5-10 cm is not 1-2 foot

1-2 foot is roughly 30-60cm

That's the plan

For quite some time now, my plan has been to build my home layout as modules so if I ever move or just want to give the layout away, it will be easy to do.  But the ability to take a module away and work on it outside for painting or in the garage so I don't have to climb under it to do wiring is just icing on the cake.

I think modules would be

I think modules would be easier for a flat "domino" style layout, but would be trickier to do if you plan on doing a an open grid/L-girder layout with terrain. There would be some additional cost in having to build some self-supporting framework to hold the individual modules together to one day have them removable. Also, wiring for module construction can be a time and cost increase, as you need to carefully plan and add connectors or screw strip connectors at each module joint. Not impossible, but it will add to the initial cost over continuous benchwork. 

add connectors or screw strip connectors at each module joint.

If one is building a layout for a possible move the wiring can just be run with some extra left at each module joint then if the move happens the wires can be cut and spliced back together at the new house. Same thing for track, just run it across the module joints and cut it if the move happens(plan the turnouts to not fall on a module joint) Adding a dremel disc thick shim between the modules when initially bolting them together gives enough sacrificial rail to let everything bolt back together tight when the shim is removed at the new place.....DaveB

Like to do more on sectional best practices

We so believe in the sectional layout approach that we'd like to develop the sectional layout best practices through forum discussions and in our pages.

Anyone who has ideas and experiences to that end, please contribute!

"Sectional best practises"

Dear Joe,

Suggest levering the experience of UK and Aussie exhibition modellers, who are doing exactly the kind of work you are thinking of and have been for many decades now...
(the only difference between a sectional show layout and a sectional home layout is the location the layout is currently setup in...)

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

difference between a sectional show layout and a sectional home

 I think the main difference is the home layout might move once or twice or maybe never so the ease of moving it is way less important than for a show layout. A sectional home layout just needs to be built with benchwork that can be unbolted without destroying it and that can be moved by a couple of people and fit thru the doors when it leaves and enters.Unless one knows they'll be moving many times it's a waste of time to make the layout show level portable. One might not even want to make legs for a move-able home layout and just set it on shelf brackets screwed to the wall for instance. My inclination is to make the layout from sectional  design elements that can be saved and connect them with lesser developed chainsaw connectors. That way a whole layout doesn't have to be designed as  a one configuration layout, this would give greater flexibility for fitting the parts into a new space.....DaveB

OK

That assumes building this way takes a lot more time. I'm guessing there may be ways to build these sectional modules so they work for either purpose. If that's true, then there's little time wasting involved.

I know, Prof, we've kicked this around before. Where is this great body of insight and how can we access it? Is it a few URLs or is it bits and pieces all over (including oral tradition and methods in people's heads) that have yet to be compiled into the one definitive work on the subject?

so they work for either purpose.

 If the home layout will never be used as a show layout then building it that way takes more time, materials cost, and  design compromise. A dual purpose item is rarely best for one of the purposes.  If you never display it then there's no need to make complicated bolt on or folding legs, just set it on shelf brackets , book cases, or cobble up some simple lumber legs, no need to spend time and money on wiring dis-connects when a simple loop of extra wire added at the section joints can be cut and put back together if one ever moves, and no reason to make the sections light or narrow if they will only be moved once or twice and you got movers there to move all the furniture anyway. Just make the sections fit thru the doors and frame them rigidly enough  that they don't damage all their scenery when they are being moved. Probably the most important thing is plan the section joints so there are no turnouts, buildings, or detailed scenic features on the section joint, one doesn't want to have to chisel buildings or turnouts  off the layout then try to put them back when the layout is re-assembled, at some point it become easier to just trash it and start a new one when you get to the new place. ...DaveB 

No argument that it takes more planning

No argument that going sectional takes more planning, but the rest of your list is less clear cut. Because of the manageability benefits during construction, I would expect a more enjoyable construction experience over all, and I would expect a much more manageable scope - building as you go rather than building-in-the-large only to find out later you made it too large.

Sometimes total cost is less of a factor - think of buying a house on time. Yes, it costs more, but it's also way more manageable in the budget to take it in bite-sized chunks rather than trying to swallow the entire cost up front. Same  story here. Would you rather spend $4000 to fill a room full of benchwork, then $5000 on trackwork, then $6000 on wiring/DCC, etc .... or spend $1000 now on a module that's essentially complete, down to the last wire, piece of track, ballast and scenery detail?

Yes, it will probably cost more doing it this way, but it was a lot easier to swallow, and a lot more fun along the way.

I would bet the amount of wasted resources on plywood pacifics that later get torn out is huge. If "wasted effort" involves a more realistic way to manage scope, then the extra planning needed to go with sectional modules could pay you back over and over as to layout you never needed to build and then later abandon.

