I’ve been reading in the Cat-6 string about duck-unders as an alternate to lift-outs, drop-downs and hinged rights-of-way where layouts are designed for inner operations. Over the years this subject has been treated repeatedly. Granted that I’ve hardly read them all; so -
Occasionally I’ve run across someone who eliminates (or at least mitigates) duck-unders by raising a portion of the layout to allow for a walk- or stoop-under. But that almost presupposes a large pike that allows for significant changes in elevation or a couple of helixes. But if there’s enough vertical clearance in the room, why not just raise the entire layout?
That leaves two options for internal ops: either step-up walkways all the way around the interior periphery or a false floor across the entire interior - except for the steps at the bridged entry point(s). Of course one could spend more by running the false floor clear to the walls, but properly built longer legs should suffice.
I’ll grant that there are some liabilities to this approach that I haven’t thought of. Please offer them here. Or otherwise opine.
John, I have a basement layout, built on a poured concrete floor. I have often mused about excavating a hole in the floor to built a pair of stair steps to walk under the layout and back up.
Years ago I saw a layout article (MR?) that had concrete stairs set in the basement floor so one could walk under the layout.
I think the real concern would be what’s under the floor such as drain pipes plus you may need to add a drain somehow to the bottom of your walk under.
Always loved basements, Rich. For lots of reasons. But here there’s an extra bennie, as long as you don’t have ground water issues. Surely the quicker and cheaper (but a tad dirtier [(-D]) fix.
Actually, raising the layout could make sense, but as an alternative to raising it high enough to walk under, just make it high enough to roll a wheeled office chair under the duck under.
It has been done, multiple times. Over the past 60 or 70 years a number of club layouts have been built with raised floor systems that allow stand-up access to under layout areas and providing stairs down - stairs up access to “island” aisles.
Look up “The Model Railroad Club” in New Jersey.
But few basements have that kind of headroom. As for digging down, that would be very doable in most cases. Just a fair amount of work.
Raised floors need to be built to the same standard as building floors to handle the weight and live loads (people walking around). You don’t want it to feel bouncy while people are moving around, and you don’t want it to collapse under your guests.
So that means footings, posts, beams and joists, or stud walls and joists. Since the raised walkways are typically only under the aisles, the stud walls need to be shear walls.
You also need to consider safety barriers between the raised floors and the open space under the layout.
Seems like just building the layout a bit higher and rolling under it on a chair or stool is a much simpler, safer, and cheaper, approach.
Agreed, they would need to be correctly built. Not really that complex given the likely spans in most cases. The bigger issue in most residential settings will be headroom.
Lots of layouts have been built with limited sections of raised floor to save space in what is known as a mushroom plan. Assuming the actual layout weight is point loaded to the main floor, the raised floor portion presents no unusual engineering issues.
Agreed, it’s not a hard problem to solve. Even with headroom, the question I would ask is, Is it really worth it?
I remember the layout with the steps cut into the basement floor, I want to say it was a large O scale 3-rail layout. What I can’t remember is how high the layout was or how deep the steps went. Depending on layout height, to be able to comfortably walk under the layout the stair runs on either side could take up a lot of floor space. I would argue
For me, it’s a lot easier to design and build a layout with a hinged liftout than one with elevated track. Here’s a thread that provides good examples and how-to’s:
Raised floors need to be built to the same standard as building floors to handle the weight and live loads (people walking around). You don’t want it to feel bouncy while people are moving around, and you don’t want it to collapse under your guests.
So that means footings, posts, beams and joists, or stud walls and joists. Since the raised walkways are typically only under the aisles, the stud walls need to be shear walls.
You also need to consider safety barriers between the raised floors and the open space under the layout.
Seems like just building the layout a bit higher and rolling under it on a chair or stool is a much simpler, safer, and cheaper, approach.
Agreed, they would need to be correctly built. Not really that complex given the likely spans in most cases. The bigger issue in most residential settings will be headroom.
Lots of layouts have been built with limited sections of raised floor to save space in what is known as a mushroom plan. Assuming the actual layout weight is point loaded to the main floor, the raised floor portion presents no unusual engineering issues.
Sheldon
Agreed, it’s not a hard problem to solve. Even with headroom, the question I would ask is, Is it really worth it?
I remember the layout with the steps cut into the basement floor, I want to say it was a large O scale 3-rail layout. What I can
I will reiterate that I believe a “roll-under” is the best option*. Raise the layout height a bit, build low-clearance benchwork over the access point, and buy a stool or chair on wheels.
Very few people are lucky enough to have a layout space where the stairs enter in the center of the room, or where there are no utlities or mechanicals that need access. Why do I mention that? If you need to have removable sections to access mechanical systems or utilities, then building a removable setion to enter the room is just as easy (or hard, depending on your point of view).
Or just build a walk-in layout, with return loops at each end if continuous run is desired.
Edit to add: My opinion above is for a home layout. Walk-under access for a large club layout feels both more desirable and achievable.
Agreed, but I do not like turnback loops. From an operational stand point, I want left to always be west right to always be east.
Even if I used DCC I would want that operational convention.
So being “in the middle” of the layout is important.
And while my track plan allows continious operation, its primary design is thru staging, hidden from view, as the train makes a second “loop” around the room under and behind the scenery it passes thru multiple staging yards.
I agree, walk-under or walk-through is preferable in a club layout setting, for space and practicality. Our club layout takes a lot of beating. Anything mechanical gets broken unless it’s super commercial grade. A lot of rubbing, slamming and operational mistakes happen. We remind the guys to be careful, but it just doesn’t sink in. There’s also a lot of guys operating trains at the same time, that would be difficult or annoying with a liftout.
I still like the club for the social, despite its quirks…
