Trestles

stonysmith wrote: I have my associate elves trying to sneak into Talent, OR and get me measurements of the MTL bridge at this time.

Associate elves indeed.............humph. I'm a tooth fairy you big silly. But I no longer make house calls. Too much of a chance of getting shot while I sneak through the bedroom.

Loren,
Well, what do you think? Are we close? Seems to me they aren't far off from the trestles around Shasta & Portland. If Stony can't get texture on the diagnals, I'm thinking of a slice and dice of some of your HO trellis to apply to the surface.

tealplanes wrote: Too much of a chance of getting shot while I sneak through the bedroom.

Does Karin know? Or is she the one with the gun?

Mark

Kelly,
I have the documents, but unless Stony knows some deep secret of Shapeways, I don't think we could do the deck well. It seems to me to get a good running track, one needs to either mold the rails into the deck like MTL or create a channel for somebody's track. It's easy to cut the deck to length on the MTL since they have a pin on the rail at only one end. Then there are the girders that one would like to have detail on all 6 sides.
The steel trestles are something we don't have in Z right now. But we do have several bridges.

Mark

Actually didn't mind the thread hacking, found it very helpful. Love what I am seeing.

All,
Since we're at the point of needing to know what goes on top of the trestles, I'll be collecting the measurement on the units I have and would like to know which one's the group is interested in so I can set some priorities:

Marklin 8975 Arched bridge
Marklin 8976 Ramp
Micron Art 1085 79' Deck Girder Bridge
Micro Trains Line 990-40-95X Plate Girder Bridge
Micro Trains Line 990-40-95X Bashed as a Deck girder
TrainCat 200801 90' Deck Girder Bridge

Mark

Stony,
After measuring up all the bridges here's what I've come up with.


Cap the posts with a centered 25mm long box beam on the ends same size as the posts. This will work with all the bridges I have (Marklin [19mm], MTL [25mm], Micron and Traincat 14mm). I'm assuming the material your using isn't too hard (or fragile) to cut by hand. Otherwise, look at using 19mm for the cap beam and we lose the MTL thru girder bridge.
This plus my previous notes height notes are the last items I can think of.

Anyone else have opinions?

Mark

Stony,
I like what I see, but want to study it a bit. I'm mixed on the posts: my artist eye likes what I see, but the engineer in me keeps nagging that it's not right. I wouldn't mind reading a couple opinions from the group on it.
The top looks odd, but that's the best way I can think of to accomodate all the different bridges. The end box beams aren't quite right, but the change is minor & I'll post it next time.
Mark

I am seen a lot of different versions, for example www.etsy.com/listing/55952293/steel-industrial-decor-linear www.flickr.com/photos/80651083@N00/100456440/in/photostream/lightbox/

I guess we should be calling the thing a viaduct rather than a trestle. After all, if it looks like a viaduct...

Kelley,
I think of a viaduct as multiple bridges supported by trestles or in the case of roads a bridge with multiple supports. I've also seen reference to structure like this as pylons.I'm sure someone here can post the proper terms, but I suspect it's like switch vs. turnout or gage vs. gauge.
More importantly: what to you think of the look? I'm struggling on the posts: they aren't what the WP used on the Greenville bridge I'm modelling right now, but they seem to be a good match for what the WP did on the Keddie Wye: www.flickr.com/photos/johannes-j-smit/5743694645/

Mark

Its looking good. I threw the word viaduct out there to give folks another option when doing web searches. I know you guys are working hard on this and trying to make it useful for multiple bridge parts that are out there. Cheap but accurate and useful is my motto.

In this photo the leg lengths are the same height between supports. I believe this is what you eye does not like with Stony's, the fact that we want to see everything in equal dimensions from bottom to top.




Bill

Stony,

If you fudge a little like 1/200 would that work for the detail.



