Interested in a signal building group?

[Dave Noble]

I recently received a little article for Turnout from Martin Rant about a semaphore signal which he had powered using an R/C servo. He just removed the electronic bits and used it as a winch, the chain fastened to the arm and with limits controlled by microswitches. Neat.

DSC_0326.JPG (62.05 KiB) Viewed 15889 times

And while we're on the matter of control, what was the scheme you had in mind Jonny, something to with Arduinos and interrogation?

[Eddyg]

Dave,

Why non ferrous for the signal posts? Surely steel tube is cheaper and stronger and takes paint better.

If the actuator is a motor driving a snail cam then the motor only needs to run in one direction so the switching is simpler, i.e. no need to reverse polarity.

With the layout we used last year we will need five single post home/starter signals and a junction signal as a minimum assuming that once past the home signal all movements are un-signalled.

Eddie

[Ben Lyons]

100_9308.jpg (33.95 KiB) Viewed 15883 times

Promised pics of Doug's parts

[Jonny Ward]

Can Jonny please explain why we need 3 signalmen. I assume one in the main yard, one at the junction, and one in the bottom yard, but do we need that last one? And should we consider properly signalling just a small section or yard as a start?

You assumed correctly Dave with the three signalmen. It all depends on how close we want to get to full size operations.

Signalling just one yard would be a good starting point (As the Main yard has the highest amount of activity it would be the hardest one to signal, but the most worthwhile one operationally).

As for interlocking's, again how near to full size operation do we want to go? A mechanically locked frame is one option. A lever frame working a relay based or micro computer based locking is another option.

.... assuming that once past the home signal all movements are un-signalled.

Eddie

We haven't had any un-signalled moves at Shildon so far. Where a Signal or Stop Board haven't been provided, Hand Signalling has been used (With Single Line Token's to reinforce single occupation of the sections).

I finally got around to sending a signal plan back from work, only to discover that because it is quite long when I put the photo on here you could actually see any of the detail. So here are three plans, one for each interlocking.



First, Noble Sidings. This layout would simplify the signalling drastically, and ease operation. Alternatively, leave the layout as is, and find a way of interlocking Dave's signal's with token operation.



Second, the Middle Box. In this instance, it sit's between a Token worked section and a section to Noble Sidings worked by directional slotting or another token section.



Finally, the main Yard. I'm aware there are plans to alter the track plan a little in the yard (Access to/from the steaming bays), but it builds on the signalling I provided for the first two years (But does it properly!).

Of course, I'm not suggesting that this is the only way the layout can be signalled, nor that this should be the plan we follow. But, I think that this is the most likely way the line would have been signalled in full size.

[Eddyg]

We haven't had any un-signalled moves at Shildon so far. Where a Signal or Stop Board haven't been provided, Hand Signalling has been used (With Single Line Token's to reinforce single occupation of the sections).

I wasn't suggesting main line moves were unsignalled, just that up to now once the token is back in the signalman's hands then all moves are under the control of the yardmaster. Point being we don't need to signal the yards, just the entry and egress. Later we can get cleverer.

My initial reaction to your scheme is that it is a good plan for the future, but we will need to start smaller, hence my view that we only need six signals to start with. I wouldn't change the layout much at Noble's yard since it worked well enough last time after it had been tweaked.

Be interested in other peoples views

Eddie

[Dave Noble]

Eddy, I was trying to avoid rustable materials if possible, but the poor range of non-ferrous may lead to mild steel. At the moment I'm thinking of 1/2" mild steel and 15mm stainless. This would cost about £6 per post.

Yes, a cam actuator wouldn't require reversing.

Not over impressed with the castings. Looks like some could do with updating somewhat. Disappointingly, they are all for square posts. Ben and I have discussed this briefly, and wonder if standard BR signals might be the thing to go for initially, as they were universal, and it would avoid treading on anyone's toes if we made new parts. If we can get prototype information, I will have a go at drawing them in 3D, and Ben will try and grow them in lost waxable resin on his printer (though we would need to agree on type). Over to you Eddy.

If we wanted different styles, I really fancy NER, perhaps we could model different yards on different areas.

Thanks for putting the drawings up Jonny. I'd agree with Eddy, that something like this years arrangement at Noble's yard would be better to operate. I can't offer much on your ideas, just, should there be a shunt arm and another distant arm at the junction to allow trains to reverse between the middle and bottom yards? And, you talk about interlocking. Are you thinking of interlocking signals and points, and if so, do the points need to be remotely operated?

