# O scale Helix



## T-Man

One finds info in the strangest places. With all the hoopla about grades, pull,inclines, I robbed this off You tube for your enjoyment. Seven cars and a 6 inch climb over 360 degrees. Enjoy 






Rickbigs:


> A helix is used to change track levels using the lowest amount of table space. This one rises 6 inches in each 54 inch circle for a grade of about 3.5 percent. This same 6 inch rise would take 171 inches, or 14 ft of straight track. In this case, the helix takes a train from table top level, to just above door level, which is a total of about 28 inches. See my more recent videos for more details. More importantly, my wife saw one in HO, and specified﻿ that I had to have one on my layout





> Mine is 42" in, and 54" out, with 6" layers(top of track to top of track, so clearence is app 4 3/4 inches. The Polar Express is pulling all it can on the outside. It will not pull up the same cars on the inside. If you let me know the type and how many you want to pull up yours, I can try it on my 0-42 loop over the holidays.﻿
> 
> Advice: 1)If using 1/2 inch ply, use 4 ply instead of 3 ply. 3 ply flexes too much. 2)Don't forget the transistion grade top and bottom. Can be straight tracks


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

The problem is, when you get the train to the top, what do you do then?


----------



## T-Man

This guy has class. What do you think? He laps around the basement and then goes back down!


----------



## erkenbrand

Thanks, T-man. That video just opened my eyes up to a new world of possibilities. I'm running in a tight space for my O setup - 4'x13'. I really wanted to do a second level, but just can't quite pull of the grade. But with a helix I can get there. 

Hmmm. That's great food for thought.


----------



## T-Man

I have seen one or two on my Tour during Thanksgiving weekend. They were in N and HO. The N was large enough for my son and another kid to crawl and sit inside, when he was smaller. I had a fit but no damage was done. Often these cellar layouts if they are multilevel have a helix.


----------



## erkenbrand

Yup, it just makes perfect sense. I had been considering going to a L, but didn't really want to eat up that space since our basement is pretty small. I've already built the table 4' high, so there's plenty of room for the second level.

Time to find some more of those videos.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

That's an interesting idea, and it sure would add interest to the layout!  I may consider something like that.


----------



## tjcruiser

T-Man,

GREAT video links ... I've never seen a helix in O before ... certainly not anything that multi-layered.

I like his full-loop video ... neat cable-stayed bridges! Very eye-catching.

TJ


----------



## T-Man

*Domino, not the pizza*

Actually it 's all dominoes. Yep the domino effect.

I have read about them in CTT in the past 
acwilli sent me a post about inclines.
I thought and decided the helix was the ultimate incline.
AT first I suggested CTT
THEN STUCK BY LIGHTNING I thought you tube and found the video.
With all the tech specs. WOW

So the author Rickbigs deserves credit.

The domino effect, one thing leads to another.

I have always thought that discussion groups just lack the visual experience

I should go rate his video.


----------



## rickbigs

Hey Guys, thanks for the kind words. The videos T-Man posted are very old, and were in the initial stages of the Helix Loop construction. I will attempt to attach a couple newer ones (well, couldn't figure it out, but here are the links). You can search NTS&B in youtube for latest and other in-process videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbTvaU2TleI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS3-9e_KskA

Rick


----------



## tjcruiser

Hey Rick,

Welcome to the forum! Thanks for chiming in ... that's a really fun, creative layout. Hope to see you hanging 'round the Forum a bit.

Cheers,

TJ


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Great stuff, that is one impressive layout!


----------



## T-Man

Welcome to the forum!
You are the first to find us through YouTube.

In the future when you do any maintenance on your treaures please post some pics on the insides. All I see are the diagrams and it would be a real treat.

