After a long absence from model railroading, about two years ago I was able to “pick up the thread” and re-enter the hobby, building a respectable 8x16 HO layout in one bay of my three-car garage.
I have learned a lot from this project, and, having reached the limits of what I can “tweak” on this layout, I am preparing to demolish it and start fresh on my next layout in early 2007.
One of the concepts I have been strongly attracted to is the “domino” method of construction advocated by David Barrow.
I’d like to hear from anyone who is interested in the domino approach to layout design and construction – advocates, railroad modelers with experience using this technique, opponents, whomever.
David Barrow’s Domino layout construction technique is sound…if you like to build new layouts every couple of years, or if you’re planning on building a large layout and might move in the next five to eight years. Otherwise, I’d opt for a more traditional layout construction technique. David’s Dominoes are designed around the premise that the core of the module is the same: a sturdy box frame and leg framework with a plywood top. The uppermost level of the domino is a thin layer of any given material (David uses 1/4" Lauan plywood, but the top layer could be foam or Homasote too) that the layout is actually constructed on. When it’s time to change the trackplan, it’s fairly easy to demove and dismantle the top “skin” of the Domino but leave the core support in pristine condition. I think that the biggest advantages of the Domino technique is that they’re portable. You can build and scenic an entire module away from the layout and then plug it in once it’s done. They’re handy if they have to be transported; if you have a display layout or if you’ll be moving. In addition, if you’re a modeler who is constantly fiddling with track arrangements, or who becomes bored with a layout after a short period, it’s a great system since it allows you the flexibility to change things around easily while not sacrificing all the work done on the benchwork. But there are a LOT of downsides to the Domino technique. First and foremost are all the joints on the layout. I had a large modular home layout not too long ago, and it was nothing but a headache. Differential expansion meant that I spent as much time fixing trackwork as I did actually running. And the cost incurred by adding LOTS of barrier strips and spade terminals to all the wiring was pretty high too (I think I had more money in barrier strips than I had in engines!). The Domino style of module is also more costly and time-consuming to build that a more conventional module. David seems to like carpentry, since his Domino supports are overbuilt (we’re de
Thank you for such an extensive and thoughtful response.
Although I love to look at the layout spreads in model railroading magazines, I know from past experience that I am, in fact, one of those people who likes to revise my with track arrangements, partly because I don’t like the status quo and become bored with a layout within a short time of its being “completed.” (Sidebar: That’s true of me in general - one of my speaking topics is titled “Embrace Tiger, Return to Mountain: Initiating and Managing Change”.)
I really appreciate your comments on the “dark side” of dominos. I, too, had some concerns about so many joint between dominos. In fact, I had been thinking about using the domino construction technique, but laying the track continuously, across the domino joints; if I decided to fiddle with the track on one domino, I thought I would just cut the track at the joint (e.g., with a Dremel) and “reconstruct” the track work on one domino.
Although the domino structure looks to be quite a bit more sound and stable than the Mianne benchwork I used for the first layout (which now seems to me to be rather flimsy and unstable), I am no carpenter (is that even an understatement!) … and although I do have a humidity and temperature problem in my train room (the 3-car garage is a detached building, and although it is insulated, heated, and air conditioned, the temperature can vary from 55F in winter to 80F in summer, and I live in the Midwest where the humidity can be all over the map) birchwood is outrageously expensive, which is why I am looking at foam for the next layout. On the current layout (after the original plywood ended up warped so badly it looked like a very shallow bathtub) I used hardboard which does not warp, but reflects every rise and dip in the benchwork so much that laying trackwork flat was impossible, and doesn’t take a nail worth a darn. [I guess that’s why it’s called hardboard ]
Mianne is a manufacturer of precut benchwork. A “Domino” is a layout building technique that’s very similar to a plain old module. The legs and base are a bit beefier than what’s usual, and the tops are removeable to make swapping out track arrangements easier.
Hmm, thanks. I’ve definitely heard of Sievers but never Mianne. And what exactly are the characteristics of the “Domino” technique? sounds a little like my layout, where most of my N scale layout’s benchwork was recycled from my previous HO scale layout.
The “Domino” method of benchwork construction was originated by Dave Barrow who also was the builder of the various versions of the Cat Mountain and Santa Fe layout. I believe his “Domino” method was described in one of the Kalmbach publications, either in Model Railroader, Great Model Railroads or Model Railroad Planning. You might do a search under his name with these publications to find the specific reference. If I can find it in my own library, I’ll post it here.
