# elevated layout on a deck, with concrete mountains



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

I'm not sure where to begin, or how to bound what's behind it, but my story is basically this.

I'm a newbie to this outdoor railroading gig, but was seriousy into HO as a younger man. In more recent years, I've been an amatuer Comstock historian, and am particularly fond of the mine structures of the great silver rush; and I used to love detail modelling. But after blowing 25 years on the computer, my wife and I think it's high time that I really *did* something *real







*; and a long-term outdoor layout project, combining several interests that I'd thought I'd never see again, began its serious planning stages 6 months ago.

The bad news is that our back yard slopes away and downhill from where we want to view and operate, meaning that the layout terrain slopes must go against what mother nature is doing. After much trial and error in planning, I've concluded that an on-dirt approach is impossible. Besides, I'd like to get under the thing (wiring, etc.). The good news is that my wife Linda has given me the whole back yard (it's been a useless jungle-wreck all along) to do what I want with it, and is excited to see the plans and tree/brush clearing efforts so far.

So here's the deal. I've read some great articles / posts here, regarding a) raised deck construction with an on-dirt layout on top, and b) on-dirt concrete mountain construction. I'm banking on a combination approach, with the following characteristics:

- Open & standard deck construction for the layout, w/ code-compliant design for peripheral walkways
- Concrete (actually mortar, mixed perhaps with glass strand chop) for mountains
- Either PT, cypress or plastic wood roadbed
- Roadbed elevated above the framework w/ risers
- Enough headroom beneath to at least stoop to get to building undersides
- R/C control, battery power trains
- Storage yard beneath the mountain in the rear of layout (the side not normally seen; open to rear walkway) 

So here's my questions:
- Does anyone detect a massive bozo no-no in such an approach?
- What about differential expansion? I've been warned by a builder not to use plastic wood here, because it will move a lot more than the PT wood frame or concrete.
- Has anyone successfully used 2 screwed layers of 5/4 PT decking for a roadbed? Or does it warp / cup too much in the long run? How about cypress?
- How about the concrete shell? Am I just asking for it all to shatter in a couple years? A builder I know says "no"; but does anyone have experience with a broad expanse?

Well, that's about it for now... I was going to insert a jpg or two, but couldn't figure it out...










Best regards,
Cliff


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

You might look at Ray Dunakin's layout, it's on a steep slope and he did some amazing things with it and concrete/rocks.
http://www.raydunakin.com/Site/In-ko-pah_Railroad.html


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

Maybe foam 'stead of concrete for mountains? Much lighter.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Jim Stapleton has built his elevated railroad using "plastic", trek decking. The posts and substructure are treated wood. Here is a link to some pictures of his layout in the live steam forum. He has run PVC pipe all along the decking to provide power to the track.


Dr. Rivit's elevated railroad 



Chuck


----------



## s-4 (Jan 2, 2008)

In your situation, I would think that cedar decking would work well for roadbed. Simply double layer them like you mentioned. While not as good as treks...it should work since your track isn't in the ground. You would have to use crushed stone ballast to ensure the water drains appropriately. 

PT is a lot cheaper...but you never know if its going to twist warp or split...and you won't know until the layout is done for about a month! 

What will you use for ground material? I would think that real dirt could cause the deck materials and roadbed to rot more quickly. Some people have mixed concrete and peatmoss to create a lighter weight modeling material. I think it is called hypertufa. Might work well for you if the layout is in a non-freezing region. Others have used grout products successfully.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Depends on where 'herre' is regarding Home Disapointment's Trex. 

I'm south east of Tucson and before Large scale was planning an outdoor On3 layout. I ripped a bunch of trex and made a ladder for the rails, fortunately I entered LS about that time and left the On3 ladder up incase I wated to add it later. 3 years later and the Trex started crumbling. No glue really sticks to it, tho' that could be hot/cold cycling... 
I had used some for cribbing and small structures, last year all that came out and was replaced with cedar. (G scale.) 
The On3 ladder on the raised portion expanded more than it contracted and is kinked like a lightening bolt! 
Anybody want what I have come and get it, otherwise it's headed to a landfill 
It was also difficult to work with as I needed to predrill screw holes so it wouldn't split, even tho' I was using self tapping drywall screws. Because of the bugle head shape of the screws I also had to use finish washers, stamped raised circles, to prevent head pull through... 
Maybe using whole the boards might last, but exposure of the interior really hastened it's demise.... 

John


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff

Don't know if in your travels around MLS you've run across the PDF file I put together from Richard Smith's postings on the building of his Port Orford Coast RR layout, if not the following are a couple of links to the files. The first file contains the postings, the second file contains a list of all the links to the separate topics, some of which weren't included in the first volume since they were posted after the first file was published. Maybe you can get some ideas from his great work.

*Port Orford Coast RR
Richard Smith
File Type: PDF - File Size: 25MB
Left-click to open - Right-click to download*

Port Orford Coast RR - Topic List
File Type: PDF - File Size: 118KB
Left-click to open / Right to download[/b]


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

"Maybe using whole the boards might last, but exposure of the interior really hastened it's demise.... " 

The Trex web site doesn't mention sawing boards lenghwise, but does say that sanding the exterior, or scratching a deck by using a metal snow shovel voids the warrenty. It suggests using MEK on cut edges to minimize pore size. 

CliffyJ, I made mountains out of plastic cement, no glass, no vermiculite, or any other filler. It works fine. Some has been up four or five years, and hasn't cracked or anything. There are pictures of its construction in a previous thread that is around here someplace, but I can never find anything with the "new improved" search feature.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Trex has been really great for us-we use it as ladder roadbed and as decking and a base for houses--we've had no problem with crumbling or deterioration. We have it as a walkway in contact with the ground and it has held up really well for ten years.


I don't see how sawing it would have any effect on its structural integrity--you saw boards to length all the time, and that exposes the interior. Maybe they changed the formula?


----------



## Chris France (Jan 3, 2008)

I would second the recommendation to take a look at Richard Smith's methods. I built my yard on a raised platform based on his ideas and it was the best move I ever made. The only flaws have been a result of my less than supurb carpentry skills.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Great link Jerry, thanks!


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks S-4, and I agree that I don't want to learn the hard way about PT. I'm thinking about cypress: a drive down to Florida to J&S Cypress (http://www.cypressthings.com/). I understand they have great prices (vs. typical cedar, up here in MD). 

Ground material, I'm thinking about mortar with some sort of reinforcement, such as fiberglass strand... but the jury's still out on that...


