Atlas one a year or so ago. I found it to have some issues with freezing up my machine with the version i was using. I sort of gave up in using it as a design tool. I think I will have to give it another go.
As I read your reply and my original post I think maybe i should have been more specific in my request. A few months ago I had read an article (unfortunately I cannot remember where I saw it) where there was a Chart that the author used to rate and eventually use in determining certain faetures he wanted to use on the layout he was planning to build. I thought at the time that perhaps this would be a good way to determine what faetures to include in my layout. I also figured that someone out there has already thought of this and has done the ground work and developed a Design Matrix. Like I said in my original post i have tried to make one up in excel and found it tedius at best. I think this would be a most usefull tool and i cannot beleive that someone hasn’t already developed one.
The Design Matrix as I envisioned it would have a number of major categories with as many subcategories necesary for each element to be incorported into the design. Each would be given a rating to determine how necesary or desireable that particular element was to the eventual design of the layout. Major categories would be Benchwork, Wiring , Control, Track etc.
I would be eternally gratefull if someone out there had a Design Matrix or something that i could use as a starter and then expand on.
GUB
I design mechanical things for a living, as a consultant. When I worked as a full-time employee in the past, at various companies, people would often try to come up with such things (and I’ve never met a mechanical designer/engineer who wanted to come up with one that applied to many types of products, because they’ve known there are way too many factors involved).
The problem is, a matrix cannot tell you how to design something, it just can’t. First you’ll have to design the matrix, which will be influenced by your thoughts.
Someone else’s design matrix may have totally different items in it than yours. Maybe it has 5 columns on coupler choice, but someone else couldn’t care less about coupler types. Maybe theirs has 3 columns on colors of ground that are allowed because their cat won’t eat them!
Did the guy in the article have a column for Proto: 87? For large scale?, Z scale?
Maybe one column is era, but yours has an extra x’d out year because that was the year you lost your dog, or got dumped by your girlfriend when you were 12.
Unless you’re designing something that is very repetative, etc., the design matrix should be designed by you, with your thoughts in mind. (my opinion only, of course).
And yes, I do remember the article you’re talking about. His matrix was probably perfect - For Him!
: )
CARRfan;
I agree there may be too many factors to incorporate into a Design Matrix and in all likely hood it would have to be taylored to my needs and requirements which will specific to my layout. Now having said that i thought someone in this hobby would have come up with even a basic Design Matrix covering the major components. If done in excel i could add as many subcategories as required for my own use. I guess when i asked the question I was hoping that i wouldn’t have to redesign the wheel so to speak. I am always on the look out for ways and means to cut down my time. It is the only we way our business can remain competitive. I run a Custom Commercial Woodworking facility.
My intent is to use the Design Matrix as a tool to determine what the end results will be, not necesarily how to design my layout. It will however, influence how I will eventually build my layout and what components will be incorporated into same. There are too many things to consider when building a layout. The worse thing for me personally is to start without having a clear idea of where i am going with is thing. That is not to say there will be no changes along the way. There will be. However, with a comprehensive plan at the beginning I hope I will avoid those costly decisions that were obviously wrong and will cost huge sums of money to correct. The Design Matrix can also be used as a synopsis of the ideas and/or components that i have either considered or explored further. At present, i keep a journal with all sorts of information that I have come across or Buildings to be incorporated into the final design. I have even created a data base (quite basic - needs some work) to keep track of my magazine and book articles on Scenery, Rolling Stock, Structures, Layouts etc. The Design Matrix will be the 3rd element. It was just a thought …
I cannot remember it the article had a coloum for Proto 87 or Large scale. Now that i think about it it may have had moer to do with what Prototype Road he was going
GUB
I’m not sure what you are looking for actually exists. I certainly haven’t seen it. What I have seen is design analysis charts and calculations that calculate the operating potential of an existing and measurable track plan. Joe Fugate has a pretty good one on his web site.
The problem is that in layout design, very few decisions force one down a particular design branch. The larger the layout, the more viable options there are for a successful layout. Personally, I see the preliminary part of layout design as mostly ruling out as many of the various options as possible to reduce it to the manageable few.
Many will cite John Armstrong’s “Givens and Druthers” as the ultimate starting point. I beg to differ. The “Givens and Druthers” were intended for Armstrong’s clients - the questions aim more at determining the operational style and schematic of a layout. There is too little (for me) emphasis on the technical “standards” that most MRs already have consciously or unconsciously decided upon. Also, I find that almost all beginners and many experienced MRs don’t know enough about their operational preferences to answer many of the “Givens and Druthers” questions.