You talk about mechanical interlocking or relay/microcomputer. I have no preference, but would suggest that a mechanically interlocked one would be a lot of work and could not be altered, whereas an electrical one could use simpler levers/switches, and could be updated if layouts are tweaked.

Lastly, are any of you going to the AGM, we could have a chat there perhaps.

[Eddyg]

Over to you Eddy.

Dave

I've had a search of all the books and magazines that I think I've looked at recently and haven't come up with the article on BR signals that I was sure I'd seen. No doubt it'll turn up when I've done something else and don't need it any more! I've accumulated about four hours of internet searching for dimensioned drawings of signals and have turned up a few from the USA and some from SAR, but no BR. What I did discover is reference to drawings for semaphore signals in the Railway Group Standards. Problem is I can't get access since they are lodged with IHS and you have to be a subscriber to get them. Sadly if I was still working I could probably have got them (for my own use only of course). Further research revealed these are now on the withdrawn list and are in the hands of the Signal Records Society and are now listed in their archives (see list attached). I have downloaded a copy of Appendix M22 of the Guide to Signalling and Telecommunications. Equipment Standards, Specifications and Drawings which lists these signal drawings and I have attached them so you can see what drawings are available and if anyone can list which ones might be of use we could perhaps contact the SRS to see if we can buy copies. Or perhaps we have someone who works in NR's S&T who can get hold of them.

Won't be going to Bristol for the AGM but could well see you at Derby in August.

Eddie

[Eddyg]

Whoops, forgot to add the attachments and can't find a way to edit a post.

App M22 Sheet 1 of 5.pdf

(11.56 KiB) Downloaded 669 times

App M22 Sheet 1 of 5.pdf

(11.56 KiB) Downloaded 669 times

App M22 Sheet 2 of 5.pdf

(131.18 KiB) Downloaded 536 times

App M22 Sheet 3 of 5.pdf

(136.28 KiB) Downloaded 594 times

App M22 Sheet 4 of 5.pdf

(148.11 KiB) Downloaded 523 times

App M22 Sheet 5 of 5.pdf

(80.21 KiB) Downloaded 558 times

[Admin]

Whoops, forgot to add the attachments and can't find a way to edit a post.

There should be an edit button top right similar the picture below.

edit-icon.JPG (29.02 KiB) Viewed 15816 times

[Dave Noble]

Good bit of research Eddy.

I have also been looking on the web, I didn't manage to find that particular SRS archive list, but this forum entry

http://forum.signalbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4548

has scans of SM-68 and SM-1. Neither is dimensioned, but the latter shows clearly the arrangement at the top of the post.

I had a run up to Cheddleton the other night, they sometimes have interesting bits lying around the car park, but not this time. They do have BR semaphores in operation, so I might go back and see if I can contact the S&T department.

I'll give it a few days, and if no-one turns anything else up, I'll contact the SRS.

[Richard Phillips]

The Lens drawings (and modern battery boxes) are available on Unipart Dorman's site:
http://www.unipartdorman.co.uk/products ... %20Signals

A Network Rail Document Index is available here:
http://www.ihsti.com/NoRCS/docs/brafas0 ... cat003.pdf

[Dave Noble]

BR semaphore signal drawings - sorted. Via an anonymous donor. I can say no more, but many thanks to him, or her.

Next question, are we all happy to go with this style?

And, how tall do you think they should be, bearing in mind, scale suggests quite low, drivers will want them fairly high, and, they all have to be carried somehow. As a first suggestion, how about 2ft to the top of the post?

[Eddyg]

Good bit of research Eddy.

I have also been looking on the web, I didn't manage to find that particular SRS archive list,

I got it by finding the drawing list in Railway Group Standards and then searching for the semaphore signal drawing number prefix BRS-SM which reveals the SRS as a pdf. More ways of skinning that cat. I couldn't find a way to access this document from the SRS website though, so my method must open a back door to the archive. I did see the SM1 and SM68 drawings but thought they were of little use at this stage without dimensions.

Pleased you found that 'anonymous donor'. I was at a meeting tonight and hoped I could get to talk to one, but he got a phone call (I assume he was 'on call') and left before I could ask him if he could see if he was able to access those drawings and print or download them.

I'm comfortable with BR semaphores, it will prevent anyone complaining of bias to a particular pre-BR company, although I think the Western Region had their own design of BR(W) UQ signal.

Signal heights varied from the lower arm being at about train roof level upwards, so 2ft from the rail head to the arm will not be wrong. We need to ensure that the post is far enough from the rail to clear driver's knees though. If this makes the signal base boards too long for convenient transport, perhaps they could be made with a hinged joint at mid length so they can be folded under for packing.