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Yes! An awesome document! It was one of the ones that intrigued me to go whole hog -- but with concrete terrain, as opposed to garden-on-a-deck.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks, and yes, I've seen TJ's article on what you and he did; it remains my best source of confidence that fake mountains on a deck can be made to work and last. 

Unfurtunately, I've searched high and low for plastic cement here in MD, but no joy. I may need to make a road trip down south! 

It's great to hear that it's still behaving for you.


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

CliffyJ -- 

Try Lowes. I'm not sure what part of MD you live in; but I selected a Lowe's completely at random in Baltimore, and they have it in stock. 94 lb bags, 47 lb bags, pails. What part of the store were you looking in? Around here, it's in the costruction materials area, along with cement and near the lumber. 

TJ's article is a summary of everything that we did here, and what TJ did on his own. That is the everything-in-one-place document.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

You're kidding me! That's great! I live just west of Columbia, and shopped Lowe's stores on the net all arond these parts; and it didn't show up. So that's great news, and it solves a big piece of the puzzle. Thanks!!

And TJ's article IS excellent; I've read it, and intend to use its guidance a lot. 

Do you have a web site for your layout?


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks everyone for all your helpful knowledge, pics and links. 

What I've learned here is to stay away from Trex, at least for this particular roadbed application -- just as my builder friend warned me. He said that wood+concrete wouldn't expand/contract much, but the plastic wood would really do so, and I'd me asking for trouble in mixing them into one massive thing.

Still, there's a couple big heartburn issues for me. Leaving out the plastic wood from the equation, does anyone have experience with combining concrete (better, plastic cement) mountains with wood roadbed (cedar or cypress), but on a broad and elevated PT deck structure, and run into differential expansion issues? Issues big enough to make the whole concrete surface crack up? I'm planning such a layout that is about 90' x 20'; any thoughts on expansion joints?

Also, do I need to be a member to post pics? 

Thanks mucho,
Cliff


----------



## SlateCreek (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff, 

One of our members, Chris Walas, and some other guys did a lot of concrete/plastic cement mountains made of cement soaked burlap over a chicken wire/hardware cloth frame. Much lighter, and still strong like cement. I'm working on finding the link for you. This type of construction would solve a lot of your problems, as it's really only attached to your benchwork by the frame for the mountain instead of the whole mountain itself. It's kind of the heavy duty version of the hardshell scenery lots of indoor folks use. 

Matthew (OV)


----------



## SlateCreek (Jan 2, 2008)

Here we are. Try these:

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/tj-lee/Trains%20-%20Building%20Scenery%20-%20Cliffs%20Rev%2001-01-08.pdf

http://archive.mylargescale.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=27107

http://www.triplecrails.com/Rock/Rock.htm

http://www.silverstatespecialties.com/images/trains/Backyard_06.htm

And this: 

http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/forumid/10/tpage/1/view/topic/postid/9807/Default.aspx#10044

which has more info, and refers to the links above.

Matthew (OV)


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff

No sir you don't need to be a 1st Class member here at MLS to post pictures here, all you need is to have the image files stored somewhere that is available across the Internet, like PhotoBucket or any of the other free picture storage places. Then all you have to do is create a HTTP link in your reply to the image files you wish to display in your reply.

The instructions for how you create the links to your pictures can be seen on the MLS FAQ page, which can be accessed using the following path, or you can simply click the hyperlink below for a direct link to the page. The directions presented there will wor in both the Quick Reply (i.e. located at the bottom of each topic page) and HTTP (i.e. Add New Topic, Add Reply, etc.) editors.

*MLS menu-bar >> Resources menu >> FAQ >> Q10.* 
*Q10. How do I use the Quick Reply Editor to post a reply?*

Here also is another link to another topic found on MLS by member denray.

*Mountains, Bridges and trestles*


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Good news, I'll bite! Just got onto photobucket, did the thing, and we'll see what happens...

Plan view of intended layout, with house on the bottom, with downhill being toward the top of the pic:
http://s584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/?action=view&current=layout6plan06-18-09.jpg

Isometric view of frame work, from a downhill point of view, looking uphill toward the back of the house (shown with foundations only) and existing deck:

http://s584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/?action=view&current=layout6iso06-18-09.jpg

Thanks Steve!


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks for all the effort, Slate; it's a great listing. Not to sound ungrateful, but I've read these items -- and been inspired by them! Indeed, thanks for gathering them all together!

My issue is applying these techniques across a lengthy elevated deck -- and facing potential crack problems in the shell, and maybe gap problems in the track. I don't know if such things will happen... maybe I'm just being a weenie... but one way or another, I'm soon to start excavation and post hole drilling, and I'm hoping and praying that it will all hold togather somehow!

Thanks to Steve, I just posted a couple of jpeg links that will perhaps clarify the stuff I'm contemplating.

Gracias,
Cliff


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

*"It's kind of the heavy duty version of the hardshell scenery lots of indoor folks use."* 

Bingo Matthew, that's hitting the nail precisely on the head.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Yeah? you and whose army? LOL... Dang that's mighty impressive. I think your track plan is a rather bold statement, perhaps on a scale that few are able to comment. 

What is the stability of your ground? Most any structure that long can flex if there is any ground settling. Any water table issues in your area? 

Don't worry before you are done you will have tried several methods and will be teaching those that follow! 

I think I speak for most by telling you; We Want Pics as you progress! 

I would consider overlapping some mountains with out connecting them, box canyons and deep ravines.... maybe to force perspective... and mechanical connectors at every rail joint... 

Best of luck, 

John, that bit about the army was a childhood flashback! lol


----------



## SLemcke (Jun 3, 2008)

Cliff, 
That an awsome plan, I think I would start out smaller to get something up and running to enjoy while the rest is in construction. Also, not sure if your decking will support someone or not. If so plan on paths for getting around on the layout. If not, plan on some hatches in places so you can reach all interior areas of your layout. Mishaps happen at the farthest point away from where you are or can reach. Thats the law. 
Steve


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Hey John,

*>>>>Yeah? you and whose army? LOL... *
Yeah, that's why I'm nervous about putting in the post holes soon...

*>>>Dang that's mighty impressive. I think your track plan is a rather bold statement, perhaps on a scale that few are able to comment.*
Thanks; and say a nighty-night prayer for me, would you? LOL
I don't think it's out of scale at all, vs. the awesome things I see folks here doing. The only thing that's different (or maybe not, that's why I'm haranguing) is that it's parked up in the air -- with concrete mountains that hopefully don't destroy themselves within a year... 
My main thing is to stay true to the V&T, in this model of the Virginia City trackage. It's pretty much the basis of why this new hobby intrigues me, because it will be a platform for modelling the VC mines. Hate to admit it, but the garden aspect is -- once my wife said Heck No! to that maintenance piece -- is kinda out the window.

