BrickTracks: different curves, PF/9V compatible

[pirzyk]

5 hours ago, zephyr1934 said:

NOOOO!!!! Keep them curved!  (grin)

Don't cross your streams!  :D

[M_slug357]

Just a bit of shameless promotion for this project:

What (not) to do with your tax refund... by Nick Jackson, on Flickr

How much grey? by Nick Jackson, on Flickr

Darker than the last by Nick Jackson, on Flickr

Almost Indistinguishable (1) by Nick Jackson, on Flickr

What (not) to do with your tax refund, part 2 by Nick Jackson, on Flickr

Silky Smooth! by Nick Jackson, on Flickr

 

 

 

 

((While I know that my photography skills aren't superb, I will be taking some higher resolution pics soon!))

[legoman666]

Tease!

[Cale]

We ran some of the prototype R104 turnouts on PennLUG's train layout at Philly Brick Fest recently. We were very impressed with the quality. The turnouts performed flawlessly all weekend as we ran multiple different trains through them, some at considerable speed, without issue. Scott Hoffmeyer has done an excellent job with refining the design. We're very much looking forward to the Kickstarter.

IMG_4287 by Cale Leiphart, on Flickr

You can see some more of our trains running through the turnouts here.

 

Cale

[coaster]

Thanks Nick and Cale!  Those look way better than just on my living room floor!

Just a quick update for everyone.  Curve tooling is still in process, but it's going to be late.  Don't think in my career I've ever had anyone deliver tooling on time.  Disappointing, but not totally unexpected either.  At least I don't owe anyone any parts.   Soon as I have the production samples, I'll be sure to post some pictures.

In other news, I've taken some feedback I've gotten on the switches - so thank you all who have bought some off Shapeways and tried them out - and have remodeled them all.  No significant changes, just tweaked a few details I'd overlooked and added some additional studs where possible.  Give me a day and I'll get the new versions up on Shapeways.  Barring any other changes, these will be the versions for the Kickstarter next month. 

Edited May 9, 2017 by coaster

[3797]

I still feel that you should hype up those curves before silently starting another Kickstarter even if that means that you may have to delay the Kickstarter for a few weeks. You need to get people's attention, if you want it to succeed this time around. Also, I'm sure you are aware that many are fed up with ME Models because of their supposedly less than stellar communication. There are a few Scott Hoffmeyers on Twitter but none of them seem to be you. Maybe you could use the platform for quick updates. There doesn't seem to be anything on YouTube, either. Maybe you should see, if someone with a lot of subscribers wants to show off your curves and let everyone know about Brick Tracks. Or send a few samples to some of the larger LUGs like 1000Steine.de and ask them whether or not they are interested in doing a review. They did it for the 3D printed monorail stuff, so I don't see why they wouldn't want to work with you. If you do use Facebook, then please share your updates elsewhere as well since many (myself included) can't stand Zuckerberg and thus don't use any of his products.

I have no doubts that you're doing a fantastic job and that you're very busy at the moment. I'm just a little worried, so please don't take this as an insult. As I said before: For me it's either your track pieces or nothing. And FDM 3D printing doesn't seem to be a good long term solution. (Thinking of Thomas Sanladerer's strength test videos and a few comments by Angus at Maker's Muse.)

[M_slug357]

I agree with @3797 that there should be a bigger ad campaign this time around! It also would be nice to know of what changes have been made to the 3D print prototypes -- like a version log for software.

My biggest suggestion would be to take as many pictures of the product(s) from as many angles as possible! Ballasted, plain, internals, externals, undersides, etc.

Lastly, since the goal is to secure injection molding, does this mean that the switches will come pre-assembled or diy? I don't remember if this was discussed previously or not...