There seems to be an overall theme...

On trainmasters.tv the act about tearing out a permanent layout is a rather sobering thought. What happens to the layout once it becomes a liability vs. an asset? It's a hard pill to swallow and a harsh reality to face. Many don't want to think about what happens to the layout either when a move becomes necessary or when life happens.

This thread seems to reinforce the premise, "spend the money now to invest in a transportation solution or the layout goes into the trash"

Over the lifespan of a layout, by considering transportation and an exit strategy will secure your investment in time and money into a home layout. Otherwise what is built and invested will all be lost if the outcome of the home layout is the dumpster.

Chris Palomarez

Modules.

    There is a huge difference between a clubs portable module layout over a home modular railroad. A club would have standards for height, width, depth, track spacing, 2 or 3 main tracks, wiring, and electrical connectors. A home modular railroad has no standards except what the builder decides. A home module does not have to be 2 foot wide increments. You can build one as wide as you like, as high as you like and do not have to conform to track spacing standards.

   My seven portable modules are all retired now and soon to be incorporated in a home layout. They all still conform to the clubs standards except for height.

             Pete

Depends

The former.

I assume the numbers are off the top of your head. $5,000 worth of track work fits on $1,000 worth of benchwork. Those numbers are spot on for my 900 sq ft layout.

As with so many things, the answer depends upon the person making the decision. If you have a need for instantaneous gratification then perhaps the $1,000 module at a time is for you. If, on the other hand, you can be satisfied by simply seeing progress being made then building complete sections at a time is a less efficient and more costly means to an end.

I agree with the premise of the article for a free-standing layout. For an around the walls layout it is highly unlikely the new location will have dimensions similar enough to allow the layout to be reassembled as before. The chopping and adapting to make fit will create a mess of the layout. Better just to strip it bare, salvage what you can, and build benchwork anew.

Hobbies, especially model trains, are a spend without financial return just as with any entertainment venue. If you can't afford to lose your investment then you should question your decision to spend in the first place.

building as you go rather than building-in-the-large

I think there's two basically different themes here. One is build every layout in sections so it's moveable if ever needed. In this scenario the design is complete and the builder is ready to go on the whole thing.In that case I'd build all the benchwork ,run a buss wire around with extra wire at the section joints then lay enough track to run trains, maybe a mainline around the room and a yard then go back and finish each section in what ever order the builder wants. If a move happens the whole thing can be dis-assembled and re-built in what ever configuration the new place can accept. If some of the bare benchwork won't fit it can be re-built to a different size. The second scenario is a guy who has a large space but is not sure what he wants or thinks he might move sooner than later. In that case I'd build a staging yard and then start building single modules till I moved or till I got to the end of the line. Each section would take a bit longer this way but the tasks would be more spread out without the initial benchwork design and construction. Looking at these two scenarios  think the decision would come down to how long does one expect to remain at the house and how soon does one want to be able to operate over the completed track plan? ....DaveB 

"Removable" ...

... is a worthy goal.  It is always a bit sad to read about someone's model railroad being destroyed either because plans changed; location changed; or other reasons.  Often you read where someone tried to salvage sections of it; but in the end, it just was not doable.

If a model railroad is designed to be moved, then it can be easily removed as well.  If the layout is comprised of moveable sections, then one could literally redesign the entire layout one or two sections at at time; keeping the rest 'operational' ...

Yes, it takes some planning up front, but should the need ever arise (and lets face it, EVERY model railroad will get removed at some point ... nothing lasts forever); having something that can be easily removed will be a blessing when the time comes to move on.

DaveB's point about the LDE's connected by 'chainsaw' sections designed to fit the (current) space is something that I've been toying around with for a very long time now.  If you are going to put a great deal of time into scenicking and detailing a model railroad; knowing that you can move it and use it again somewhere else would be comforting I'd think.

Many, many years ago, I had come across a pretty neat idea for bench work.  It was comprised of simple triangles (all identical) made of thin plywood that could be joined in several different ways to form shelves and corners.  I'd always thought that would be a simple way to make the bench work for the sections ... and then simple bridge pieces (DaveB's 'chainsaw' sections) could be constructed to join the individual sections in whatever configuration happened to fit the available space.  These sections could rest on shelf brackets attached to the wall, or L-girders with legs, or any other suitable surface ... they would not need legs of their own.

Revovable is a worthy goal.