Eddie

[mickfearn]

Hi reckon the single arm on the link entry at Morley derby is the same as you are after,the one at the rear of the signal box,do thick you are due for a visit Dave!.
regards Mick Fearn

[Jonny Ward]

Well done Eddy! I'll see if I can find the drawings on our system at work when I get back there.

Thanks for putting the drawings up Jonny. I'd agree with Eddy, that something like this years arrangement at Noble's yard would be better to operate. I can't offer much on your ideas, just, should there be a shunt arm and another distant arm at the junction to allow trains to reverse between the middle and bottom yards? And, you talk about interlocking. Are you thinking of interlocking signals and points, and if so, do the points need to be remotely operated?

Distant arms, technically yes but we could manage without (Again, how close to full size practice do we want to model). The Shunt arm ought to be there, its a diverging route from the main and by rights should be approach released too but I'm ignoring that fact. By having Homes and a Starter reading to the main yard, it allows for working trip workings between Noble Sidings and the Middle yard, not an absolute necessity but adds to operational flexibility (Incidentally, we did run a few trip workings between the two yards this year).

The Points could do with being detected, but they don't have to be motorised. The set up I did for the first year just detected the two point leading out of the yard, the points were still worked by hand.

[Guy Harding]

All. Sorry to be a little late to the party, but I am also interested in helping out and building a signal or two. I noticed that Richat mentioned the S&D which would be of specific interest to me but happy to go with a more mainstream type. Again semaphore preferred. I live very close to Banbury which is still a bastion of semaphore signalling in the modern age. I can get photos of them (Western Region I think) if needed.

[Jonny Ward]

I live very close to Banbury which is still a bastion of semaphore signalling in the modern age. I can get photos of them (Western Region I think) if needed.

Make the most of them Guy. Stage 3 of the re-signalling works went in on Saturday night just gone. North and South Boxes will be abolished April of next year, so get pictures while it's all still there!

[Dave Noble]

Welcome Guy.

There was a little meeting of those interested in signalling after the AGM last weekend. There was Jonny, Richard and me, and Steve Birch stayed a while.

Jonny produced his drawing of Shildon and proceeded to put signals on it again, I think he indicated that we'll need something like 7 or 8 single post signals, two brackets, and a good number of ground signals, as minimum

The signals will probably be operated by R/C servos, and the control system will have a controller at each box, with a mini computer (apparently they only cost £3 or £4) at each signal. Each of these mini computers will have it's own address, so all the parts only need connecting with one cable, in any order. The central controller will send commands to a particular address, so all railway signals will receive all the electronic signals, but only the one addressed will act on it. I think it's much like DCC, but Jonny says it's not, and that it's much better anyway. This arrangement will make setting up very quick, but a different programme will be needed for each change of signalling, though it only needs doing once. At this point, Richard said that he used to do coding, in fact he can still do it, so he's lumbered himself with that job! Hopefully we can arrange a changeover switch in each signal so that they can be operated off 12 volts at home by electronic dunces like me.

I suggested a three layer system for the bases. If the post has a steel plate silver soldered to it at the bottom, this could be screwed to the underside of a 3mm sheet of acrylic (Perspex) with the post sticking out through a hole in the middle. A layer of say 12mm acrylic with holes cut through it could then be screwed or glued under the top layer and the electrical bits fitted into the cavities. A last layer of 3mm is then screwed to the bottom to seal everting in. It now occurs to me that we could solder brackets to the steel plate to carry the servos, and that the middle layer just needs to be a hollow rectangle, maybe made from strips for cheapness, rather than one large piece.

I've been wondering how to connect the servo horns (arms) to the signals, and my latest idea is to use a vertical wire link to operate the balance lever from directly below. This shouldn't be too obtrusive, and if we can arrange a seal around the wire, they should be waterproof, just in case we ever get to use them outside.

The full size posts were 5 1/2 and 6 5/8 inches in diameter, and the nearest material I can find is 1/2" mild steel and 15mm stainless tube. I've bought some of each, and made the bits for some posts. I'll try and take a photo tomorrow and post it here.

Thoughts anyone?

[Alan Wood]

I


I was wondering if your using steel and Stainless steel are you going to get any corrosion problems and how do you join them .

[Dave Noble]

I'm guessing a bit here, but I would have thought that they'd be OK, especially as they will be painted and therefore hopefully dry. I intend to silver solder them, and the solder fillet will shed water from the joint if it does get wet, but I'm sure Araldite would be fine.

The reason for using dissimilar metals is that it seems that mild steel is only available in imperial sizes, and stainless in metric, at least that was all I could find.