Bob


----------



## rickbigs

Hey Bob,
Not sure what you mean by my 'treasures'. If you are talking about in-process pictures of the layout, then you can check out my blog http://rickbigs.blogspot.com/. If you are talking about engines and stuff, that would be an intersting thread. I don't recall ever seeing a thread like that on any of the forums.
Rick


----------



## T-Man

Hi Rick 
I am a mechanical kind of guy. Shells are OK but I like under the hood view.
That's why I find HO so confusing. I just need to see the motor. Brands or engine types are so numerous in that scale, to me anyway they don't mean much. I have a few favorites but that is about it.
Getting back to your question, You have modern engines. Even the Polar Express would be a treat . I see a lot a questions on just what the switches do! The nice thing about this forum is there is more openness about information and we don't deal with loyalties to magazines or manufacturers that restrict other sites. 
As you can tell I don't have new models, I tend to look for older ones lately.
Another thing I need to look at is blogs too
Thanks for the link.
Bob


----------



## Big Ed

rickbigs said:


> Hey Guys, thanks for the kind words. The videos T-Man posted are very old, and were in the initial stages of the Helix Loop construction. I will attempt to attach a couple newer ones (well, couldn't figure it out, but here are the links). You can search NTS&B in youtube for latest and other in-process videos.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbTvaU2TleI
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS3-9e_KskA
> 
> Rick



Excellent! :thumbsup: Love it all. :thumbsup:

Welcome to the site.


----------



## Dave Sams

Rick

Love the layout. I got many ideas from it.

I think I'll expand to where the washer and dryer were, we'll just use the laundramat.


----------



## Dave Sams

I'd like to see a video of trains going up and down the helix at the same time. It would be too cool for this big kid.


----------



## erkenbrand

I've already started working on my wife to convince her all the shelving in the back of the basement needs to be moved to make more space for a future helix on my O layout.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

T-Man said:


> Hi Rick
> I am a mechanical kind of guy. Shells are OK but I like under the hood view.
> That's why I find HO so confusing. I just need to see the motor. Brands or engine types are so numerous in that scale, to me anyway they don't mean much. I have a few favorites but that is about it.
> Getting back to your question, You have modern engines. Even the Polar Express would be a treat . I see a lot a questions on just what the switches do! The nice thing about this forum is there is more openness about information and we don't deal with loyalties to magazines or manufacturers that restrict other sites.
> As you can tell I don't have new models, I tend to look for older ones lately.
> Another thing I need to look at is blogs too
> Thanks for the link.
> Bob


I'll have to take one of my new TMCC engines apart for you and shoot some pictures.


----------



## rickbigs

Dave Sams said:


> Rick
> 
> Love the layout. I got many ideas from it.
> 
> I think I'll expand to where the washer and dryer were, we'll just use the laundramat.


Hey Dave,
Please let me know how that works out for you  I think it would be a 'fatal' suggestion at my house.

Rick


----------



## Big Ed

Dave Sams said:


> Rick
> 
> Love the layout. I got many ideas from it.
> 
> I think I'll expand to where the washer and dryer were, we'll just use the laundramat.



Get the machines that front load and you can build it on top of the washer and dryer.:thumbsup:


----------



## rickbigs

Dave Sams said:


> I'd like to see a video of trains going up and down the helix at the same time. It would be too cool for this big kid.


Dave,
I've had up to 3 trains on it at once (accidentally) and I have to admit it was 'exciting'. Problem is that I'm not coordinated enough to do that and take a movie at the same time. I'll try to take a movie of 2 on it when I get a chance, probably next month if I remember.


----------



## rickbigs

T-Man said:


> One finds info in the strangest places. With all the hoopla about grades, pull,inclines, I robbed this off You tube for your enjoyment. Seven cars and a 6 inch climb over 360 degrees. Enjoy .


All, 
Don't be too fooled by the number of cars being pulled. Even thought the Polar Express cars are rather hard to pull, the engine has traction tires on it and has been upgrade with cruise control. Using modern engines pulling modern cars, you can run a fairly long train (as shown it the videos). Using postwar engines and cars make that number go down fast. While the Polar Express and most other modern engines pulled up 12 cars or more, my 624 swither (with magnitraction) only pulled up 8 (plus a simulated tender). A 2026 2x6x4 pulled up 6, my 2020 6x8x6 pullted up 5, 2037 2x6x4 slipped with 4, and 2x6x4 slipped with 3. If I remember right, the 2020 would slip when pulling only 4 well lubricated postwar passenger cars.

