Tomix Tram Track Mini Module System

[ToniBabelony]

Hello all.

 

After the release of the Mini Curves and tram tracks by Tomix, I've had the idea of developing a T-Trak based module system for Tomix rails. As I think Tomix has a more inviting sectional track range that stays very strict in its geometry, a modular system for Tomix tracks comes close to ideal.

 

The standard system I've chosen is a multitude of 70mm (like the S70 track piece), as almost the whole system is based on this size. The narrowest curve where Enoden trams (and other major rolling stock) can pass through is the S140 one, a multitude of 70mm. So, I've limited the minimum radius to 140mm.The standard length of the straight modules is 280mm (S280), a bit smaller then an A4 size sheet of paper, and as wide as an A4 paper (210mm). About the same as T-Trak.

 

The measures of a standard outside corner module is 280x280mm, which falls perfectly in shape with a standard straight module.

The inside corner provided an extra problem, as the 280mm size couldn't be well maintained with the minimum radius of 140mm with double tracking, so I've chosen 350x350mm (280mm + 70mm) as a size. This has thus to be compensated with a 70mm piece somewhere when making a continuous layout. I think this shouldn't be a problem as this can be solved creatively (70mm module).

 

The height of the modules should be 70mm as well to stay in the pattern, and the track height should be about 100mm from the surface where the modules are placed on. This should provide a compatibility with T-Trak when a transition module is placed in between.

 

Below this post an image is placed with additional information on the measurements and tracks used. The dark rail is the main track, whereas the lighter one is optional. This is because of a personal preference for single-track operation. I know it's a bit risky electric and operational wise, but this can always be changed.

 

Electrics should be simple with a connection on every module on every main track.

 

What does JNS Forum think about this idea and what name for this system would be appropriate (not to be confused with T-Trak that is)

[David]

A good question is how are the modules linked? The Unijoiner adds both a bit of flexiblity (it is not completely rigid, allowing for less then perfect module edges) and eases attachment and seperation. What mechanism would be used to ease the assembly and disassembly of a group of connected Tomix modules. Would a piece of track be used to bridge modules (like an 18.5mm or 33mm piece)?

[CaptOblivious]

Why have two different kinds of curves? Can you not combine them into a single module design?

[CaptOblivious]

A good question is how are the modules linked? The Unijoiner adds both a bit of flexiblity (it is not completely rigid, allowing for less then perfect module edges) and eases attachment and seperation. What mechanism would be used to ease the assembly and disassembly of a group of connected Tomix modules. Would a piece of track be used to bridge modules (like an 18.5mm or 33mm piece)?

 

I would think using the variable-length piece at the edges would be a decent-enough solution?

[David]

One other question - is this intended just for trams/street cars/railbuses, or for general rolling stock? In my own tests when I got mini curve track the R177 was required for most modern locomotive power, and many 20m trains need 8" curves to avoid derailment (19m with truck mounted rapido couplers could make R177, but looked ridiculous). Unfortunately I've run into the issue of Tomix lacking an 8" bridge between mini and regular curves (big gap between R177 and R243)

[ToniBabelony]

Linking the modules is through normal tomix snap-joiners. I don't like the idea of the V70 piece at it breaks the scenery visually. It would end up something like the system as seen on this page (2nd layout): http://www.jmra.gr.jp/shinohara/shino106.html and this system: http://carendt.us/scrapbook/page97a/index.html#microsections Of course every builder should provide a correct connection possibility. A think the use of wedge and some care, the modules should be easily separable.

 

I've used two different dimensions for curves as otherwise it'd break the geometry of the Tomix track. Only with a continuous double-track layout (in the exact middle of the module) a symmetrical curve geometry is possible. As the idea of these modules is to offer a single and double track layout. this isn't possible. If you look carefully to the design, everything matches with the 70mm geometry.

 

This system is more thought to be for smaller railway vehicles with a minimum curve of 140mm. It's not like the 'Americanized' T-Trak idea, whereas the original T-Trak concept was also thought to be only for smaller railway vehicles.

 

For a start, this is a personal project, but if it proves to be a popular concept, others can easily join in the fun!

[KenS]

If you're going to design the system to exploit the "tram" version of Finetrack (aka. Mini-Rail), you really should incorporate the C103 curve as well (Super Mini-Rail). While it won't work for modern articulated trams, it makes for much more prototypical curves if you're modeling older trams.  You could make your end pieces centered around the C140 curve, with optional outer and inner curves based on C103 and C177.  That would allow for both kinds of double-track modules (C103+C140 for small trams, and C140+C177 for articulated trams) as well as single and triple-track designs.

 

Also, if the dark track on the diagram is intended to represent the required track, and the lighter colored one the optional track, I think you should say that on the diagram somewhere.

[westfalen]

Linking the modules is through normal tomix snap-joiners. I don't like the idea of the V70 piece at it breaks the scenery visually. It would end up something like the system as seen on this page (2nd layout): http://www.jmra.gr.jp/shinohara/shino106.html and this system: http://carendt.us/scrapbook/page97a/index.html#microsections Of course every builder should provide a correct connection possibility. A think the use of wedge and some care, the modules should be easily separable.

You would have to be very careful not to break the joiners as they would overhang the end of the modules. We always have a few Unijoiners on hand for our T-TRAK modules just in case.

 

Have you thought of using Kato S62J Unitrack to Tomix adapter pieces at the ends of modules?