 

[coaster]

Agreed on the above.  Unfortunately, I feel I'm a bit limited in ad campaigning before I have product, and I was hoping to have it available well before running the switch Kickstarter.  I do have a number of things in place, but in a sort of holding pattern until I at least get the production samples.  bricktracks.com is all set to go, there is a BrickTracks facebook page wanting content, and a BrickTracks Twitter account (I've never actually used Twitter before, so this will be a new one for me).  I am working with a firm on some videos, but again, animations and printed parts only get you so far.  Once I have product though, I'm going to be hitting it hard.  Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, YouTube, EB, Bricklink, Amazon, ebay; we'll be getting word out.  NILTC and PennLUG have both been awesome and agreed to help in whatever way they can.  I think we can get plenty of action shots and set scenes for photography.

I'm not opposed to stalling the Kickstarter for a bit.  I was hoping to coincide with Brickworld Chicago next month, but if I don't have product early enough, there's not much time to show off beforehand.  This Kickstarter will run for the full 2 months though, so even if someone is late to the party they'll still have time to get on board.  If nothing else, I can have the "proof" page up for the Kickstarter, so even though it hasn't launched people can sign up for notifications.

Hopefully I'm not causing anyone concern with regards to production.  This is par for the course for product development; I'm just making it a lot more visible than normal.  It's like sausage making: the end product is nice, but you really don't want to know how it gets done.

@M_slug357 The changes to the switches were very minor.  I've added a stud just above the frog and a few between each of the side guard rails.  There was also a minor detail on the underside where I didn't properly relieve a cutoff for one of the studs.  Finally, there was a mismatch between the coverplates on the switches and the double cross-over, so that's been corrected as well.  Other than the added studs, you probably wouldn't have noticed the changes.

Yes, the switches will be sold pre-assembled.  Pull it out of the box and start playing.

 

[Ludo]

Hi Coaster,

I'm taking a look at the point and was wondering why the guard rail on the straight track  doesn't have the same 'angled entry' as the guard rail on the deviating track.

Shouldn't this also be the same angle (15 degree), or what you using?

Better to get this also right before molds are made.

The 'almost' 90° angle on the LEGO rail guard give sometimes a 'problem' because the wheel flange hits the rail guard entry.

While using a rail guard entry for both rail guards (straight & deviating) like the one for the deviating track (15 degree?) will force the wheel flange to go gently against the track.

I'm also thinking on steamers with a single front axle like a 2 - 6 - 2

Those are realy sensible to hit the rail guard, because there's no second axle on the leading 'bogie' to keep the wheels lining up, like the Emerald.

I hope you understand my explanation, English is'n my native language, you see.

 

See also the second picture of a Fleishman point, where you can see that the rail guards have on every end the same angled 'entry' to force the wheel flange smooth to the rail.

  

 

 

 

 

 

[M_slug357]

@Ludo, I've been able to playtest these r104 switches for a while, and I have a 2-6-2 and a 2-8-2 engine that have no problems traversing the switches from any direction. I don't have a 2-10-2 or 2-12-2 to test, so I couldn't speak to those wheel types. I'd say if your engine can handle r40 switches, it should be able to navigate these r104s!

I do agree with you for including more of the angled rail guards for the sake of realism, but I also think that they would not be necessary for the sake of functionality.

[Ludo]

@M_slug357, thanks for this verry fast reply.

I agree with you that including more angled rail guards adds to realism. Now is the time to do it.

Also great to read that there are no problems with 2-6-2 & 2-8-2 engines passing this point.

I was a bit concerned because the LEGO points are no ideal ( nor realistic) design.

Prevention is always better than curing, isn't it?

I have not many steamers to run with, and most of the time, i'll keep them on sideways as a static model.

I'm building a Type 29 (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NMBS/SNCB_Type_29  [English]) and would like them to run smoothly in curves and points.

The driver wheels don't have the same spacing. The distance between the first 3 is identical, but is larger between the 3-th & 4-th. See pictures below.

Still need the driver rods and upload some pictures on Brickshelf.

Anyhow, this one can't run on R40 curves, nor pass a point on the deviation track.