Also, coming back down can be 'exciting' with post engines. I have to set the voltage so low on my 2020, that the e-unit will drop out. 

Moral of the story, if you are running post war you may want less grade (bigger diameter, or less clearance). If you want to run unattended, cruise control is required on most engines (cruise is included MTH PS2 and some if not all Loco Sound engines)


----------



## Big Ed

rickbigs said:


> T-Man said:
> 
> 
> 
> One finds info in the strangest places. With all the hoopla about grades, pull,inclines, I robbed this off You tube for your enjoyment. Seven cars and a 6 inch climb over 360 degrees. Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> You forgot the link?
Click to expand...


----------



## rickbigs

Sorry for the confusion big ed. The link is on the original entry by T-Man that started this thread. I was just pointing out the realities of the helix grade (around 3.5%) when it comes to running various trains.


----------



## Konga Man

Like a lot of others, I've been kicking this idea around for a while. And, as I suspect is the case with many, I'd like to do this with the smallest possible radius due to space constraints. Obviously, decreasing radius means steeper grade. 

The question I've got is this: what's the "multiplier" which one might apply to get the "effective grade"? This is what I'm getting at: a loco which pulls 8 cars up a 4% straight grade might only pull 7 cars up a 4% grade around a 54" radius, or 6 cars up and around a 42" radius. 

Example: For a 5" rise, an 042 oval with 2 10" straights and an O31 oval with 6 10" straights are both 3.4% -- but I'd guess that more stuff would go up the 042.

Any guesses?

And no, "Build them all and find out." is not the answer I'm looking for. 

FYI, if you can pull a 4.5% grade, you can do an 072 double helix.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Well, the curves add friction, so the tighter the curves, the less grade a given configuration will handle. Since everyone's mix of engines and cars will be unique, there is no "one size fits all" answer to this question.

I'm with you, I'd like to do it with a maximum of a 42" diameter, a 54" diameter is just a bit too large. I'm just waiting for someone like you to "try them all".


----------



## Konga Man

Let's talk about wiring one of these. Suppose I'm using something like a 1034 to power the track, with a helix going up and a long ramp coming down. It's a given that you need more power going up and less coming down. Not having cruise control, and wanting automated operation, can it be wired like this (using simple, stock parts):
- U-A on flats, with a 95 rheostat to limit to 18V.
- U-A on upgrade, w/out rheostat. This will give an extra 2V on the climb.
- U-B on the down slope, to limit to 14V (or less, with another rheostat or two).

Suppose I'm cruising on 15V. When I hit the helix and start to climb, I get bumped up to 17. When I hit the ramp to descend, I fall back to ~10.5 (or less). 

In theory, does this work?

In practice, it may not: 2V might not be a big enough bump to get it to the top, and the descent might be risky at almost any power level -- let alone 10V. But in _theory_, might this provide one-transformer, hands-off, single throttle operation for the entire loop?


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I think you'll need more than 2 volts on the climb!


----------



## Konga Man

Well, yeah -- I'm not even sure it would go _down_hill on 2V. 

What I was talking about was giving it a 2V _boost_ over the setting used on the flats. Is that enough? I dunno. I guess I could build it and find out. (Notice how it always comes back to that?)

Another solution is to have a separate transformer that's dedicated to the helix. If'n you were smart, you could rig that one up to pump out one voltage for a climbing train and a second, lower voltage for a descending train. For example, take the venerable RW. Hook up the descending voltage to a fixed 9V (A-C), and use the throttle to set the appropriate voltage for the climb (A-U). You could use sections of isolated track at the top and bottom to control a switch to flip between the two.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I was talking about the 2V boost, I really think you'll find it'll take quite a bit more. Also, you'll have to figure traction into the mix, at some point you'll have your train just spinning it's wheels on the grade if it has too many cars.

I notice my new Railking S-2 Turbine has the cast tender applying a lot of weight to the traction tires, most of the tender weight is supported by the connection. I'm sure that's to give it more pulling power. I'm guessing that traction is going to be the sticking point.


----------



## Dave Sams

The problem I would have with a 2v (or whatever) change in track voltage is my locos don't all pull the same. For some, +2v would send it off the rails.

