Large Scale Central

Expansion Joint

Track and Trestles
#1

Ron Teten is having troubles with his code 250 Aluminum track expanding so much. Well, we think that is the problem, in this 100 degree summer we had. Looked at ordering one, but no code 250 ones. I saw some code332 ones at Kidman’s display at Marty’s, and after talking to Ron Senek(who’s made a lot of them) I decided I could make one. Used some code 250 brass SVRR rail I had and some AML/Ams narrow gauge ties that Ron had. Used my bench grinder to take off half on each side. Seemed a little floppy up and down so I put some cedar pieces in the ties under the splice and at the ends to hold it flat and level.

#2

Hey Jerry,

That looks like it will work. However, as we said, it will probably be next Summer before it is really tested.

#3

Another way of doing that is what Train-Li does on their Transfer Table(?). Grind about half of the rails down about an inch long so they’ll slid inside a joiner. I did this on my own transfer table since I didn’t need five tracks as that what the Train Li one d has.

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/kenbrunt/_forumfiles/2012_09260001a.jpg)

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/kenbrunt/_forumfiles/2012_09260003a.jpg)

#4

Ya’ know all my track floats in the ties and the ties are screwed to roadbed at multiple points on the layout but no screws securing the track to the ties …I have Split Jaw expansion joints installed but I rarely see them move and when they do it’s minimal …what I do see is the track pushing in and out on the radii

#5

I just had to re-do a Hillman’s joint, today. Both rails had come undone. Perhaps it is time to give this some thought.

#6
David Russell said:
Ya' know all my track floats in the ties and the ties are screwed to roadbed at multiple points on the layout but no screws securing the track to the ties ...I have Split Jaw expansion joints installed but I rarely see them move and when they do it's minimal .....what I do see is the track pushing in and out on the radii
Rooster, interesting thoughts. I guess I do the same thing, without thinking about it, because when I custom bend a curve, I don't put the screws back in the ties.
#7

I generally don’t have a big problem with expansion either. I’m using Aristo stainless steel rail and I do keep the tie screws in, even put a few back in custom bends where I can. I bought one of Split-Laws expansion tracks but never got around to installing it. There are a few places where I have some pretty large gaps, but not large enough to cause a derailment. Some of my track floats and some is screwed down to roadbed. About 60% is in partial to full shade.

#8

The only time I see a lot of expansion is when we have a hot stretch on the desert. One time I saw the track at one end more than an inch out. Since I float my track, use rail clamps and inspect it often it hasn’t been a problem.

We’re not the only ones that can have a problem.

Years ago in San Bernardino (an hour from us) the railroad was replacing track in the yard, They had a hot summer day and discovered the foreman hadn’t allowed for expansion. I hear it looked like spaghetti!

#9

My aluminum track will easily expand 4 inches over the length of my RR. I had to widen the ballast the track floats on considerably at each end.
When I was running track power it would cause problems. I’d have no connectivity issues in the heat of the day, but plenty as it cooled.
For the most part, my rail is not screwed to the ties. Except the switches. Everything just moves where it needs to :wink:
Ralph

#10

Expansion and contraction is a consideration on the Sahara where steel pipelines run hundreds of miles on the desert surface. Pipeline engineers put an “S” wiggle in them every so often to compensate for this.

I’ve read that some outdoor Model Railroader guys anchor their straight track and let the curves float wherever the temperature takes them.

#11

I think it is a good idea Jerry. But, the engineer in me says there is a flaw in the design. You ground the inside rail off the one side. This makes the gauge off in that short section. It looks to me like there is enough distance that could cause some derailments.

Wouldn’t it be better to grind the outside part of the rail on both sides? This would keep the gauge correct, but still allow for expansion.

This is just my thoughts, I dont really have a problem with expansion either and so I have no experience in this type of setup.

#12

Jake - the Split jaw expansion track is made the same way. Hopefully when you set it up initially, the gap you leave for future expansion is small enough that a wheel doesn’t drop in and your winter contraction doesn’t open it too wide either.

#13

Jake Smith said:
I think it is a good idea Jerry. But, the engineer in me says there is a flaw in the design. You ground the inside rail off the one side. This makes the gauge off in that short section. It looks to me like there is enough distance that could cause some derailments. Wouldn’t it be better to grind the outside part of the rail on both sides? This would keep the gauge correct, but still allow for expansion. This is just my thoughts, I dont really have a problem with expansion either and so I have no experience in this type of setup.

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/kenbrunt/_forumfiles/2012_09260001a.jpg)

Stolen fair and square from Ken Brunt. :stuck_out_tongue: What about this… Alternate grinding on the rails. Lemme see if I can make sense of this, after all, I’ve only had two cups of coffee… In the photo above, the rails in the superior section of track are ground on the inside rail, and the rails in the inferior section of track are ground on the outside. If we were to switch the right hand track around, so that the superior rail was ground on the outside, and the inferior rail on the right was ground on the inside, wouldn’t that work better to maintain gauge?

#14

Yes - but if they get too far apart your still going to have a big bump.

#15

Good thinking Jake, shows I was not! Wheels roll through it fine, so should be okay.