 

Edited May 14, 2017 by Ludo

[coaster]

@Ludo I understand.  Here's a closer view of the guards:

We've had some discussion on the guard rails before.  The problem is balancing a realistic design while keeping a cohesive look with the existing LEGO product.  The LEGO check rails have a rounded lead-in, as opposed to the 15° one that is typical of actual guard rails.  On that straight guard and the exit side of the turnout guard we can keep the LEGO-like rounding, as it provides adequate lead-in for the wheel flanges.  On the other side, I swung it out at the 15° because some of the longer bogies would jam without any additional relief.  It doesn't really matter to me, it's just aesthetics though.

One thing I have gone back and forth on is the guards on the frog.  They add to the realism, but they aren't strictly necessary, and the LEGO switches neglect them as well.

[davidzq]

I myself would opt for the more realistic 15° guides, and am not bothered if the product strays away from the original Lego design (which we all know is a bit lacking in some respects). I also like the inclusion of guides on the frogs, for both accuracy and the reassurance of the wheels not colliding.

Another thought I've had; Would it be possible to make some of the studs hollow in the tight areas (i.e. between the guide rails). This would allow a 1x3 tile to be centered between them instead of a 1x2 with gaps on either side when ballasting. And if not possible, perhaps shift the studs by half for the same reason? And thank you for the added studs in the last update!

[TCRR Constitution]

I love the concept, and I would love to have some larger curves. I agree about the track selection being terrible. I mean, look at the 12 volt stuff. That was incredible! I hate the fact the project did not reach funding.

[coaster]

I'll play with the guard rails tonight, see what it would take to add the 15°.  As long as we don't have to lose any studs, I'm fine with making the change.

@davidzq I've toyed with that exact idea regarding the studs.  There's no clean way to get the studs in there, even going halvsies.  Here's some tile area sketched over the studs:

Note that I can get an additional half towards the frog, but there's nothing really to the left towards the outer guard because of the support ribs.  I can certainly hollow the studs, that's easy to do, but unless you've got super-secret 1x2.5 tiles, there's no point to it.  In places where a half-stud does because an option though, I will hollow those to make it clear they're shifted off the other studs.

@TCRR Constitution  Well, I'll have the larger curves soon.  Even though the project didn't reach it's funding, I ponied up and bought some of the tooling, because I'm confidant I can recoup it.  And, I will relaunch the kickstarter soon for the switches.  I was shooting to have it ready to go mid-June, but I may delay it a bit to give the new curves time to get out into the market.  But even if I never get a funded kickstarter project, I'm determined to bring these tracks to bear.  Money that I make from the R104 and R120 curves will be directly reinvested in additional tooling.

[TCRR Constitution]

Cool. I would probably order some. I would like to see long straights as well. 

[M_slug357]

42 minutes ago, TCRR Constitution said:

Cool. I would probably order some. I would like to see long straights as well. 

Um, did you read the rest of this post? This project is dedicated to large radius curves and switches!

You're on your own for straight rails........ there's always ME models

[TCRR Constitution]

I know... But Me models straights are expensive. I have set aside funds for a steam locomotive and better track.

[coaster]

When I started the project, there was no way I could compete with the standard LEGO straight.  You could get them for $.50 or less.  Now they go for about $2.50, but there's knock-off versions from China that can be had for $1.  That said, I will have to make a tool that has some small straights to pair with the switches, and I've been asked about 2x and 4x straights before.  I'll see what can be added to the tooling, there may be something there.  A 2x straight though would probably be $3.50-4.00; about the same as what ME is asking. 

[Ludo]

Hi Coaster,

Thanks for the fast reply, and willing to take a look for the guard rails!

Concerning the lookalike as the points from TLC, I'll agree with David Hensley to have a more realistic point. Anyhow, your track is LEGO(R) COMPATIBLE, not made by TLC. What I mean is that you have no obligation to make them lookalike to the LEGO(R) points. It's your idea, and the community give you some - valuable - input, and I think that this is the way to do it. As written in previous message, it's better to prevent problems than to cure them afterwards. If those proposals (guide rail & frog guide rail) where not necessary in real life, them I'm convinced that the points would look completely different. They are added for some reason.