[ToniBabelony]

In the design I've tried to avoid the use of C103 rail at all costs, as only a few rolling stock will make it through these curves. T-Trak standards allow a minimum radius of 120mm for a good reason, I wanted to use C103 rail, but it's just too risky. The EasyTrolly concept: http://www.trainweb.org/tomix/ET-dwgs/ETdrawings.htm allows also a minimum curve of 140mm, as there is no mention of the use of 103mm curves on their website. I think for the very same reason.

 

Also, Westfalen has a good point about the risk of breaking joiners with overhang. It could just happen, but with enough care and maybe a protective piece at both ends (could be a piece of foam) this shouldn't be much of a problem. Also, during transport the standard 280mm modules (which will probably be the most popular size) can be carried in a regular A4 document box, as they would fit perfectly in such a box. An inexpensive, discrete and cheap method of transport.

 

All in all, this project in its developing stage, but I think the dimensions of the modules are good as they are. I'll start on some new diagrams today for a clearer explanation and high flexibility of these dimensions.

[bill937ca]

In the design I've tried to avoid the use of C103 rail at all costs, as only a few rolling stock will make it through these curves. T-Trak standards allow a minimum radius of 120mm for a good reason, I wanted to use C103 rail, but it's just too risky. The EasyTrolly concept: http://www.trainweb.org/tomix/ET-dwgs/ETdrawings.htm allows also a minimum curve of 140mm, as there is no mention of the use of 103mm curves on their website. I think for the very same reason.

 

I use C103 on all my tram layouts.  I can run four axle trams and interurbans, non-articulated interurban trains and Portram trams. Most prototype systems with articulated cars make tight turns.  That is the reason for the articulations.

 

Don't forget Joshin has information on which trains take C103 curves.

 

http://joshinweb.jp/hobby/minirail1.html?ACK=TOKU

 

http://joshinweb.jp/hobby/minirail2.html?ACK=TOKU

[ToniBabelony]

True, but trains like the articulated Enoden trains from Modemo (personal favourites) and the Kirara from KATO don't manage 103mm curves, so that's the main reason for avoiding this radius.

 

I've posted below some new diagrams and some simple variation suggestions. Also, the (over)use of C140 curves provide a good base for junction layouts as well.

[David]

Just back on the rolling stock, if it is intended to be for trams and similar short stuff (unlike Tomix the modern Kato commuter trains don't stand a chance on R177, the Kato telescoping close coupler was designed to just barely pass R216) then maybe it should be stated in the documentation or name (i.e. call it Tomix Tram module standard). You might also consider a design or implimentation suggestion for transition modules - from street level tram tracks to open tie tracks. On the same thought, there might be some suggestions on how wide to make the street (for street level track sections) so that modules form a continous road. The Tomix bus system would provide some ideas in this area, since it seems to clip to the sides of the tram track, forming a 4 lane road (2 outer car lanes, 2 center lanes with tram tracks).

[ToniBabelony]

Firstly, the name. Good thinking! It's too generic now, but hey, it's still a project name in development ('^^')">

 

You also have a good point there with the bus lanes... Maybe it's good to wait for it to come out and look at the dimensions of those pieces than setting standards now. The modules are flexible in wideness, so that shouldn't be a problem. I reckon the wideness of the bus lanes is 37mm, just as the tram tracks: http://casco.blog.so-net.ne.jp/_images/blog/_a37/casco/IMGP0959.JPG and http://atbmodels.web5.jp/special-info-2009makuhari.htm#%E3%81%A4%E3%81%84%E3%81%AB%E3%83%90%E3%82%B9%E3%82%B3%E3%83%AC%E3%81%8C%E8%B5%B0%E3%82%8B%EF%BC%81%E8%B5%B0%E8%A1%8C%E3%82%B7%E3%82%B9%E3%83%86%E3%83%A0%E5%87%BA%E5%93%81That means the modules will have to change from 210mm to 265,5mm or more. 280mm wide is the maximum then.

 

Another problem that will occur with the incorporation of the bus system is making double standards for module heads. There are already two different module heads now, and with the introduction of the bus system this will only make the heads more complicated.

 

Maybe it's a good idea then to introduce a maximum of 4 heads:

- Single track street running (dual direction buslane on either side of the rails);

- Single track dedicated track (with a two-lane road next to the railway);

- Double track street running (dual direction buslane on either side of the rails);

- Double track dedicated track (with a two-lane road next to the railway).

 

The next problem is of course how to solve the issue of railway crossings. The buses and trains are almost asking for a collision when switching from one side of the tracks to the other without a proper safety system for the buses. Maybe Tomix will come up with an interesting solution here.

[ToniBabelony]

Sorry for the double post, but I've made a new design. A bit more easy to comprehend then my previous designs and with a more consistent geometry.

 

The main track (for single track lines) is now in the middle of the plate, which is now 280mm wide. This provides a higher flexibility when combining modules. Also, there is now room for the future tomix bus system, if it's going to be incorporated.

 

I've also added a new name 'Tram Module Network' (T.M. Network) as a tribute to one of my favourite Japanese pop bands.

[David]

As you've found, the 30 degree cross over is a bit difficult to work with due to non-symmetrical geometry. You can get slightly better results by flipping it (so it at least meets up with the switch right, and the bad geometry is on the outgoing track).

 

The 140mm/R540 15 degree switch combined with the 15 degree cross over seems to work a little better, but I don't think there is enough room to make it work. I'm actually hoping Tomix looks into fixing this with their tram track, so that you can create the double track with diverging route.

[Ken Ford]

Toni, I really like what you've developed here.  Did you ever do anything more with the idea?