Subject:
|
Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:08:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2630 times
|
| |
|
|
We all know that different LTCs around the world have different sized
tables. NILTC uses 40x30, GPLR uses 30x60, IndyLUG uses 40x80, NBLTC uses
25x50, etc. There are previous more general discussions of train tables,
e.g.
http://news.lugnet.com/trains/?n=19828&t=i&v=a
I'm interested in the pros and cons of table top sizes in particular.
I've thought about this a bit; I'm curious to see what I missed.
The issues I see are:
Cost
----
The marginal cost (in both labor and materials) of increasing table size
is very small. This is especially true when using folding legs, where
much of the investment goes into the legs, which will be the same
regardless of size. A 30x60 table with folding legs probably costs
only a few dollars more than a 20x40 table with folding legs but has more
than twice the area (or, it would cost twice as much to get the same
amount of area using smaller tables).
The major issue I don't take into account here is that the plywood usually
used for table tops almost always comes in 4'x8' sheets. One such sheet
would produce one 30x60 (and a 30x30) table top, but four 20x40 table
tops. A table size chosen with the 4'x8' material limitation in mind
could result in a lower material cost, especially if cheap legs are
employed.
Transport
---------
Based on measurements (but not testing), a Buick Skylark or other smallish
car could accommodate 20x40 tables on the back seat, stacked up with space
for boxes. 30x60 tables would be much harder to fit, and would be at an
angle that would leave little space for boxes. Basically, if members must
transport their own tables, smaller tables can fit in more vehicles. If
someone trades in his van for a compact, he may not be able to get his
tables to shows. A geographically close (or close-knit) club can
alleviate this by having members with vans and trucks collect and
transport tables. If the club owns a trailer and tables are club-owned,
transport problems go away (provided someone can tow the trailer. . .) and
the only limit on table size is the size of the trailer.
Handling
--------
I'm no he-man, but I have no trouble picking up, carrying, and setting up
a 30x60 table. Carrying a 40x80 table I find much easier with a helper.
I don't even want to think about trying to move a 40x80 table around my
apartment. The larger the table, the harder it is to handle. On the
other hand, smaller tables may mean twice as many trips to get the same
total table area.
This is especially acute during setup and teardown, when the tables must
be tied to each other (usually with bolts). More tables leads directly to
more work.
Doors and elevators have special handling issues. Residential doorways
tend to be a bit less than 30 inches wide. Commercial facilities tend to
have doorways that are a bit more than 30 inches wide. Elevators are
almost always wider still. If a model needs to be transported flat on a
table, it needs to be able to get out of the LEGO room and into display
facilities. Of more import to most people: tables can only be transported
on a dolly if they will fit through building and elevator doors.
LEGO Compatibility
------------------
The common baseplate sizes mean that dimensions that are multiples of 5
inches work best. Gray baseplates work best with dimensions that are
multiples of 15 inches (unless you are willing to cut baseplates), while
roadplates (if you use roadplates) work best with dimensions that are
multiples of 10 inches (unless, again, you are willing to cut baseplates).
This makes 30x30 and 30x60 the most LEGO-compatible table sizes.
Flexibility
-----------
Rearrangement of tables into new configurations is challenging unless the
tables are square or rectangular with lengths double or triple their
widths. The only club of which I know that does not use such tables uses
modules with predefined fronts, so they're not meant to be rearranged
anyway.
It can be convenient to drop or raise a table a few inches. That is easy
when it's small. When the basic table size is large, half-size modules
may be employed. This gets complicated if the basic module is 25, 35, or
45 inches on a side.
--
TWS Garrison
http://www.morfydd.net/twsg/
Remove capital letters in address for direct reply.
|
|
Message has 9 Replies:
 | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| A few things : For several LOWLUG events we needed tables. In the end we settled for tables exactly 2*3 32*32 baseplates. Reason : these still go through a normal door and are still easily carried by one person. The legs are whatever you want, (...) (20 years ago, 12-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| Hello Thomas, Thank you for your interesting update on this everlasting point of table standardization. We are also seriously considering the standardization of tables for multi-participant presentations. Although it seems quite improbable that a (...) (20 years ago, 12-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org, FTX)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| (...) That's exactly what we've done: Use smaller modules, always. The standard in rtlToronto is 30.25x30.25", using the PNLTC standard. We use exclusively what I think they call a "half module", except its our regular size. Our "half" is actually a (...) (20 years ago, 12-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| (...) [...] BayLTC has an assortment of different kinds of tables: mostly 30x60's, plus a few 30x45's, 30x30's, and 45x60's. We also have two 18x60 extenders which we bolt onto the sides of 30x60's to make 48x60 tables. Most of the tables have (...) (20 years ago, 12-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| (...) SCLTC builds its own tables from 0.240 inch thick melamine coated hardboard and uses 1.910 inch diameter black ABS pipe for the legs. Both materials are cheap and readily available. The drawback to the hardboard is that it is not waterproof, (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| (...) The NBLTC has adopted a modular approach using 80 studs wide x 160 studs long standard table (module) size. This works for us but the overall design allows for a multitude of arrangements and optional sizes within the modular concept. (...) (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| Here is what NELUG uses. Most of our tables are 40.25" x 40.25" or 4x4 32x32 baseplates. The extra .25" is to account for the fact that the baseplates are not exactly 10" square but ever so slightly larger. We also use some 40.25" x 20.125". Finally (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| The GMLTC uses 40"x60" plywood tables with custom-built aluminum frames underneath and heavy-duty folding legs. Some pros and cons: - Pro: Plenty of room! After we trashed our last layout, we consciously decided to build "larger" this time: 8-wide (...) (20 years ago, 14-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | Re: Discussion of Train Table Sizes
|
| (...) I sub-contracted this to a model railway board builder. The boards I have ATM cost £26.80 each plus £9.90 per double leg, and I have 20 of each. This came to £742, a considerable investment! Add to this sneeze guards made from 14 pieces of (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
35 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