At the same time, I have been driving to limit the questions of a beginner to just the few that are required to draw out the necessary info, and that he is likely/able to answer. So here is my suggested supplement to the “Givens and Druthers” (remember, I am trying not to repeat anything already covered in “Givens and Druthers”):
- desired minimum radius
- absolute minimum radius- desired normal train length
- minimum normal train length- maximum acceptable grades for both mainline and other track
- primary track system? (sectional, flex, or handlaid)
- couplers and (very important) uncoupling system to be used
- DCC
I don’t know if this is exactly what you are looking for, but I had developed four worksheets starting from ground zero for developing a layout design. It did not jump straight to the “minium radius” type questions but worked up to them via questions about type of locomotives, trains, scenery, and era. They were posted on the “Youth In Model Railroading” web site, but I see they have redesigned the site and I can’t find them… I know I have paper copies somewhere if you think you might be interested in at least giving them a once over.
My day job is engineering and designing medical devices for surgeons, but other product designers use the same technique or method. It is called a “House of Quality” or a QFD. We typically only use the first level and that would be about all I think would be appropriate for a model railroad. This is probably overkill for a model railroad and may not be terribly helpful, but if you think it will help you, well, go for it. I’ll try to explain briefly. We typically use a spreadsheet program like Excel to create these tables.
In the first column, we list all of the customer requirements. The customer requirements are written in non-technical terms and are not typically quantifiable or numerical. Think of it as your generic wish list. For example, a 24" minimum radius would not be a customer requirement while being able to run a Berkshire locomotive, modeling the 1950s, wanting a long bridge, having mountain scenery, having long trains, and preferring the Sante Fe would be good examples of customer requirements. In the second column, we rate the customer requirements with the most important requirements getting the highest scores. I recommend a 1 through 5 scale. Too large a scale gives you too many choices here. After all, a design matrix is just a tool and will never be perfect.
Across the top row starting in the third column, we list the design requirements. This is were things like length of mainline, curve radius, turnout size, double or single deck, scale, money required, time required, etc. are listed. These are all very measurable things.
Now we have an empty table. The idea is to fill in the table cells by rating the correlation between the customer requirement and the design requirement. We tend to leave the cell blank if there is no correlation, put a 1 for a slight correlation, 3 for a medium correlation, and 9 for a strong correlation. For
Thanks Fred;
Joe Fugate’s Analysis Chart is a good starting point. Actually, this is where I am at right nowwith my planning. Do you have or know where I could view a copy of John Armstrong’s Givens and Druthers? What you have listed is great and I will incorporate them in my Design Matrix when I actually get the time to work on it.
Again, thank you for your help.
GUB
Texas Zepher;
I would very much like to have a once over. If you find them could you scan them and email them to me?
Thank you
GUB
ericboone;
This is how I had envision the Design Matrix would look and work. Now all I hve to do is implement your information and all the other valuable imformation posted on this thread and see how it turns out.
I do appreciate everyone’s input and look forward to any and all future posts.
THANKS
GUB
Here’s a link to a thread in another forum where we discussed the Givens and Druthers:
http://www.the-gauge.com/showthread.php?t=19575
I’ve saved a copy of the thread, let me know if the link doesn’t work.
My advice (for what’s it worth) is to remember model railroading is as much art and theater as it is scale modeling. I’m not sure you’ll get the return you are looking for out of the matrix for the time invested. But please keep us posted - I’m anxious to see what you come up with. This non-artistic person would love to be proved wrong!
yours in planning
Fred W
Thanks Fred;
That is very helpfull. I’ve reviewed it and printed a copy for a more in depth study. I’ve come up with what I think are the Major Categories that I will have to contend with and/or consider when planning my Layout if you or anyone else for that matter is interested.
Category No. 1 is the Environment or Train Room. In my case this will be the walk-up attic of a nearly 100 year old house. This will be brooken down into either separate items or subcategories such as Design Features and/or Uses (office, work shop etc.), required Utilities and Finishes. Perhaps more as I work through this.
Category No. 2 is Layout Design / Type which will include Era, Local or Region, Prototype or Freelance, Point to Point, Multiple Levels etc.
Category No 3 is Benchwork includes Style, Materials etc.
Category No. 4 is Trackwork which i figure will include Min. Radius, Ballast, etc.
Category No.5 is Wiring
Category No. 6 is Control
I could possibly combine 3, 4, 5 & 6 as One Category or at least 5 & 6 as one category.
Category No. 7 is Scenery which will altimately be dictated by Local and/or Region.
Category No. 8 is Structures and Vehicles. This will include the types of Industries to be Modeled, Specific Buildings and/or kits. It will also include Bridges etc.
Category No. 9 will deal with Rolling Stock and will three sub categories - Locomotives, Passenger and Freight.
And finally No. 10 will deal with Operations.
Am I missing anything? I think I covered all the Major Categories. All I need to do now is refine the sub-categories and/or items. I think the Design Matrix may become more of a Wish List than an actual Design Matrix. I’m still working on the ratings. I think 1 to 5 is the best as someone previously mentioned, with 5 being the highest perhaps “Gotta Have” and 3 being “Nice to Have” and 1 being “Not Desireble”. That one still needs some more work …
I’d appre