Regarding the question from David Hensley to add hollow studs to place a 1x3 tile as ballast: What if you can add a 1x3 tile where both ends are cut away , so making the tile a bit shorter, but still centered over the hollow studs? The 1x3 tile ends are so close to the rail guards that no one would notice it. I know, it's cheating, but could be a possibility to add the ballast as realistic as possible, without a significant gap. I don't mind to cut bricks to make a model or building as realistic as possible, did it before. And for the little few tiles that need to be cut, I think that no one would hesitate to do it if it adds to realism. 

Don't shoot me abouth the idea of cutting a few tiles, it's just an idea that I like.

Note: TLC = The LEGO Company

[coaster]

Hi Ludo,

I understand.  I don't mind deviating from the LEGO design.  There's a number of aspects where I question why they did it the way they did, or I recognize they cut corners on the tooling.  My objective though is to have my tracks blend seamlessly with the LEGO ones.  The focus should be on the layout as a whole, so there needs to be some level of cohesiveness.  It could be because I focus on tracks that I notice, but I dislike the overall appearance of the ME rails because they don't blend well with the LEGO ones.  I find the differences distracting.  Something like angling the guard rails though is innocent enough.

1 hour ago, Ludo said:

Don't shoot me abouth the idea of cutting a few tiles, it's just an idea that I like.

HERETIC! :)

If you're not opposed to cutting tiles, it may be better to simply break off the posts on the underside.  This will allow you to slide the tile off center from the studs, and in a couple places fit the entire tile between the guard.

[carbon60]

On 15/05/2017 at 3:27 AM, coaster said:

In places where a half-stud does because an option though, I will hollow those to make it clear they're shifted off the other studs.

14 hours ago, coaster said:

My objective though is to have my tracks blend seamlessly with the LEGO ones.  The focus should be on the layout as a whole, so there needs to be some level of cohesiveness.  It could be because I focus on tracks that I notice, but I dislike the overall appearance of the ME rails because they don't blend well with the LEGO ones.  I find the differences distracting.  Something like angling the guard rails though is innocent enough.

I think that hollowing out some of the studs could be detrimental to blending seamlessly with the LEGO track.  None of the LEGO Track has hollow studs.

 

 

[3797]

2 hours ago, carbon60 said:

I think that hollowing out some of the studs could be detrimental to blending seamlessly with the LEGO track.  None of the LEGO Track has hollow studs.

This. Also, those who ballast their tracks are a minority and they could just as well modify the tiles slightly, if it's that important to them. The reason why I want these and nothing else is that I want them to blend in.

[Ludo]

22 hours ago, coaster said:

Hi Ludo,

I understand.  I don't mind deviating from the LEGO design.  There's a number of aspects where I question why they did it the way they did, or I recognize they cut corners on the tooling.  My objective though is to have my tracks blend seamlessly with the LEGO ones.  The focus should be on the layout as a whole, so there needs to be some level of cohesiveness.  It could be because I focus on tracks that I notice, but I dislike the overall appearance of the ME rails because they don't blend well with the LEGO ones.  I find the differences distracting.  Something like angling the guard rails though is innocent enough.

HERETIC! :)

If you're not opposed to cutting tiles, it may be better to simply break off the posts on the underside.  This will allow you to slide the tile off center from the studs, and in a couple places fit the entire tile between the guard.

Hi Coaster,

Thanks for seeing the angled guard rails as innocent, great.  Looking forward to a CAD sample.

Also a thank you for the tip to remove the tubes (posts) on the underside of the tile. In this case, we don't even need hollow studs, isn't it? And the remark from Carbon60 could be solved this way.

Perhaps not everyone will ballast his track, and solves their problem too (no open studs).

You can't please everyone. There will be always pro's & cons. As we say, a medal will always have 2 sides, and some will always like one side more than the other one.

[Ludo]

@Coaster,

Still an other question.

I'll see on the picture posted from Cale (PennLUG's train layout at Philly Brick Fest) that changing direction is done with a rotating mechanism, which is different from the LEGO points.

I guess (hope) that the hole from this rotating mechanism goes straight trough the bottom plate, making it possible to use an electric driven mechanism under the table, like a motor, servo motor or something else.

I can't see it on the posted pictures.