It would be my luck, just as the additional voltage kicked in, a coupler would come loose, and I'd have a loco flying through the air.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I have an old 44 Ton switcher that was randomly opening it's coupler, when it was pulling 8-9 cars, it would shoot off like a rocket when the coupler opened!


----------



## Konga Man

gunrunnerjohn said:


> I was talking about the 2V boost, I really think you'll find it'll take quite a bit more.


Could be. Remember, I was talking about doing this with standard Lionel parts -- and the 95 rheostat is good for a 2V drop. Maybe you need 4 or 5 in series.  

The key here is "fully automated". The separate transformer is probably the easier solution (because if you're putzing on the flats, there will still be enough oomph to get up the hill), if you can figure out the auto-adjustment for ascending and descending trains. Besides, you have greater control when running over the rest of the layout, including the oh-so-important ability to put the kid-friendly lower-the-max-voltage-by-switching-terminals governor on the transformer.



gunrunnerjohn said:


> Also, you'll have to figure traction into the mix, at some point you'll have your train just spinning it's wheels on the grade if it has too many cars.


Well, nothing I'm running is any newer than 1936 or so, and some of them are pretty freakin' light, so they may need an 096 loop to make up it on the full 24V from a Type R.

Or maybe we mod one into a cog loco.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I think heavy engines, lots of driving wheels, magnatraction, or traction tires are probably called for.


----------



## rickbigs

Konga Man said:


> The question I've got is this: what's the "multiplier" which one might apply to get the "effective grade"? This is what I'm getting at: a loco which pulls 8 cars up a 4% straight grade might only pull 7 cars up a 4% grade around a 54" radius, or 6 cars up and around a 42" radius.
> 
> Example: For a 5" rise, an 042 oval with 2 10" straights and an O31 oval with 6 10" straights are both 3.4% -- but I'd guess that more stuff would go up the 042.
> 
> Any guesses?


I asked my niece, who's a physics teacher in a NY high school, that same question. She posted it on the State of NY Math website. Completely stumped them all. I also think that since this is on an incline, there is a lot of extra force required to overcome gravity on each car, because it is being pulled at an angle. If anyone remembers their calculus, this would be a good brain teaser

Rick


----------



## rickbigs

Konga Man said:


> Remember, I was talking about doing this with standard Lionel parts -- and the 95 rheostat is good for a 2V drop. Maybe you need 4 or 5 in series.


I dont have a 95 rheostat, but I did try using 1 transformer with a #81 in series on the down hill grade. I ended up laying the Polar Express engine and all cars over on their side before I could even get my hand to the throttle to shut it down. I have the fealing that the cars pushing the engine created more of a generator than a load, so the resistor had no current to resist . Also, I think the difference is much more than 2 volts on my 2020, since I had to have major throttle for the climb, but so little coming down that the e-unit kept dropping out. 

I did wire my helix in 4 blocks. Top, bottom, up, and down. I believe you will need at least 3 transforms (or a ZW) for aoutomatic control of most conventional engines, 1 for the top and bottom flat loops, 1 for the incline, and 1 for the decending grade. I decided cruise control was much easier and safer.

Rick


----------



## rickbigs

gunrunnerjohn said:


> I'd like to do it with a maximum of a 42" diameter, a 54" diameter is just a bit too large. I'm just waiting for someone like you to "try them all".


If you have an example train you want to run, I can try to duplicate it for you and run it on my 0-54 and 0-42 loops and let you know the results, as long as you are not in too much of a hurry. My limited experience is that I have to run at least 1 car less on the 0-42 (I tried it when I first built it,and have always run up the 0-54 since).


----------



## servoguy

If you use multiple transformers and blocks for the helix, you will have a problem with fault currents as the pickup rollers bridge the gaps of the blocks. When one roller is on one block and the other roller is on another block, the two transformers outputs are shorted together. This is not the best situation as the transformer circuit breakers do not sense this fault current. If the voltage difference is high enough, you can create a large current which can damage stuff or start a fire. Passenger cars or tenders that have multiple pickups may melt the wires between the pickups. 

