Scaling in Four (or More) Dimensions

[ChrisGreaves]

Well, why not?

Length, Height, Width, man-hours, weight, dollar cost. There are six dimensions for starters.

I have visited the Kinzua dam and Kinzua Viaduct three times at least, once before the 2003 collapse, and twice after, but before the restoration. Kinzua Viaduct 1.0 was built in 1882 in 100 days. Version 2.0 was built in 1900, again, in a hundred days. Version 2.0 blew down as a wind-storm funneled down the valley back in 2003 while restoration was in progress. Bit of a set-back, you ask me. My understanding is that 3.0 is now open to visitors, but sadly for me, Kinzua is no longer a day-trip from home.
By the way, Kinzua is pronounced “Kin-Zoo”, and if you say “Kin-Zoo-ah”, you’ll be labeled as a tourist, even if you are not wearing your polyester slacks and Hawaiian-theme shirt.

Kinzua viaduct is but 2h30m drive from the huge layout in Medina NY.

So why aren’t I building a scale model of the Kinzua Viaduct in 1/72 scale?

Because a 1/72 scale model would be four feet tall and twenty-eight feet long, which would suit an club exhibition with four-foot high layouts and a few tons of fake trees, but not a 1955 bungalow whose largest room is the 20’x16’ shed out in the back yard.

You can read the details here, but I thought to throw out a few questions for general discussion on scaling:-

(1) Why not build the model in 1/144 or 1/288 scale but keep the third dimension (roadbed) 1/72 of the twenty-foot width?

(2) Why not reduce the number of struts using, say, five shorter struts from each end to span a valley rather than a gorge?

(3) It might be interesting to set oneself the challenge of completing the erection in 1/72 the man-hours for the original two projects. (Completion in 1/72 the time of the third project would be a shoe-in with union rules, tea-breaks, medical leave etc.)

(4) It might be interesting to set oneself the challenge of completing the erection in 1/72 the dollar cost for either of the original two projects. (Somebody work out 1/72 of $6,251,000, please)

(5) It might be interesting to set oneself the challenge of completing the erection in 1/72 the weight of materials, where the relative density of steel versus balsa wood is factored in as well as the 1/72 scale of the original weight.

(6) Version 2.0 was what I think is called Latticed Girders of steel. Version 3.0 appears to be simpler material – square tubing, almost. Take your pick.

(7) Comments and Corrections welcome!

I'm sorry to have ruined your day (evil grin)
Chris

[Bufferstop]

There's a model of Brunel's Tamar Bridge, sort of in TT3 scale, 3mm/ft, actually it's in the architectural model scale of 1/100th. It's toured the country going on display in places like The London Design Centre, the Swindon "STEAM" museum, the NRM at York and Shildon; as it includes the approach viaducts they are the only places that it can be fully assembled.
True scale is often not the best way to represent something, and often is impractical to achieve, the hardest dimension to get right is often the thickness of panels leading to passenger stock with window reveals that would do justice to a 1930 semi-detached house.

[Bigmet]

...(4) It might be interesting to set oneself the challenge of completing the erection in 1/72 the dollar cost for either of the original two projects. (Somebody work out 1/72 of $6,251,000, please)...Chris

Nah, inappropriate calculation.

Divide the cost by the cube of 72, as all the materials are 3D solids in order to have another crucial dimension, that of mass: and the materials cost, power, transport/handling and much of the construction costs, will all be in fairly direct proportions to mass. So that's roughly $17 to get your 1/72 structure constructed. I feel you will need to make an adjustment for fiscal inflation between original build date and present. There's also the little matter of the original builders not having to first construct the correctly terraformed real estate the model will require to stand upon...

Didn't think to ask about the estimated cost of the T gauge (1/450) model of the Forth Bridge, exhibited a few years ago at the Chiltern Model Railway Exhibition: bridge itself near 20 feet long, overall layout length 25 feet.

[glencairn]

I think (in the main) that whilst a modeller will ensure a locomotive, coach , wagon, railway building etc. is 'true to scale' the scenery is a 'representation' of the real thing, because they do not have the room.
Therefore a platform is not as long as the real one. A bridge or viaduct becomes shorter.