*>>>What is the stability of your ground? Most any structure that long can flex if there is any ground settling. Any water table issues in your area? *
Very stable: pretty much on a huge rock, with about 3' of topsoil, and on a slope. We had to drill over 500' to get to the aquifer.

*>>>Don't worry before you are done you will have tried several methods and will be teaching those that follow! *
Well, now, that's a big chunk of wisdom. You're saying, Dive In, Don't Sweat It So Much, and Enjoy the Process. Right?

*>>>I think I speak for most by telling you; We Want Pics as you progress! *
Roger that.

*>>>I would consider overlapping some mountains with out connecting them, box canyons and deep ravines.... maybe to force perspective... and mechanical connectors at every rail joint... *
All great advice; it confirms the details I've been worrying about, and at the same time suggests that the obstacles can be overcome. Specifically, you're thinking along the same lines that there should be a reasonable method of expansion joint design between mountain sections. I've been thinking about pouring sections with irregular edges; placing a rubber sheet on the edge before pouring the next section; and then trimming the rubber and hiding the edge with loose material.

Thanks much, Cliff


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff,

That is quite a project indeed! I would definately be concerned about the natural settling of the structure over time. Looks to me from noting your dimensions of this layout that this would be comparable to a 2500 sq. ft. home! I know this is ambitious, but you might think about building large retaining walls and filling with soil. Do some major compacting and then build like a "normal" outdoor layout on the ground. Lots of expense no matter what you do here. This will be impressive to say the least!


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks Steve for the sage advice. 

Here's a few additional data points.

- I know I'm biting off more than I should in this first phase...
- This phase is a much reduced version of the ultimate track plan... 
- Not that I can afford any of it, but what the heck...
- I'm bound and determined to somehow represent the VC V&T trackage, but I've had to fold it over 3 times to fit!
- And after about 40 versions, I think I have to draw the line and start building (that is, excavating and putting in post holes)
- Can't quite figure out where to chop it off, and still have a loop (they're all intertwined)

Nevertheless, yours is sound advice; and in reading like kind statements of other experienced folks, I have to admit that I feel like I'm on shaky ground. 

Another data point: I'm a mechanical designer, who spends his days on the 'puter working up sometimes wild stuff (entertainment industry). So far, this effort has been just like that process. But now, with trees being cleared and this thing starting to move from virtual to actual, well, it's both exciting and frightening! 

Here's a pic of the current devastation going on in our back yard:

http://s584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/?action=view&current=backyard06-12-09.jpg

As for decking sturcture, you raise a great point. I'm working with a builder-friend who is keeping me code-compliant in the walkway / deck areas. He assures me that everything else is outside the boundaries -- like a sculpture, if you will. 

Regarding access, yes, that's a big one! There is the peripheral walkway in the back, patio or deck towards the front, and 3 "tunnels" to below -- from whence there are a TBD number of pop-up platforms. I've worked on a design for removable concrete-topped hatches, but the jury is still way out on whether to just keep the holes open.

Thanks so much for your thoughtful response.

Best regards,
Cliff


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Gary,

Thanks for voicing your concerns, that's excatly why I've "come clean" with myself and put the matter up for examination. I was hesitant to do so, but now that folks like you are responding, I feel like the reality of the thing I hope for will somehow come true.

Yes, it's big. The first plans were for N or HO in the basement, but that didn't work. Outside, I'm limiting my plan to 5' radii, hence the confab I raised over AC wide-radius switches in a different thread. 

However, it's not so big: garden railroads can get huge!! And this sub-structure of PT wood, though bigger than the house, is VASTLY cheaper than raising the ground level. Here's why:
- It's an open-deck structure
- Lumber will be less than $2k
- Retaining walls would, on the down-hill side, be over 10' tall: there's no way we could afford the fill dirt, let along the wall and internal strengthening
- The elevated approach, analogous to an indoor shell-on-frame (as Matthew pointed out) is pretty much the only option I have.

Having said all that, I give it a 50% chance of succeeding, because there's so much room for error in technique here. My gut says that the demon in the closest has a name of Differential Expansion. Or something like that. And thanks to this thread, I now know to avoid instable materials like plastic deck boards.

So, here's food for thought. Gary, you mentioned the dimensions of this plan. But I ask you, and all you kind folks, what would a person run into, if the design involved:
- A simple 10'x20' open grid PT deck;
- Cedar or cypress roadbed, set on risers+runners (ladder method)
- Concrete (better, plastic cement) forming the terrain between
???

Being a newbie here, my surprise is that such an approach isn't widespread -- regardless of dimension. I'm not trying to break ground here, believe me!!

Another question: Would the concrete survive better, or worse, than if it was on the dirt? And what if one ran the concrete down to ground level, in the form of a skirt? There is ample evidence that such might work, via the awesome Hitchcock Railway: http://web.mac.com/rpeaton/iWeb/Hitchcock%20/Welcome.html. My concern is the broad expanses involved in my plans, as opposed to narrow concrete terrain along the roadbed.

Cheers,
Cliff


----------



## Richard Smith (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliffy, 

Your plan while large and ambitious is no worse than building a simple deck. If you use the same procedures as are used in your area for deck construction I don't see any unsurmountable problems. The only unknown is the additional weight added by your concrete mountains. This problem should be easy to remedy however with additional legs on cement piers placed strategically as needed beneath especially heavy locations. Since the underside is open access to do this won't be a problem either. 

Just be sure that if the posts are placed into the ground that you go below the frost line if you have one there. Otherwise the posts will be pushed up out of the ground during a freeze making waves all over the layout. If doing this is a problem then consider placing the posts on top of cement piers as the guys up in Canada do.


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By CliffyJ on 06/20/2009 6:13 AM
You're kidding me! That's great! I live just west of Columbia, and shopped Lowe's stores on the net all arond these parts; and it didn't show up. So that's great news, and it solves a big piece of the puzzle. Thanks!!

And TJ's article IS excellent; I've read it, and intend to use its guidance a lot. 

Do you have a web site for your layout? 



Here is a link to plastic cement at the Lowes in Elkridge, MD:

http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?action=productList&N=4294961544&Ne=4294967294&Ntk=i_products&Ntt=plastic+cement

I have a web site, but not for my layout. I probably have some more pictures around here someplace, but I'm not sure if they are any more definitive.


I reread TJ's article; while still the best source to get started, I realize that everyone starts out with way more framing than they need. We used 4x4s, TJ used rebar. You don't need any of that. Firring strips and scraps of nearly anything work fine. I have one section that is molded over Styrofoam that was originally wrapped aound a TV set, or something like that. Remember: the form only has to hold the burlap until the cement in the burlap hardens. After that, the cement does all the work.

