Trying to get an idea of your space, so it’s 19’ x 9’ ?
Mike.
I’m using John Sterling shelving components for the bulk of my layout, so I could do some testing when I first started (just had to move shelves up or down as opposed to re-doing benchwork). I thought about doing a two-level layout and experimented having 12" from the top of the lower level shelf to the bottom of the valance above it (so the upper shelf was about 15" above the lower one). It worked OK, for me I found it easy to work on and operate, but it somehow didn’t look or feel right…possibly because my prior layout had very high backdrops. I eventually went with one level, allowing for around 24" of backdrop behind the layout.
Flying Crow,
Why double deck? You could have a very nice single deck layout in this space.
IMHO - Your space is a little small for a double deck layout. Yes one will fit, but by the time you build it out to reliable operating standards you will find that you are going to have to make some pretty big compromises to get a double deck in this space. Either you will have to take a big chunk out of the space for the helix (6’ X 6’) or you will have to figure out a clever way to double back through a scene to climb up in a nolix to get a decent deck separation (my definition of that is roughly 20” railhead to railhead).
Building a double deck layout is not a simple task. Way more work than two single deck layouts. It would be a shame to spend lots of time on a layout that was so compromised that in the end that you didn’t like the end product of your labor.
If it were my project, I would explore some other design options.
My two cents,
Correct. 19x9
First question should always be, what are you going to run. I got by fine on 18" radius but then most of my cars were 40’.
You can also go with more than 2% grade.
OK, well with a room, or space of 9’ x 19’, a 16" shelf around the room, you should be able to get about 44’, or 528" of “run” to climb 15", which would be .028 % grade, right? If that’s not “do-able” then I guess you’ll need a helix.
What about doing part of the grade with a shorter helix, kind of like going up to the helix, spin around a couple of times in the helix, then back out in the open to continue the climb? You could put it in a corner.
OR what I would do, be happy with the 9’ x 19’ space for one level lay out.
How bad do you need or want the second level? Just to make it a “bigger” lay out?
Mike.
The reported 9x19’ room is very similar to the room I built my last layout, which was 10x18’. As mentioned, I had a narrow overhead of 7.5 inches over the staging tracks and it took a 2.9% grade to take the track out of staging and up to the yard over the top of staging, the 2.9% back down again.
I could pull about 25 cars up that grade with 2 six axle SD45’s by way of example. Of course the clearance was very minimal and the yard over head was 30" wide. However if the layer over the top was much narrower, access to the tracks underneeth would be better. But I wasn’t trying to build scenery or a town underneath, just park trains.
That would be over a 2.8% grade. and that doesn’t allow for transitions from level-to-grade and back nor for level areas for towns along the way, if desired. And it doesn’t take into account the extra effective grade caused by friction in any curves along the way. That would be a do-able grade in some situations, but steep for some combinations of equipment, train length, etc.
If the Original Poster plans for a narrow climbing deck around the room or around part of the room between decks, 2.8% is perhaps OK. But without knowing more about what he wants to accomplish with the layout, it’s hard to give more detailed advice.