The only good solution for this problem that I know of is cruise control. 

The force required to overcome gravity for any given car or engine is the weight of the car or engine times the sine of the incline angle. Sine(4 deg) = 0.07.

Keeping the track absolutely clean of oil or grease is imperative for a grade. I use a few paper towels held onto a heavy car with rubber bands with some rubbing alcohol to clean the track. Works well, and you would be surprised how many times you have to run it around the layout to get all the oil off of the track.

BB


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I'm going to be using TMCC equipped engines with a Legacy controller. I'm not sure if these engines have cruise control standard or not. It's not mentioned, which makes me think no. I know The Electric Railroad Company makes a Cruise Commander that will upgrade a conventional engine and offers cruise control, only for DC can motors.


----------



## rickbigs

Dave Sams said:


> I'd like to see a video of trains going up and down the helix at the same time. It would be too cool for this big kid.


Dave,
You are FINALLY getting your wish plus a little interest. Sorry for the long delay. Hope you enjoy this.
Rick

www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoSArlgTejM


----------



## tjcruiser

Ohhhh! The helix is double-tracked !!! I missed that the first time through this thread ... HOW COOL!

Very nice job ... thanks for sharing.

TJ


----------



## Dave Sams

rickbigs said:


> Dave,
> You are FINALLY getting your wish plus a little interest. Sorry for the long delay. Hope you enjoy this.
> Rick
> 
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoSArlgTejM


NOW THAT'SWHATI'MTALKINABOUT! Fantastic, lots of action, lots of noise. The video was well worth the wait! I love it.

Thank you for posting:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## rickbigs

tjcruiser said:


> Ohhhh! The helix is double-tracked !!! I missed that the first time through this thread ... HOW COOL!
> 
> TJ


Would have been a much more 'exciting' video if it was a 1 track helix


----------



## T-Man

I enjoyed the speed adjust of the Polar Express at the end to avoid the run in. Nice!:thumbsup: They are fun to watch!


----------



## Dave Sams

:appl::appl: I just had to watch it again.


----------



## tjcruiser

OK ... clueless question for all of you helix guys ...

Are there any real-life trestle-supported train helixes? I know that there's earth-mound-supported helixes, but what about trestle helixes? Do they exist?

TJ


----------



## rickbigs

I can think of plenty of examples of Helixes for cars (parking garage). I dont know of, and couldn't find any examples for trains.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I suspect that the need for helixes for trains are probably a lot less common. I can't think of anywhere there's be a need for such a thing. The closest thing I can come to is an open pit mine with a train to the bottom winding around the sides, I believe I've seen a picture of one of those at one time.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

This photo sequence shows an open pit mine with a train to the bottom. http://www.flickr.com/photos/herwigphoto/289243943/in/photostream/


----------



## Dave Sams

I believe I saw of one in a mountain in Europe (or was it Sout America).

They do things differently over there.


----------



## Dave Sams

*More than I wanted to know*

Look what I found.

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/model/trackage.shtml


----------



## tjcruiser

Thanks, guys...

Sounds like quite a few spiral elevation-change loops, but nothing I saw in those links (at quick glance) of a true trestle-supported helix. Doesn't surprise me, given the diameter required, and ability to build the ramp out of earth, rock, tunnel, etc.

Cheers,

TJ


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Well, what practical use would such a helix serve? It would be horribly expensive to build, given the loads involved.


----------



## sstlaure

I remember seeing one of a real live helix (had 2 loops stacked) first loop went around the edge of the mountain then went into a tunnel, the exit from the tunnel ended on top of the first loop. I believe the valley the train was in couldn't be spanned and the grade was too severe for a straight climb. It was a 2-level wooden trestle.

I can't for the life of me find that pic now.


----------



## servoguy

You guy do know about Tehachapi?
BB


----------



## servoguy

I have been there a few times: http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&...AbQ5ImPDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=667


----------



## servoguy

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&...AbQ5ImPDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=667


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

servoguy said:


> You guy do know about Tehachapi?
> BB


I'm not sure that qualifies as a real helix, it only has one turn.










It's also build on the mountain, not a free-standing structure.