A couple suggestions: Stop worrying, and just get out there and do it. If you aren't messing up, you aren't learning anything. Start with an area that is gently sloping, and out of view of the main viewing area, in case you mess up. I said to start with a gently sloping area because vertical walls, while doable, are extremely time consuming. Burlapped cement doesn't want to stick to a vertical surface. There are various ways to make it work, but they are all slow. Learn someplace else, then tackle the vertical stuff. Don't use the burlap you find in yardage stores. It is too densely woven, and won't hold cement. You want this stuff:

http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?action=productDetail&productId=194942-23132-10013&lpage=none

Also available in Elkridge.

Now, stop reading, and get out there!!


----------



## Terl (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff 

Let me share some photos of a layout built by my friend Bruce Maxwell over several years of hard work. I would guess that it is roughly 1/3 the size of the layout you have planned. In August of 2003 it looked like this: 










By November of 2003 it looked like this 










He preferred to sculpt his mountains in layers of styrofoam and then covered them with dyed stucco textured with wadded up sheet plastic. Note that he is building basically on level ground, with a wooden framework made basically of pressure treated wood. The highest mountains in the background are hollow made by covering stucco wire sceening draped over the wooden framework. It is possible but akward to go underneath the hollow parts to rerail trains which have derailed inside of tunnels. 

He started his layout around a pond on the ground and hence was able to use real miniature trees growing in soil. 










Later scenery was on the stuccoed structure (which is strong enough to walk on, and is weather proof) and used artificial trees made from old Christmas trees. Personally I think that the real trees look much better and the vegetation on the stucco is pretty sparce. Consider putting pots in your benchwork or hollow areas filled with soil. Soil drainage is important for your plants.










I would guess that your layout as planned would involve the mixing and application of several tons of stucco, probably over several years. Since you’re are basically building a traditional wood framed model railroad only outside, may I make a few suggestions. Consider modifying your plan so that you could add layout footage on the end as you finish up what you build. How about building a mountain range as a scenic barrier. On one side is a town, the train goes around the end of the mountains to another town on the other side. Maybe the mountain range could zigzag down the hillside with a maximum grade of 4% on the track so that you walk on the ground as you follow your train rather than 10 feet off of the ground. Track and building areas are not more than 24 inches from the edge of the benchwork and so can be easily reached for construction and maintainence. Keep all tunnels straight and less than four feet in length so that removal of derailments is easy. My friend has to do quite a bit scambling to get to areas inside of his layout, but for him the scenic effect he wanted to achieve was his overriding consideration, not ease of access or maintainence. 

Well best of luck to you. Hope this has been of some help. 

Terl


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Richard,

Yep, it's big... but I figure it needs to keep me off the streets for a decade or two; and once the framing goes in, well, I'll start pecking away. 

The key is to have a sound approach which won't fall apart in a year or two! So I appreciate your concurrence that it's a simple deck, and that you see no major no-no's. 

Actually, the structure should be cheaper than a typical deck, for 3 reasons:
- No decking (roadbed only)
- No handrails (except at walkways)
- Design is on a strict grid, with most elements being "mass produced" in the sawing

You've hit on, however, the same critical point that my builder-friend (also named Richard) pointed out: the piers. He said similar things as yourself, and that the pre-cast pier approach would be dumb. So the current plan is to plant a forest of posts-in-concrete (I think code requires 30" deep, I forget). Then comes the grid, and -- gradually, I suppose, depending on my skill and speed -- the center deck, walkways, terracing and steps.

Then about, oh, 10-20 years for the rest?









Thanks for the insights and encouragement.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks for the advice -- and that link!! I swear I tried to find it.... and wow, there it is, in a store I practically drive by each day to work!

Yeah, something tells me that I'm using too much wood. On the other hand, the structure needs to be code-compliant in the walkways. Also, it needs to hold up not only the concrete, but, say, 3' of snow. But your point is intriguing; just how self-supporting is the concrete shell, once it's peripherally supported? You can crawl on it, right? If not, how thick would you recommend in order to do so? Say, 3/4"? 

*Now, stop reading, and get out there!!* 
Great advice! I'm just waiting for the logs to get hauled out; and we need a few dry days for the truck to get back there. And you know how much rain we've been getting...! 

Thanks again,
Cliff


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Fantastic Terl, that's pretty much exactly the approach I had in mind! The only thing I'd be doing different is raise the whole thing, use plastic cement rather than stucco, and have mountains that aren't so dramatically sloped. Other than that, it's very similar. And that's great, because it means I'm not trying some voodoo that is doomed to failure.

Looking at your pics of Bruce's amazing layout (and thanks for them!!!), and reading your comments, I see a couple of intriguing things.

1. I've been concluding that the cement should go OVER the roadbed, effectively protecting it; should reduce warpage, right? Maybe allowing PT to be re-considered for roadbed? That's what Bruce used, right? 
2. I think see 2x6's directly supporting comparatively thin roadbed, and I've been imagining that plastic cement would contribute to that supporting method; is this true? 
3. We've got lots of rain; I'll need to seriously plan for drainage and snowmelt; any thoughts on that?
4. Excellent idea on the foam supports for the mountains; I think that's what astrayelmgod was saying: that the cement supports itself, no need to go nuts with framing beneath

Thanks so much Terl, 
Cliff


----------



## sheepdog (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff - Regarding this link Ms. Dawgs Mountain She did that rock in 2003 and it's still in great shape. The Chipmunks and birds love to sit on top and look around the yard. So the paint has been wore off the top by little sharp toes. And birds have added plenty of......... weathering.