Didn’t Model Railroader run a series of articles by Barrow in the mid-nineties? If I recall his use of dominoes used sparse scenery and were based more towards operation. Basically it was roadbed and track on barren plywood tables, like a modular layout without scenery.
Personally, I find Dave’s Dominos way overbuilt. The idea is a good one…a standard size modual that can be used over and over.
I use a more lightweight, open grid sectional benchwork - no top, only two legs per section, almost no added bracing. I can move and assemble my sections alone. I also hang some sections off other sections, so some sections don’t have any legs at all. My sections have supported 4 layouts, in two locations.
The other thing to consider…domino style contruction, by its nature, tends to force you into a narrow, linear track design.
I think Ray covered it pretty well. I built mine more like Nick’s. I built a series of 2x8 modules (sections, really, in model railroad terms, since the idea of a ‘module’ generally refers to a truly interchangeable unit). I won’t be building it now, but if I had continued with my grand plan I would have built many more of these sections, and just added a single pair of legs on the ‘free’ end as I went on. No need to have 4 legson each section, resulting in 4 legs right next to one another at each joint. The 2x8 pieces I can get out of my basement and up the stairs (I built them in the garage and carried them in) so when I move I can take apart the current layout and move it. Either reassemble as-is or scrape the track and roadbed off and start something different.
A ways back, Dave Barrow had a more ‘conventional’ fully sceniced layout, but his goals and desired changed and he started with the last few revisions of the CM&SF using the domino method. I believe the previous version to the current one had little if any scenery on it - the latest one has some structures at least to make spots for the operating crews. A rather minimalist approach to the hobby, but if operating is your thing instead of scenery it might make sense. As Ray said, the domino units are somewhat overbuilt, even given that the idea is that they are to be used over and over again. But based on the published articles, Barrow is quite satisfied with the concept, and int he end, that’s what really matters.
After a lot of thought, I decided to go with the domino plan. We are a military family, and tend to move now and again, so I did not want to base my layout around a particular space. I am doing a “U” shaped layout with 2 five foot modules, and 1 three foot module on each leg. They are 2 feet wide. they are connected with a 1’x4’ module. I will also build a removable curved track for the other end for continuous loop operation. It will have no scenery. I am building the modules so the layout is expandable if I ever have the space to play with.
All the modules have a 1"x4" frame with 2"x4"s for legs. The legs are stabilized with 1"x4"s about a foot from the bottom. It is sturdy enough for about anything, yet once the legs are removed, light enough to transport easily. I am considering building “lids” that will latch on to the modules.
What started me on this path was Bruce Petty’s layout…
The only thing that I am really at odds with right now is the trackage across the module joints. As mentioned above, I think that I am going to lay the track across the joints, and cut them when it is time to move, and re-lay a new piece when I set up again.
have you looked in to free-mo? there is yahoo groups for every scale i’m sure. i joined the n scale group recently after seeing an ho free-mo layout under construction at a show. it fits my needs at home and can be used in bigger layouts with others’ modules.
I had a 12 X 25 foot layout that was Homasote on L-girders that had to be dismantled for a move. Between dismantling and the damage from moving, it was easier to chuck the whole thing than reassemble it. I probably could have saved a lot of it if it had been domino construction.
It’s easier to replace / rebuild a module than a chunk of traditional layout. Even if you’re happy with your trackplan, you can change out modules as your skills improve and tastes change.
Construction is simpler - you can build the domino and lay trackage at the workbench and drop it into place. I work on modules in the same room as my kids are watching TV or playing video games in, although some would argue that if they’re playing XBOX, they don’t know I’m there anyway.
As mentioned, they do force you into a linear trackplan. I like that because linear “trackplans” are what I see on my prototype in the Midwest. I think dominoes would not be good if you model an area with a lot of elevation changes. I have no grades - I fake elevation changes by cutting away or building up the foam, which works fine for a relatively flat locale.
DB’s modules might very well be overbuilt. I use 2-inch foam on shelf brackets though, so the weight is minimal and there’s little carpentry involved.
I use manual switch throws, so electrical connections are not an issue between modules. I don’t even use connectors - just splice the wires together with a wire nut.
I use the domino system without any intent of tearing up my layout every few years like David Barrow does.