----------



## servoguy

The URL is too long for this forum to deal with. Just look up "tehachapi loop" on Google.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

URL doesn't look to big to me, I see the picture fine.


----------



## Dave Sams

Not a RR track, but a go kart track helix in Wisconsin.

Lots of fun!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Talk about a Trojan Horse, you really dragged one in here!


----------



## concretepumper

Now that GoCart track is cool!


----------



## servoguy

Look up "tehachapi loop" on Google and you will see a multitude of pictures.
BB


----------



## tjcruiser

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Well, what practical use would such a helix serve? It would be horribly expensive to build, given the loads involved.


I wasn't asking what purpose it would serve. In fact, I think it would be odd to have a real-life trestle-helix. That's why I asked the question if anything like that actually existed in real life. 

I guess there's this in the back of my mind ...

So many of you detailed-scaled model rr guys (HO, etc.) go all ga-ga over helixes on a layout. But I find that a bit at odds with the inherent desire to model something scaled faithfully to real life. Sort of a "We love accurate detail, and we love trestle helixes" way of thinking.

Not trying to stir the pot here ... just curious about what you helix fans think about the dichotomy of thinking ....

TJ


----------



## servoguy

TJ, That is why I stick to the "toy trains" approach. If I want to see a real train, I'll go to the railroad about 2 blocks away and watch the trains. IMHO, just watching a model train go around a loop over and over again is a little boring. It's OK for a while but not for several hours. That is why I make layouts with lots of loops and switches with the switches wired together so the switching is automatic. I make no pretenses about what I am doing being a model railroad.
BB


----------



## concretepumper

I agree with servoguy. Personally I really enjoyed the challenge of building my wanna be helix. I plan on building a bigger one. I just found these. Kinda pricey though. http://modulartraintables.com.au/helix.html


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Mine will also be strictly for enjoyment, any resemblance to an actual location will be purely accidental.


----------



## tjcruiser

Thanks, guys ... I was just sort of curious about one's thinking.

Personally, I'm drawn to the "toy / imagination" theme, too. In that realm, a helix on a model rr layout can serve to expands one's horizons!

TJ


----------



## Dave Sams

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Mine will also be strictly for enjoyment, any resemblance to an actual location will be purely accidental.


For me, any resemblance to an acutal train is in the mind of the viewer.


----------



## sstlaure

For me, the helix will merely be a way of getting my trains from one level to another in an effort to increase my mainline length thus giving me more destinations to drop-off/pick-up additional cars along the mainline. Everyone is crunched for available space for their "hobby", so this will allow me to have 3x the layout in the same amount of space (3 levels.) 

I'll have one level dedicated to staging (allowing me a nice variety of trains to run during a session rather than watching the same ones go round and round) and 2 levels of detailed layout giving me plenty of room for a large yard, a city, several industries and possibly a couple branch line operations. The helix won't be visible from the layout but will rather be underneath a staircase that would have been a less than useful closet area. The trains will pass through portals in the wall between the layout room and the "helix room". By doing this I can have a continuous run, run long trains (20-25 cars) and not have the front of the train entering the next town before the end of the train leaves the first one.

I love the idea of a realistic layout with shipping/receiving occurring and a reason for each car with a destination in mind. For me, just watching the trains go round and round gets boring fairly quick. I also want to have a large amount of structures/detail work to do as I enjoy the modelling aspect of the hobby. I don't want to finish this thing too quickly.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Well, I'm with you Scott on that point, I'll be doing some multiple level stuff to add interest. I have several multi-engine lashups that I intend to run really long trains, and I have plenty of rolling stock to stick behind them.

I'm sure it'll take me a long time to "finish" the layout, it's taken me a long time to get started!  However, the basement project is finally moving along briskly, so there's hope yet...


----------



## servoguy

> I don't want to finish this thing too quickly.


 

Scott, I agree with you about finishing too quickly. A lot of the fun is in the building of the layout or restoration of old trains like some of the guys do. I like to take stuff that no one else wants and make it work again. I bought a diesel switch loco a few years ago that didn't work. I turned the E unit on and it ran fine. Got it for about $10. I like taking the locos and other things apart and lubing them and cleaning up so they work again. 