Craig


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

While we're at it (and it's only just stopped raining... sheesh!), let me turn the question around. Given your experience with the plastic cement mountains, can you find any problems with the following design philosophy:

- Given a stable / rigid deck frame, 
- The roadbed framing supports the mountains, but only indirectly the track 
- Hardware cloth / reinforcement gets attached to the roadbad
- Cement covers all; roadbed framing isn't directly exposed to the elements (or soil)
- Final levelling / contouring of roadbed (in cross section) is achieved by the cement, not the wooden roadbed support beneath
- Ballast can be the polymeric jointing sand discussed in GRY a few issues ago: http://techniseal.com/products.php?Id=13&region_Id=1&langue_Id=1
- Coming back to roadbed support, 
- Trex is out of the question: too unstable dimensionally, when secured to concrete
- Cedar or cypress would be good; and that's what Rod Eaton (http://web.mac.com/rpeaton/iWeb/Hitchcock%20/Visit.html) advised me
- But, with the plastic cement approach you and TJ worked out, maybe PT can be used:
- I think that's what Bruce used (shown in Terl's pics)
- Lot's cheaper than cedar / cypress
- 2 layers of PT 2x8, screwed together and with staggered joints, seems way, way strong... 
- Maybe overkill? My builder-friend Richard recommends 2 layers of PT 5/4x6 decking; anyone see a problem with that?
- (yes: tougher to lay out, vs. 8" or 12" wide...)
- I want to avoid PT plywood (heard nothing but problems there)
- Overlapped joints appear mandatory, for obvious reasons

Sorry for rambling; but it's paid off for me, in all the great insights you and the other folks here have put forward. Thanks so much,
Cliff


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Based on what I've had in mind, but modified in light of what I've learned in this thread, here's a quick track cross-section diagram for consideration: 

http://s584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/?action=view&current=trackx-section06-22-09.jpg


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

*>>>Consider putting pots in your benchwork or hollow areas filled with soil. Soil drainage is important for your plants.*

Exactly! Has anyone worked out the details of removeable pots, set into the concrete shell? To bring them in for the winter, or reduce the root balls, or whatever?
Not that I'll soon get to that stage of things, but it's nice to have a working theory...


----------



## dltrains (Jan 2, 2008)

CliffyJ, 
So far you've received lots of good advice and you have the help of a local contractor for you're main build. Might I question your desire to use 2 layers of 2x for your road bed when by your drawings you seem to have support on 16" or 24" centers? I would think that 1 layer roadbed would be sufficeint. And Fr. Fred has always endorsed that your splice piece at joints of roadbed be long as in 24" or so. Have you considered an L-girder support type system?Or as opposed to 2 layers of 2x building a U type support for your track (again over kill ) but a 2x4 on edge along each side of your 2x8?This would better constrict warpage and twist. 
Also to protact the longjevity of your wood in contact with cement you may apply a layer of 30# tar paper to the top and sides of the wood. 
As was suggested before make your scenery non-continuous. If you form a mountain leave a piece of 1/4" rope at the base low point which can be left in place for a weep point or removed for full drainage.This will eliminate pools forming on you platform. 
Hypertufa(?) was suggested look this up on the net they form flower pots out of the stuff and it holds up great and may help hith water removal. 
As far as pots for planting just pick the size pot you want to use and form your wire mesh around it before you place your hardshell material. 
Hope this helps. 

Dave


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks Dave, all of that helps. 

I've seen a diagram in a GRY flyer, showing 2 vertical 1x's supporting a single roadbed board; and that's similar to what you're suggesting. Probably a lot stronger than just 2 layers of 2x, as you say. Good call.

The main grid is planned for 30" centers (after trying several grids / layouts, this seemed to work best given the 5' track radius) but supplimented as necessary.

I really like the tar paper idea; sounds like a good insurance policy. And the rope & pot-cage ideas are great! 

I'll have to look into hypertufa...
}}}subsequent edit: here's a good site: http://www.the-artistic-garden.com/hypertufa.html

Thanks much Dave,
Cliff


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

We don't have anything that even resembles weather here, so I can't pretend to offer any advice on snow loads. 

My scenery is mostly too steep to stand on, but I do have a tunnel that was built with similar methods. It is 1/2 inch thick, and you can jump on it with no effect at all. It has 2-4 inches of soil on it also. 

I have put cement over my base, but I find it very difficult to make the cement smooth enough for solid track. You may be a more careful worker than I am, but plan on a thck-ish layer of something or other in between the cement and track. DG, very fine sand, something like that. 

My mountains are only a couple feet tall (five feet or so at maximum), and I haven't found any plants that scale nicely, nor did I allow any way to plant any. A friend who used a similar construction method on very tall cliffs (over 8 feet) has built in niches filled with planter mix to hold ground cover and/or dwarf trees. Very effective. I'm not clear on how he waters it; probably a drip system. 

Six inch wide boards have to be located very exactly under the precise center of the track line. Eight inch, on curves anyway, would give you a bit more leeway to make small mistakes. I used 6 inch, it worked fine, but it took more fiddling. I find that I have to have the track in place, and build the support underneath it.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Dave,

I looked up that article I referred to just prior: www.gardentrains.org/gta/objects/pdf/beginninggarrailroading.pdf 
On page 10 is illustrated (under "Wooden baseboards on posts") 1x4 stringers straddling 4x4 posts, with what is (though not described) shown to be 1x8 as the baseboard.

From what you said, is this an adequate approach? And in view of supporting the cement mountains, but not coming in contact with soil, what would you say to modifying such an approach as follows:
- Use 2x4 posts
- Apply a 2nd layer of 1x, with joints staggered between those of the lower baseboard

With these modifications, what would you say is the minimum post spacing?

Thanks,
 Cliff

PS, FWIW, this thread has been like going to a wonderful all-weekend seminar for me!


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Astray,

Great data points! 

At 1/2", I think that works out to about 6psf; and standard structural design for decks already account for snow load I think (have to look into that), but 6psf is in the noise. 

What do you think about using the Techniseal product between cement and track (as ballast, though bonded)?

Interesting points on the plantings. I've heard that direct potting-on-concrete may be problematic, with acids leaching out of the concrete. Is this not the case with plastic cement? Sounds like your friend's plants are surviving well enough though! I like the drip system idea...

You're so right about the 6" vs 8" boards: I can't make it work out in AutoCad, so I'm sure I won't be able to do so in real life! But I can only 5/4 decking in 6", leaving the choice at 2x or 1x. Hence the helpful dialog with Dave just prior. Did you use double or single baseboard? And did you use 1x or 2x?

One last thing. You said earlier: 
*>>>I realize that everyone starts out with way more framing than they need. We used 4x4s, TJ used rebar. You don't need any of that. Firring strips and scraps of nearly anything work fine. *


You were speaking strictly of supporting the mountains, correct? But from the perspective of the roadbed structure supporting both them and the track, do you think I'm heading down the path of planning more framing than I need? I'm curious as to whether the cement mountains are simply a burden, or if they are an additional structural stabilizer. The pic's that Terl posted of Bruce's layout show very thin roadbed boards, indicating that the latter is the case. Would you, or anyone else, concur? If so, perhaps a double layer of 1x (with stringers) would seem workable. And maybe even that would be overkill?

Thanks again,
Cliff


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I think we are assuming that you will be using flex track. If so I would suggest using a glue-laminated spline roadbed. Similar to a ladder, but a lot stronger. 

Making straight boards support curved track is hard. Can be done but wastes wood and might not be strong depending on the wood's grain. 

