 | | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) We don't have the room at GEMTS to elevate track to the level required for your arch bridge, not without dedicating a full *two thirds* of our space to elevating the track, and consiquently obscuring at least 1/2 of our layout behind (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) I agree there isn't enough room for elevation ramps. That's why my mountain-valley-bridge suggestion has both tracks at the level of the tables. The upper portion of the mountain peaks are above track/table level, while most of the "two (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) That calls for a lot of brick, probably more than I have. Verticle lift is what requires the most volume of bricks, if you want it sturdy, and I was fairly well tapped out with the Supertrain mountain at about 2 feet of lift. I've got some (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
James Brown wrote in message ... (...) double (...) I'd have enough to do a double track trestle, but 30" is a bit short... Something longer would look better, but would mean borrowing or acquiring some more black beams. More beams ... I like the (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
John Koob wrote in message ... (...) Clarification - 30" is a bit short, but 60" is too long. How long is the low table? Could we go for something like a 45" bridge and have some box/wood constructed to raise the apparent height of part of the low (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | RE: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) We can vary the height on more than one table, that's no problem; all it takes is more legs. If we drop two tables, we can fill in some terrain on each side of the lowered area with brick to make it look more "natural", which would give us (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) What low table are you refering to? (...) Ummm - That's what I'm suggesting. (My bridge is _exactly_ 45" in fact.) By lowering "the table" 16 bricks, the bridge deck and track would be level with the other tables, as Kevin pointed out quite (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) I seem to recall Michel saying at some point that the table count had turned out to be inaccurate?? Six full sets as in six 30x60s and six 30x30s? That would mean then that two additional 30x60s (plus something lower for the mountain/bridge (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
The low table I made last year is one of the small 30.5x30.5 inch guys, it is more like a canyon, with vertical walls on three sides and open on only one side. The walls are there to attach to the adjacent tables with the usual bolt holes. I think (...) (24 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
The count is 6 large and 6 small, including the large table with the hole for the round house, and the small table with the trench for the elevator and the sunken small table originally for a small port. Half the tables are still in Edmonton at my (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
As everyone knows, I don't have a garage. So, no carpentry party at my place, unfortunately. But I would be able and willing to do all of the painting. Oh, does anyone have brushes I could borrow? :-] John Michel Magnan wrote in message ... (...) (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
(...) I did so, and John Neal started to reply, but then figured it would be better to discuss it here so that others could contribute to - and benefit from - the discussion. OK John - you have the floor... 8-) SRC L#765 StRuCtures (24 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
(...) Ahem, well, okay then:-) First off, I will say that there is no current "standard". The GMLTC used 30"x45" tables for our last layout (actually just a skosh longer on each dimension to avoid module buckling). This size is convenient because (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.nalug, John Neal writes: <snip> (...) At first I tried to imagine a rim of LEGO 2x4s reinforcing the tables! :) Build well, Andreas Stabno (URL) (24 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
I agree that the folding legs are the way to go if you want to save space in transporting them and setting up. I used the "conventional" bolt on legs for a year and that was all I could take. I was tired of being the last group to leave the train (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
(...) lol, Oops, I guess I should have been more careful with my wording-- that's funny! -John (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
For the train clubs that use folding legs, I was wondering if you could answer the following: 1. If you don't have enough Lego bricks to cover the entire surface of the talbles, how do you hold the adjacent tables together? 2. Do you have a problem (...) (24 years ago, 17-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Table Legs (was Re: Bridge & ideas (for GEMTS 2001))
|
|
1) We don't cover our tables with bricks (they are painted LEGO brick green), we use spring loaded clamps to hold the tables together (they're about a $1 a piece at Home Depot) 2)I always take a few pieces of cardboard with me to shim up the tables (...) (24 years ago, 18-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