Bruce


----------



## rickbigs

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Mine will also be strictly for enjoyment, any resemblance to an actual location will be purely accidental.


Mine was a requirement by my wife . She saw one in HO and was facinated by it. I must admit, it is facinating watching a long train go up it. It also gave me a good excuse to buy the Polar Express Train.

Also, the reason I couldn't find any real life examples, is that they are apparently called railway 'spiral', not helix. With that in mind, here are some links to an 'almost' trestle one, a trestle one, and names of a bunch of others. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brusio_spiral_viaduct

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/3425779/Hulton-Archive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_(railway)#List_of_spirals


----------



## tjcruiser

Rick,










That first viaduct example is wonderful! Looks like something the Romans would have built, if the Romans had train technology! This would be a fabulous thing for someone to model in detail!

That 2nd one is an old roller coaster. Looks like fun.

Thanks,

TJ


----------



## rickbigs

TJ, 
One thing I've learned after all of these years of playing. For any idea I've come up with for my layout, someone somewhere has already copied in real life. LOL. All kidding aside, my layout is just for fun (as if I had to say that), and as an entry on another forum put it, "with no pretense of prototypical operation or scenery" (I'm not sure that was a complement). But I've really been surprised that in almost every case I could find a prototypical example of what I had built. Mostly I enjoy the color and operation of these toys, and marvel at the fact that they were all based on actual trains of their time, even if they were not true scale models.


----------



## rickbigs

A friend in Fla asked me how my trolleys ran on the helix. I made up a quick video and sent it to him. He posted in on the web, and here is the link for your enjoyment:

http://s278.photobucket.com/albums/kk90/TRAINS4U2C/?action=view&current=Trolleys_On_The_Helix.mp4


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I hope my helix works as well, I'm planning on O42 and O31 with a straight 30" section on the side, so it'll be an oval. I calculate the O31 at just about 4% grade, and just over 3% for the O42 outside track.


----------



## tjcruiser

Rick,

Fun video. Smooth running!

Question ... What is the silvery "tape" (???) that's in the middle of the underside of your helix support roadbed???

Cheers,

TJ


----------



## rickbigs

gunrunnerjohn said:


> I hope my helix works as well, I'm planning on O42 and O31 with a straight 30" section on the side, so it'll be an oval. I calculate the O31 at just about 4% grade, and just over 3% for the O42 outside track.


How much distance between layers do you plan (top of track to top of track) ? At 6 inches, I calculate about
5% on 0-31, and 4% on 42. I'm calculate 4.5% and 3.5%. I am guessing that due to the increased grade, and sharper curves (friction, etc), you will have to run at least a car or 2 shorter than I am. I am also guessing that post-war would be limited too. A while back, I did some tests using the 7 Polar Express passenger cars, up to 5 additional modern passenger cars, and a box car added to diesels to simulate the tender in the steam engines. Results are as follows:
-Polar Express and most other modern engines pulled up 12 cars or more. A couple of the dual motor modern engines acted like they could pull many more cars without issue.
-624 swither (with magnitraction) only pulled up 8 (plus a simulated tender).
-2026 2x6x4 pulled up 6,
-2020 6x8x6 pullted up 5,
-2037 2x6x4 slipped with 4,
-2018 2x6x4 slipped with 3.
-Also, if I remember right, the 2020 would slip when pulling only 4 well lubricated postwar passenger cars.
-Another note, coming down on the inside is fun also. The 2020 had to be run at such low voltage that the e-unit kept dropping out. To run unattended, cruise control is almost required (which includes MTH PS2 and Loco Sound engnes). The exception is a very low geared engine that won't speed out of control on the way down.

My advice. Figure out how many cars minimum you want to run, somehow lay in at least 1 loop of your helix (on scrap plywood or even heavy cardboard propped up on boxes), and test,test,test.

Hope this helps.