I used 3 glue-lams as stringers on my straight to curved trestle; I laid out the curve, bent a 3/16 x 1" along one side of the center line with blocks and clamps and then pinned or clamped as I glued the mate to it. With the center lam I can space the outer gl's a tad wider for better stability. The inner outer (closest to center) boards are close to being under the rail and the outer mate just beyond. This covers expansion and contraction. I tend to do tracklaying in moderate temps... I get extremes here. The glue-lams are blocked to gether like the ladders and my track floats on it. 

Supporting a glue-lam spline roadbed is easier as it retains it's shape and if you bring your hardware cloth to the tops of the supports you'll still have an inch for your cement cover and soil/topcover. 

On my trestle, I flipped the stringer/ladder over and glued/pinned the bents to it. When I planted the tresle I blocked it in place and then back filled the dirt under it. For you I would suggest using CementAll, it doesn't shrink very much and is very strong. The shrinkage can put the bents under strain if the grip is good. 

Have you researched the net for a strong low shrink motar/cement... maybe something we are unaware of.... 

I used my belt sander to smooth the roadbed and add super-elevation with transition through the curve...

John


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Fascinating approach, John, and it seems to correspond with Richard Smith's. Have you applied it to lengthy stretches, as opposed to an individual trestle? 

But I'm missing something. With 3 laminated strips of 3/16, that's 3/4; do you have some pics?

Sorry for being dense, 
Cliff


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Sorry about that... 

Each glue lam is two sections of 3/16 x 1" glued and pinned (yep a Habor Freight wonder) then these three are blocked together for a ladder type spline. The beauty is you are not limited by the length of lumber you buy, because all splices are staggard and glued to the mate. Infinity and beyond! They hold the curve after it sets.


I've used this method on indoor On3 layouts instead of cookie cutter plywood roadbases.

The pics show my trestle, the stringers go through the arched bridge.

John


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

WOW!!! What a beautiful layout! And thanks for explaining.

Cliff

PS, gee whiz, why isn't everyone in the world into this hobby?!? It has everything; why bother with anything else?


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Well, I just had another brain-wave (or -fart, you decide) in this amazing weekend-long-education. 

Given: 
- That if adequately-supported cement mountains are strong enough to support an average dude crawling on them, they are certainly strong and stable enough to adequately and rigidly support the cotton pickin' track. 
- That if final contouring of roadbed is handled via cement plus ballast, why the need for ANY customary baseboards that closely follow the track, in three dimensions? 

Tentative conclusions: 
- That I'm over-focusing on baseboards, via customary track support methodology; 
- That the cement shell does the main job of track support 
- That the cement shell only needs to be supported structurally, but that -- via its embedded hardware cloth -- can be made to form whatever the actual roadbed needs to be. 

Ergo, 
- Supporting framework need only coarsely follow the track plan; 
- Such framework will be shielded from the elements, but a tar paper (or synthetic alternate) barrier is a good idea; 
- Flat (non-inclined) table-like sections, differing with gross grade, and supplimented with graduated-height blocks, will adequately support both hardware cloth and then cement shell; 
- The hardware cloth handles smooth gradients; 
- The burlap+cement, with optional fill all the way down to the "table sections," handles final grade profile (between blocks) and structural integrity not only for track, but overall; 

Even simpler, theoretically, 
- One could have a centerline "baseboard" of a single vertical 2x6! For harware cloth would be stapled to this strong ridge / backbone need only be bent in profile for the proper terrain cross section (e.g., a slight gully for ballast) 
- Such a 2x6 backbone could be sloped in the gross gradient, sawn across its top edge for better gradient transitions, and evened out in the cement overlay as neccessary 
- With proper hardware / hangers, this backbone could be as strong as all get out. And why, in such a raised shell method, go further than that? The cement is doing all the rest of the work, no matter what I do with the lumber beneath. 

I don't mean to be flippant or unappreciative about the huge amount of wise advice you folks have been kind enough to offer; but under the technical circumstances, can anyone see major flaws in this logic? Am I completely off base here? If so, reign me in my friends! 

Cliff 

PS, I'll tray to throw together a quick diagram of what I'm suggesting.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Here's a rough isometric of what I'm suggesting: 
http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/altroadbediso.jpg 

And a section view: 
http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/altroadbedx-section.jpg 

Can't figure out why the text isn't hyperlinking... sorry, I guess you'll need to copy/paste it.


----------



## dltrains (Jan 2, 2008)

CJ, 
In answer to your question yes 2x4 would be fine support. Again read through Richard Smiths' Port Orford post. The spline method posted by totalwrecker is an age old wood working method for curves. Today people are using Trex (plastic) and like everything else there seem to be a couple problems with it. Search out ladder roadbed posts for great descriptions and differant methods of making it. 
Your cummulative assessment of the gathered posts seem to cover most bases.As stated Fr. Fred has had great success with a single layer of roadbed with long splices.Support at 24" should be more than sufficient for your needs.Laying a flat roadbed under the concrete or hypertufa would give a flatter surface than formed wire and if you trowel off the roadbed areas as the concrete sets you should get it smooth enough for your ballasted track. 
You seem to have a good grasp on the subject and if you encounter problems with construction or during construction I'm pretty sure you'll get more help if you add pics to show your progress and your problem. 

Dave


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks Dave; that's a good 10-4. 

I'll not be having such a weekend as this for some time, so you'll not be hearing my rantings for a while. Two reasons:
- It's been a rainy father's day weekend --- and no honey-do list to face, woo hoo! 
- It will take some time to just clear the area... at the most, I'll have the posts in this summer...
... or maybe I'm being too pessimistic? maybe things will go more rapidly?

Regardless, I just won my first e-bay bid: 2 Bachmann side-dump ore cars, at a third of retail cost! Woo hoo!

Thanks for all the help you and the others have been to me over the weekend. And I'll be sure to post up anything, as soon as there are things to show.

Warmest regards,
Cliff


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By CliffyJ on 06/21/2009 3:10 PM
Here's a rough isometric of what I'm suggesting: 
http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/altroadbediso.jpg 

And a section view: 
http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/altroadbedx-section.jpg 

Can't figure out why the text isn't hyperlinking... sorry, I guess you'll need to copy/paste it.


Just make sure to enclose the URL in the UBB/Forum Code tags.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

In theory... it should work... 

However from experience, laying the roadbed and track comes first. I always ran test trains to check for things I couldn't forsee. Plus no matter how good the plan, construction usually called for alterations... Much easier to do if there's no 'hard shell' in the way. 