There are many ways to build domino segments and Barrow himself was going for a sort of furniture quality look. I have built mine using more conventional pine and plywood. Fortunately the length of 4’ is short enough that the worst effects of today’s rather horrid lumber yard wood can be defeated or at least controlled. Barrow’s articles were not real specific about how to build them, actually.
This worked well for me because my car is too little to get 4x8 sheets of plywood home but the local Menards sells “handi panels” of clean, sanded 2x4 ft plywood in 1/4", 1/2" and 5/8" sheet thicknesses (also homasote in the same precut size). I also have built a selection of odd sizes, corners, angles, and the like that give the planning some variety.
Personally the two biggest positive features were that I could start building a basement’s worth of benchwork before I had finalized my track plan. Actually I discovered the David Barrow domino approach at the very same time that I was abandoning my dream of a 1952 era Pennsylvania RR layout in HO and instead focusing on the Chicago & North Western in my old home town of South Milwaukee WI in the late 1960s. If I had to wait on the benchwork until I had nailed down all the new research and learning involved – I’d still have nothing. It was for me far more efficient to start building benchwork while the specifics of my layout plans were still very much up in the air.
The other positive feature is that you can literally move the dominos around the basement like big game pieces. This lets me test things like aisle widths, reaching into a possible corner industry, how easy will it be to follow a train walk-around throttle style, and so on. Actually building some dominos a
This is exactly why I’m using the technique myself. Yes, I may have to move it. But more importantly, the ability to trying things out and move them around really makes a big difference in my layout’s construction.
Not being a cabinetmaker (as Barrow is, I believe), I am working with the usual pine 2x2s and 1x3s, but the concept is the same.
Anyone else know the delivery days for dimensional lumber at your local Lowe’s and Home Depot…and then have to battle other model railroaders for the straight pieces?
It is funny Dave Nelson should mention having all the benchwork complete without having the final track plan. I am in that situation now, but am really close to finalizing it. I also like being able to move everything around without too big of a hastle. I too have been trying to find the best way to position the layout in the basement and can move an entire leg (two 5’ modules and one 3’ module bolted together) without any problems.
In Model Railroad Planning 2006 there is a layout using “doorminoes” , these are hollow-core doors with foam insulation board laminated to the top. I was looking to do my new layout this way. The doors they used were 30" x 80". Has anyone who has gone this way, have input asfar as proes & cons? I looked at my HD and the doors were less than $25 each. The artical does not go into detail on legs or wall mounting info. Also there is an artical on David Barrows CM&SF in the same issue.
I have already said my piece on domino construction but if I can briefly respond to this particular point Ray made – and his entire critique is a valid one, mind you, the domino is not for everyone nor for the entire layout of even those that like it – but it really depends on how the dominos are built. There are in a sense two identical sized frames. The legs that go to the floor (2x2 pine in my case) go up to the first open frame. Then shorter “legs” for want of a better term (I use one foot lengths of 1x4 or 1x3 pine but originally I used 16" lengths) go from that frame up to the frame that holds the flat top. Depending on how tall you make those shorter “legs” and how low you set that lower frame you do have a pretty fair amount of ability for height differences – in my case 4 or 5 inches but it would be easy enough to make it a full foot or even more.
Maybe not “radical” but deep enough for my creek valley and gravel pit on an otherwise pretty flat Midwestern part of Wisconsin. Also I use 5/8 inch plywood subroadbed with cork about it so I have a certain amount of ability to change heights anyway. I think Barrow once said that the flat part of Texas he models lends itself well to the domino.
As far as hidden staging goes – can’t say personally since part of my decision in layout planning was to forgo hidden staging for open staging. Having said that, the lower frame could support its own table top with some track I suppose. I have installed some lower tops to hold paperwork etc on some dominos. It would not be ideal, that is for sure, and you’d need to think ahead more than I tend to.
The Layout Design Special Interest Group’s web site has an extensive layout project article of an under-construction domino-based layout by one of the members. This gives you a chance to see how a full domino layout with some mountain scenery might be constructed.
Personally, if I were starting over, I would probably go for a more sectional layout approach similar in basic concept to the dominos, but I would vary the length and width of the domino sections and I would generally build more rolling and mountainous scenery, and much fewer table-top flat sections.
I especially like the idea of mostly building the layout at my workbench, however, since that’s where I do my best work. [swg]
]