----------



## rickbigs

tjcruiser said:


> Rick,
> 
> Fun video. Smooth running!
> 
> Question ... What is the silvery "tape" (???) that's in the middle of the underside of your helix support roadbed???
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> TJ


TJ,
That is Aluminum Furnace tape. I am having troubles with my TMCC, so decided to try that for the ground plane. That was the easiest thing i could think of to use (conductive, sticky backed, a little flexable). Definately helped, but still not 100%. I'm waiting until 100% before painting it gray so it will blend in.
Rick


----------



## tjcruiser

Thanks for the info, Rick!

TJ


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

rickbigs said:


> How much distance between layers do you plan (top of track to top of track) ? At 6 inches, I calculate about
> 5% on 0-31, and 4% on 42. I'm calculate 4.5% and 3.5%. I am guessing that due to the increased grade, and sharper curves (friction, etc), you will have to run at least a car or 2 shorter than I am. I am also guessing that post-war would be limited too. A while back, I did some tests using the 7 Polar Express passenger cars, up to 5 additional modern passenger cars, and a box car added to diesels to simulate the tender in the steam engines. Results are as follows:
> -Polar Express and most other modern engines pulled up 12 cars or more. A couple of the dual motor modern engines acted like they could pull many more cars without issue.
> -624 swither (with magnitraction) only pulled up 8 (plus a simulated tender).
> -2026 2x6x4 pulled up 6,
> -2020 6x8x6 pullted up 5,
> -2037 2x6x4 slipped with 4,
> -2018 2x6x4 slipped with 3.
> -Also, if I remember right, the 2020 would slip when pulling only 4 well lubricated postwar passenger cars.
> -Another note, coming down on the inside is fun also. The 2020 had to be run at such low voltage that the e-unit kept dropping out. To run unattended, cruise control is almost required (which includes MTH PS2 and Loco Sound engnes). The exception is a very low geared engine that won't speed out of control on the way down.
> 
> My advice. Figure out how many cars minimum you want to run, somehow lay in at least 1 loop of your helix (on scrap plywood or even heavy cardboard propped up on boxes), and test,test,test.
> 
> Hope this helps.


How are you coming up with 5% for the O31 inner track. and 4% for the outer track?

I have three sections of straight track at 10", that's 60" total. I have 8 sections of curved track at 11", that's 88". 6 / 148 = 0.0405 or just about 4%.

For the 42" curves, there are 12 sections of curved track at 11", and the 60" of straight track. 6 / 192 = 0.031 or about 3%.

My layout will be running 100% TMCC, and virtually all the locomotives have cruise control, so the issues with E-units dropping out will not be an issue. 


BTW, I plan on doing a simple test of a turn of the helix to see how things work before fabricating it fully. That's certainly a good suggestion, and one that I was already planning.


----------



## rickbigs

gunrunnerjohn said:


> I have three sections of straight track at 10", that's 60" total. I have 8 sections of curved track at 11", that's 88". 6 / 148 = 0.0405 or just about 4%.
> 
> For the 42" curves, there are 12 sections of curved track at 11", and the 60" of straight track. 6 / 192 = 0.031 or about 3%.


Sorry about that. I read 1 10 inch section instead of 1 30 inch section. You may want to consider 6 1/2 inch spacing if you are using 1/2 inch ply with 1/2 inch splices. The grade would be slighty more (4.4% and 3.4%). My Amtrac Double Deckers just barely rub the top, so I cant run them. Again, figure out what you want to run before building too much.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Yep, I added the extra straight sections to reduce the grade. I have tested a couple of the Amtrak Genesis locomotives with six Amtrak passenger cars on a 6% grade, they seemed to do pretty well on that. It was straight, but I figured a couple of percent for the curves. I'm guessing that some combinations will have a bit of trouble with the inside track, but they shouldn't have any issue coming down on that track. Before I actually start building the helix, I will do some additional measurements.

One clever scheme I've seen is to use 1/4" material, either plywood or MDF, and overlap it 100% to make it 1/2" total with no additional splice required. Given the track and thin base, that gives me almost 5" of clearance for the cars. Most of my stuff appears to make that with almost an inch to spare. That's the current plan for the material right now. I'm thinking plywood as it's easier to work with and lighter as well.


----------



## HeyChris

Bumped for research....


----------