Because you are entering uncharted territory, hardshell outdoors, we don't know how such a massive structure will behave. Will the shell expand and shrink? Will cracks develop where you can't reach them? Will a sudden inspiration be do able if everything is cast in 'stone'? Will the wood warp when the cemet cures? What's humidity like in your neck of the woods? How good are you with a trowel? 

What if operations reguires an addition siding, how would you add it? Will planned buildings fit between the tracks, they seem to grow between work bench and the layout! Clearances shrink real fast, especially when you add 1/2 - 3/4" 's of cemet cover... 

Well you did say that there is time before you begin, why not ask some questions? lol 

John


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

CliffyJ -- 

I haven't used Techniseal, and have no opinion on it. 

I used 6 inch cedar, because that was what I could buy. Eight inch would be eaiser, but 6 will work. 

I think I used single baseboard, but I only have about 30 feet of track that isn't on either dirt, trestles or bridges. The weather here is very dry, and we don't have to worry about warping. 

Everything I said about structural support was only about supporting the mountains. All of my mountains are sitting on dirt. The mountains don't need to support anything other than themselves and the odd train: no snow, not me, nothing. I emphasized less structure because I am a cheapsikate who is always trying to do more with less. 

I should probably back off here, because I don't have any experience with the wood structures that everyone else is talking about. I would advise building one section first, and finding out how it all works. Or doesn't work. 

Totalwrecker -- 

Belt sander!?! Doh! What a great idea!


----------



## tj-lee (Jan 2, 2008)

CliffyJ, 

Glad you found the "Make Molehills look like Mountains" article useful! Like Gary I don't live where real weather is a factor, other than sun and heat, but this mountain method is very, very durable. I built my cliffs as 4 separate modular pieces if that is of any help. 










Your layout plans are awesome! I wish you the best of luck. 

Best, 
TJ Lee


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

ALL great points, John! 

And I haven't the foggiest on differential expansion -- either in construction, or long term with seasons / weather... which is kinda where I started in this thread, and thanks for retruning to it. All I can say is that, yes, it's not going to all happen in a summer, or even three. And per Gary's good advice, I'm aiming to build only a chunk of it (all the way to shell) and see how things behave.

The other thing I'm banking on is Gary & TJ's point that if changes are needed, all you need is a sledge hammer!









As for clearances, yeah, I've got a long way to go in tuning the plan. But as long as the post locations are ok (with the clearing & excavation, that's all I can hope for / pay for this year), there's time. Good on you, your emphasis is very founded.

I don't think I'll be adding any more sidings though. In my anal-retentive way, I've tried to account for every switch in the historical V&T VC trackage... and I'll admit that it's probably too much to bite off. If anything, certain spurs will have to go by the wayside... but that would gripe me... Operationally, BTW, I've added several return loops and crossovers, just to keep trians going on 2 levels. Hence all the hidden trackage, and the criticality of ready access from beneath.

I'll be thinking about what youve raised, and thanks,
Cliff


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Hey TJ, 

Your layout remains a real ground-breaker, in my mind; thanks for the article, and the encouragement!

How's your layout doing? Are all the mountains complete? Any expansions planned? 


Best regards,
Cliff


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

All pioneers had to take that first step, oh they had their plans, but when they started to climb many treasures soon lost their shine....

In On3 I was running close to the same radius or wider than my 10' diameter wide radius G whiz scale layout has.... Even then the best model railroads used forced compression and nobody really tried to have every siding, instead we focused on Vignettes, scenes along the line. 

Is there one section you can semi isolate and run alone, yet later add the rest? I think you need some hands on experience. There's no better teacher than trying. Also it can be real inspiring to have something running. Expriment, besides you still have that sledge....









Exposure to sunlight also bears in the expansion equation... but I really don't think the mountains will be doing much of that, the track will and wood might...

Off on another branchline, does Cypress have anti-bug defenses? I salvaged a pecky cedar roof from my sister's remodel. There's a lot of good wood between the pecks! lol Here in Az the termites are more aggressive and no longer does redwood deter them... but cedar does! 

I offer one inspiration... I had never built a tree house until my sister requested one for her grandkids... yep pecky cedar... I used to build board by board structuers for the On3, that taught me a lot about 1:1


Whaddaya thimk?

ps; it's not attached to the tree.

Back on track; the trestles, bridges and moutain/bench/tunnel are all pecky... the planks start as 2 1/2 x 16" x 14' I make a lot of saw dust!


John

ok maybe I am showing off


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Hey again John, thanks for replying.

*>>>All pioneers had to take that first step, oh they had their plans, but when they started to climb many treasures soon lost their shine....*
Yeah; and believe you me, I'm not trying to be any pioneer! When I first posted, I was expecting all kinds of folks to be saying that a) they'd been there and tried this approach, and b) it's doomed to failure, and here's why. So far though, all I've been getting is VERY helpful and thought-out insights from everyone up here; and a heartfelt thanks! As for treasures soon losing their shine, I'm fully expecting my idealism will soon crash and burn, as I move from the 'puter to the back yard... But you guys will be the first to know; and just like every other aspect of this journey, I'm gonna have fun documenting just how dumb I was in ignoring this thing or that.


*>>>In On3 I was running close to the same radius or wider than my 10' diameter wide radius G whiz scale layout has.... Even then the best model railroads used forced compression and nobody really tried to have every siding, instead we focused on Vignettes, scenes along the line. *
Roger that too... but still, I feel compelled to try to be true to the VC V&T trackage. Like I mentioned in my opening blurb, It's a primary driver for me; other folks love gardening, but my main thing is having a model railroad sufficient in scope to allow me to model Virginia City mines (with their supporting tracks), and have it all big enough for me to be able to see when I try to fix derailments. 

*>>>Is there one section you can semi isolate and run alone, yet later add the rest? *
You bet. Gary said the same thing; and the front yard / turntable area is now the target. I've modified the plan, so that the yard has at least a return loop to it, for that very reason.

*>>>I think you need some hands on experience. There's no better teacher than trying. *You think??? I concur!

*>>>Also it can be real inspiring to have something running. *
10-4. I've got a tiny loop in the basement for inspiration; and until the ground dries out, the logs get hauled, the excavation happens, the posts get drilled / planted... you get the idea. It'll be awhile.

*>>>Expriment, besides you still have that sledge....







* 
And THAT"S the answer, good buddy!

*>>>Exposure to sunlight also bears in the expansion equation... but I really don't think the mountains will be doing much of that, the track will and wood might...*
Yeah, that's the thing... But at least, as far as I've been able to tell, the wood+plastic cement are (with expansion joints in the latter) a good combo. With track affixed to a relatively immoveable substrate, it looks like I'll have home-made track expansion joints in my future (or purchased ones).