I saw a model of Durham Station. A lovely model. One new it was Durham. The viaduct was there; as was the Cathedral. The shops etc. all in the correct place. A lovely model as I say.
The Cathedral was small. Only a few arches of the viaduct. The shops were a smaller scale. Most of the things were of the wrong scale, yet cleverly done so it was a model of Durham.

If modelling 00 gauge and put an 'N' gauge model at the front it most probably look rediculous. Put the same building at the rear (done correctly) it is not.

As for building a dam or viaduct (whatever) they can be scaled down and look right , so long as things around it are correct. So anyone looking at it knows it is Kinzua Dam or Viaduct.

I leave you with the challenge.

Glencairn

[Bufferstop]

There's a layout that's appeared at the NEC a couple of times, it's Bath Green Park and the first mile of the S&D route. It's just over 60 feet long, wherever they put it ends up blocking one of the crossways circulation spaces.

[Bigmet]

... wherever they put it ends up blocking one of the crossways circulation spaces.

But it is so worth it! The end on view from the concourse looking along the line is exceptional, and - strangely in my opinion - more accessible than the seven deep side on viewing scrummage.

[Bufferstop]

Looking lengthways down the platforms is more like the way we often see the real thing> There's a similar view on Warwick and Leamington's "Addison Road" layout where you can look in through the Victorian booking hall and to the tracks beyond.

[ChrisGreaves]

Well, why not?

I apologize for the delay in responding. I am blessed with an over-abundance of distractions here in Bonavista, one of which is my friend's dog "Fergus", a wily Sheltie!

Postby Bufferstop » Tue Mar 30, 2021 11:10 am

True scale is often not the best way to represent something, and often is impractical to achieve, ...

I agree. As we have already read, I erred in many of my calculations and am in the process of making adjustments. The one thing I think I got right was that the horizontal component (“the bridge deck”?) should remain wide enough for whatever scale trains were to pass.

Postby Bigmet » Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:54 pm

Nah, inappropriate calculation. Divide the cost by the cube of 72, as all the materials are 3D solids in order to have another crucial dimension, that of mass: and the materials cost, power, transport/handling and much of the construction costs, will all be in fairly direct proportions to mass. So that's roughly $17 to get your 1/72 structure constructed.

$1 scale cost $2
9 scale lbs steel 9
I made adjustments to my spreadsheet and have attached the updated copy.

I am puzzled by your scaled down costs (1/72)^3 because mine now come out to One dollar and Two dollars respectively.

I feel you will need to make an adjustment for fiscal inflation between original build date and present. There's also the little matter of the original builders not having to first construct the correctly terraformed real estate the model will require to stand upon...

I used both the 1900s figures and, where stated, the later figures adjusted for inflation. However I did not specify to what date the figures were adjusted. See for example cells B36 and E36 in the attached sheet.

Postby glencairn » Tue Mar 30, 2021 1:09 pm

I think (in the main) that whilst a modeler will ensure a locomotive, coach , wagon, railway building etc. is 'true to scale' the scenery is a 'representation' of the real thing, because they do not have the room.

Agreed, if only because of the truncated warehouses that appear glued to backdrops!

I love the Kinzua area, and when I get around to bashing holes in my walls and running a continuous loop (I hope) through four rooms of the house, I rather fancy a removable Kinzua Viaduct across a doorway. That would make it a short bridge, exaggerated greatly in the vertical dimension; fewer struts, and so on.

Still and all I figured that a realistic model of my favorite bridge might be a good project for next year’s six-month-long winter. (In Bonavista even the seasons are out of scale!)

I leave you with the challenge.

Thanks a lot!, Pal! (grin)

Unread postby Bufferstop » Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:05 pm

There's a layout that's appeared at the NEC a couple of times, it's Bath Green Park and the first mile of the S&D route. It's just over 60 feet long, wherever they put it ends up blocking one of the crossways circulation spaces.

I believe that only in seriously long halls can we get a feeling of a true simulation.