Bill

Here a bit more background on the trestle design. I've been trying to model a viaduct on the WP:

[attachment:1]C:\fakepath\216.JPG[/attachment]

The trestle prototype is typical of the WP & SP in the Sierra and out west in general, so I figure that it can be of value to people other than myself. The dimensions I've provided come from this prototype (much to the distress of the CHP officers who patrol the road underneath), and calculations and standards provided by the NMRA. I have done a bit of compression on the height and span span vs. height dimensions to accomodate the deck girder bridges available in Z, but still within the engineering guidelines. The only exception to the protype is the box beams across the top, which are extended to allow them to be used as a cut-to-fit for the various bridges mentioned earlier.

[attachment:2]C:\fakepath\028.jpg[/attachment]

I've tried to build this trestle with off-the-shelf brass which end up being being about 1/3 larger than the prototype, and just don't look right. So I know that matching the truss construction is a challenge in brass.

My dilemma at this point is the texture Stony has added to the posts: it adds a needed texture to the structure and I like it, but is more typical of larger structures like the Keddie Wye. Should we go with the more prototypical box truss of the previous version on the more artistic interesting structure of Stony's latest design? Or maybe we should try to get trestles with both with both type of posts?

Other than that, I can't find any other issues with the design and am ready to ask "what is the best way to paint WSF?"

MMark

Here a bit more background on the trestle design. I've been trying to model a viaduct on the WP:

[attachment:1]C:\fakepath\216.JPG[/attachment]

The trestle prototype is typical of the WP & SP in the Sierra and out west in general, so I figure that it can be of value to people other than myself. The dimensions I've provided come from this prototype (much to the distress of the CHP officers who patrol the road underneath), and calculations and standards provided by the NMRA. I have done a bit of compression on the height and span span vs. height dimensions to accomodate the deck girder bridges available in Z, but still within the engineering guidelines. The only exception to the protype is the box beams across the top, which are extended to allow them to be used as a cut-to-fit for the various bridges mentioned earlier.

[attachment:2]C:\fakepath\028.jpg[/attachment]

I've tried to build this trestle with off-the-shelf brass which end up being being about 1/3 larger than the prototype, and just don't look right. So I know that matching the truss construction is a challenge in brass.

My dilemma at this point is the texture Stony has added to the posts: it adds a needed texture to the structure and I like it, but is more typical of larger structures like the Keddie Wye. Should we go with the more prototypical box truss of the previous version on the more artistic interesting structure of Stony's latest design? Or maybe we should try to get trestles with both with both type of posts?

Other than that, I can't find any other issues with the design and am ready to ask "what is the best way to paint WSF?"

Mark

Here a bit more background on the trestle design. I've been trying to model a viaduct on the WP:



The trestle prototype is typical of the WP & SP in the Sierra and out west in general, so I figure that it can be of value to people other than myself. The dimensions I've provided come from this prototype (much to the distress of the CHP officers who patrol the road underneath), and calculations and standards provided by the NMRA. I have done a bit of compression on the height and span span vs. height dimensions to accomodate the deck girder bridges available in Z, but still within the engineering guidelines. The only exception to the protype is the box beams across the top, which are extended to allow them to be used as a cut-to-fit for the various bridges mentioned earlier.



I've tried to build this trestle with off-the-shelf brass which end up being being about 1/3 larger than the prototype, and just don't look right. So I know that matching the truss construction is a challenge in brass.

My dilemma at this point is the texture Stony has added to the posts: it adds a needed texture to the structure and I like it, but is more typical of larger structures like the Keddie Wye. Should we go with the more prototypical box truss of the previous version on the more artistic interesting structure of Stony's latest design? Or maybe we should try to get trestles with both with both type of posts?

Other than that, I can't find any other issues with the design and am ready to ask "what is the best way to paint WSF?"

Mark

This photo was posted on railpictures.net yesterday. What a great scene! It would be a fun one to model.

www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=406129&nseq=9

Rob

Hi Stony, could this be used as the base for a classic water tower, something like this

static.panoramio.com/photos/1920x1280/47159439.jpg




Matt