*>>>Off on another branchline, does Cypress have anti-bug defenses? 
*All I know is what my boss (who lives in Florida) told me, that bugs really hate it. He says it's better than cedar in that regard, but I'd recommend a second opinion. He was able to get 1x12 planking for his new barn (see the site I posted earlier) for almost as cheap as T-111 siding! 

*>>>I salvaged a pecky cedar roof from my sister's remodel. There's a lot of good wood between the pecks! lol Here in Az the termites are more aggressive and no longer does redwood deter them... but cedar does! I offer one inspiration... I had never built a tree house until my sister requested one for her grandkids... yep pecky cedar... I used to build board by board structuers for the On3, that taught me a lot about 1:1*
Cool treehouse! That's almost along the lines of what I want my decking arrangement to be like: something with vertical depth, a couple of sculpted-tunnels to stoop under, you know, fun stuff -- for adults. I love my kids, but at some point I gotta draw the line and say that I wanna have some fun too!

Take care,
Cliff


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Cliff, 
I don't have any expansion joints. 

Free floating track in gravel, free floating on trestles and through bridges. 

My temperaure range 25 degrees to 120! It's 101 today. 

I use the darn tiny screws that come with the rail joiners and split rail clamps where I've cut rails. 

My straights stay straight and my curves move to absorb the diff. That's why I make my splines a little wider than rail width and use a third center spline. I don't trust the outside edges of the plastic ties under the Aristo SS after a good baking like today... with a heavy consist rolling overhead! 

Someday I might handlay the rails on new ties, but I'd still let that float on the stringers/spline. 

I had fun with that tree house; was supposed to sorta look like kids had built it, but it's strong enough to support 6 adults plus the kids. There's not one square corner on it! I built it to 'code', but made widows and see throughs for the shorter tykes... 

John


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

my start....

Humble beginning....


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

John that's a great pic. Gosh I'd love to live in the high desert! 

I've been gnawing on the roadbed support, realized my last o-pine was not so hot (doesn't work in tunnels), and am moving in my thinging toward a sort of compromise. This is the first figure... 

http://s584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/?action=view¤t=ROADBEDFRAMING1.jpg 

... in a series of 5 that probe the various layers. 

What do you think? 

Cliff


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Well the link is broken, but I think you are on the right track... 

The way my mind works (?) is I never trust my first best idea, I may use it as an impetus to get going, but I expect changes as reality adjusts my dreams... 

For you I see an open grid benchwork, conventional risers and the roadbed of your choice. The hardshell is great for scenery, but as tunnels have revealed you miss the earth underneath... your framework becomes the earth and the cement is the surface. 

Bon Voyage!


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By CliffyJ on 06/23/2009 4:43 PM
John that's a great pic. Gosh I'd love to live in the high desert! 

I've been gnawing on the roadbed support, realized my last o-pine was not so hot (doesn't work in tunnels), and am moving in my thinging toward a sort of compromise. This is the first figure... 

http://s584.photobucket.com/albums/ss286/cliffyjennings/?action=view¤t=ROADBEDFRAMING1.jpg 

... in a series of 5 that probe the various layers. 

What do you think? 

Cliff 
    

Cliff, if you quote my reply, then after the HTML editor displays with the quoted reply displayed in the content area, you click the HTML button located in the lower-left just below the content area you can see the HTML format of how to display a thumbnail and then link it to the full sized image. Hope this is of help to you.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks Steve; pretty daunting code, but I should be able to get it... after a few misfire thread replies which folks will need to ignore









How 'bout embedding pics directly? Hey, I'm all up for paying for membership just to have all the wonderful new buttons I'm imagining that will show up on the editor!


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff

Yes sir, you can cause the image to display directly in the reply, which I believe is what you are referring to with 'embedding', just use the image tag all by itself. However it seems the standard size for your storage provider is 1024 x 768 pixels. Now that may be the result of the size of the image you uploaded to them to begin with? Anyway the max dimensions here on MLS currently are 800 w x 600 h pixels. Two choices here, either size the images you upload to your storage to 800 x 600 or use the size attributes of the image tag (i.e. width="800"). The one draw back to just using the image tag sizing attribute is it doesn't change the actual file size which can cause problems with taking a long time downloading.

Maybe this will help out a bit with the HTML code.










Yes I'll have to agree that upgrading to a 1st Class membership, will make doing many things much easier because you no longer will have to do them manually, just click the respective buttons and fill in the blanks. Not to mention that you'll have space on the MLS server to store your image files too.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

No more (kick-the-)photo-bucket??


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Thanks much Steve. This thread has saved me bunches of $$ already; so I've just signed up.

Oooh! Lotsa nice buttons now!! That's what I was hoping for baby!


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

OK, that was fast.









Click the "Insert Image" button on the tool-bar.








When the "Insert Image" dialog displays, you'll see the "Upload" button, click that and then you can locate the image files on your local system that you want to upload. After that, the file names will display in the left pane in the dialog, click the one you want to include in your reply, the one you selected will now display in the right pane of the dialog, then click the "Insert" button at the bottom of the dialog.


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Well, this is cool (meaning, hey, now I can insert stuff!!)










I'm not sure if John or Gary or others are still monitoring this thread (geez, this horse is beaten and on his way to the glue factory), but I wanted to post a last graphic representing where I'm now headed -- based on all the tremendous advice and corrections I've received here.

The above depicts a single 90" square cell of an elevated layout on a deck. Main members are 2x8.
[*] It is bisected first with another 2x8, than once more by a pair of 2x6's. The loads (track, concrete shell, crawling dude) are thus dispersed, via ever-larger (or doubled) members, to the deck posts -- 4x4's residing at each corner of the 90" grid. [*] Result is a 45" grid, into which 2x6's can roughly follow the track centerline. [*] Frome this latter 2x6 "twisted grid" come 2x4 risers. They will need lateral bracing (not shown). [*] Over that is the roadbed (1x8, perhaps doubled) with stiffening 1x4's on either side. [/list] 
Well, that's about it.... thanks guys for all your help. And if you have an opinion as to doubled roadbed boards, or anything else, please chime in. Otherwise, I'll see you on another thread.

Adios,
Cliff


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Hello? Did somebody mention my name? 

Just got back! Online... pc boiler explosion...well I might if I can salvage the old hard drives... cept I'm stuck with vista now... 

Yep that should work. 

Now git out and clean that yard! lol


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

"I'm not sure if John or Gary or others are still monitoring this thread" 

I'm still here, but you're way past anything I know. I'd just confuse the situation. Not that that stops me, but I usually confine that to clients, where I get paid for it...


----------