At the Medina layout, way down the other end of the hall, a wobbly little light appears and then resolves itself into a diesel locomotive headlight. A few seconds later the diesel locomotive can be seen, and a vision of a long train of freight wagons. The thing crawls towards me at scale speed, seems to take forever, and I begin counting wagons, as we do at a level crossing, and grow tired around about 65, wishing the darned thing would hurry up. Then the caboose is alongside of me (for we are still in North America!), and I realize that the diesel locomotive is almost indistinguishable in the distance at the other side of me. This brings on a wonderful feeling of realism, much more so than my old Triang Pacific and five blood-and-custards rocketing around my 16’x11’ ovals!

Unread postby Bigmet » Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:28 am

... But it is so worth it! The end on view from the concourse looking along the line is exceptional, and - strangely in my opinion - more accessible than the seven deep side on viewing scrummage.

Absolutely. My only experience with long models is the Medina, and on my three visits I have always had the feeling that the layout is MINE!
Further, display cases are along all four walls, so if you want to inspect a particular model cow, while you are waiting you can rotate 180° and check out the several cases of fire trucks or whatever.

Thanks to all who responded. I shall now return to cogination-mode.
Chris

[Bigmet]

[
...I am puzzled by your scaled down costs (1/72)^3 because mine now come out to One dollar and Two dollars respectively...

Nothing to worry about. In accordance with the doctrinal position of modern maths, so long as the principles on which the calculation is based are correct, the actual result (which is mere mechanical arithmetic) doesn't matter... (I spent altogether too much time in my youth listening to the wonderful Tom Lehrer.)

[Bufferstop]

I spent altogether too much time in my youth listening to the wonderful Tom Lehrer.)

Pity any pigeons who perch on your line's telegraph wires then, or are they safe away from the park?

A track from an evening wasted with...........

[ChrisGreaves]

I spent altogether too much time in my youth listening to the wonderful Tom Lehrer.)

Pity any pigeons who perch on your line's telegraph wires then, or are they safe away from the park?

Couldn't be done with scaling, even at a reduced voltage of 1.666' (North America) or 3.333' (Australia) because for the 3D printer chaps, replacing "poisoning" with "electrocuting" just wouldn't scan. (ouch)
(signed) "Lehrer fan since 1960"

[Bigmet]

...Pity any pigeons who perch on your line's telegraph wires then, or are they safe away from the park?...

Funny you should mention that. On moving to the present home, my first thoughts model railway were to resume the experiment of OO outdoors, which had been great fun at the previous location. But unlike our previous garden which was resolutely a town garden, with other gardens making up its boundaries, the boundary of this garden is ancient woodland.

This turned out to contain wildlife with no conception of the required civilised behavioural standards a model railway demands. The definitely identified offenders were squirrels and assorted Corvids, respectively chewing the sleeper base and simply ripping out the rails. (The experiment was over before the badgers turned up and overnight made a speedway style dirt track where part of the track base had been.)

But of late the thought has returned, with the added refinement of an electric control fence system; connected to the track and exposed bus wires whenever left out of operation. What's more I can make it scan:

"All the world seems in tune
Morning and afternoon,
When electroshocking wildlife in the yard.
Upon any day you'll see
My sweetheart and me,
Electroshock the wildlife in the yard."

Perhaps an enterprising DCC manufacturer could engineer an electric controi fence option into their system, that automatically switches to 'control fence mode' 30 seconds after no DCC decoder is detected on the exposed track section that requires protection? (I envisage under cover storage for the trains, DCC only.) Manual selection of DCC for operation shuts down the control fence mode, restores normal DCC.

So, DCC/ECF, who's up for it?

[ChrisGreaves]

Perhaps an enterprising DCC manufacturer could engineer an electric controi fence option into their system, that automatically switches to 'control fence mode' ...

Get with the program, Bigmetrognome!

We are talking DIGITAL CC here, are we not?

DCC controls the tension in each segment wire of the electric fence (say, six strings between each paling/fret), and as the train passes it sets the tuned strings of each segment a-vibrating to provide a mix of aeolian and guitar/banjo accompaniment as it goes to the end of the line. ...

You're welcome!