  Yeah ,it's nice to save the work and either move it or sell or give it away instead of tearing it apart and putting it in the trash. I'm trying to figure out now how to build the CCT loco shop/team yard benchwork so it can be saved but it looks like it might be too odd shaped. Anyone with ideas how to section it into save-able parts?  The rough plan is in the Central California Traction  thread , look for the larger scale drawing with the curve going into the wall, the drawing is on 1/4 inch graph paper so each square is 3 inches, the yard section is 24 inches wide.....DaveB

I have my own standard that I

I have my own standard that I am conforming to, it is loosely based on Free-mo but in metric dimensions. My prototype that I am modelling is fairly flat so I have that as an advantage. My idea is to have modules that can be both used as a home layout with the ability to be removed and used at shows when needed and if I do relocate I can box my layout and ship it (my wife may have a fit when she sees what will have to be moved!). Free-mo is flexible when you read into it...

"By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail."

Building in pieces

In my case, I am going to be building in pieces--starting with a shelf switcher, so I can start running trains.  Once that's up and running, more will get added, but nothing huge.  I plan to be certain that the switching section is movable when the time comes, and each other piece as well.  Sooner or later, I WILL be moving..

Home Layout Module Construction

Now that we are in what we see as our final home, I have been following this thread with interest. Our last layout was built in place as a double decker and when it came time to move, all we could really salvage was the top deck. Although we don't forsee a move, there is always the possibility that we could down size the layout as we get older. To that end, we are constructing our new layout with built in cut points. Where the sections come together, there is a built in gap to allow the use of a saw for seperation. In the mountain areas, there are double risers of hard board which will support the scenery when taken apart. Yes, you do have to do a bit more planning for turnout placement and such, but in the event we need to dismantle the layout, we can do so and this allows us to sell it to recoup our investment and apply it to a new, smaller layout. The good of this is that someone can benefit frm all your hard work and you know the layout will get a second lease on life. Being retired, every penny counts ad I will not g through the wasteful disposal route again. Something to think about.

Re: Build a home layout as modules

I understand the concept that you are trying to promote but I also see a major flaw in the argument.  If you are going to build a large layout using this method it will contain ugly separation lines between modules which will detract from the layouts overall effect.

Unless somebody comes up with a good visual way to hide these separation lines I do not believe people will like the concept.  Another approach could be to build the modules but not scenic near the edges of the modules until they are joined together so that your scenery flows visually.

As they say just my 2 cents worth.

build the modules but not scenic near the edges

    I think that's how one would have to do it if the modules were built separately and then joined. Some planning could make the end scenery easier to blend to the next section, maybe add a fence along the joint or a tree line or a new sidewalk, etc. There are transitions in the real world where old and new construction join so it wouldn't look wrong if built right :> ) .....DaveB

Comment to Sectionals Discussion

An interesting thread to be sure, especially since I designed my layout to be sectional. My switching layout was designed as I was starting to teardown an existing layout and wanted to save certain elements of it. As I looked at it, I figured there had to be a better way and not lose previous work.  I was lucky enough to come across the FreeMo concept and incorporate it into the new layout.

I found it amusing to read the various discussions about whether it is practical based on moving a few times vs. ever.  If you like your layout and even think you'll move just once, it's worth it in my opinion, since you don't have the huge time curve involved in planning and re-building a layout. Now maybe you want to build a whole new layout after tearing one out. That's fine. But for me the decision was an easy one. Build the layout the way I want but just make the frame a modular one.  When you really look at it, when you build an L-girder construction, you're essentially building 8-foot long sections but just have some sort of seamless attachment as the layout progresses. You probably can hide the scenery changes better, as that is one of my disappointments with the modular approach, but I've learned to plan my scenes so that buildings or a line a trees hides the seem.  

Let me say that my track plan was designed regardless of thought as to how it was going to be built. I chose modules simply based on the ease of moving the layout.  When I discovered Freemo, I opted to build modules to that standard with the hopes of joining a local group. When the Freemo group I joined fell apart several years later, I had no regrets as I still had my modules that never left the house as well as those that had.  The layout was operational.  As to cost, I don't think that I really spent a lot more money building it in sections than if I had not.  I used foam with some wooden supports beneath it to add stability for my construction. So no costs for homasote or some other layer at the top surface. The only additional cost I have is for electrical connectors between the modules.  However, the advantage is that I wired my layout while the modules were in my garage, not lying flat on my back trying to wire a large length of the layout.  Part of my backdrop is also mobile, although it's not a huge backdrop.  It allowed me to build the backdrop on my workbench, rather than reaching over the layout.  As for the time, I could get a 4x8 ft section of dimensional plywood, rip it into lengths and assemble 3-4 modules at a time. I easily built most of my modules over a weekends time. My limiting factor was not enough clamps to keep the modules glued together. If I was to start a new layout that was not-sectional, I think I would try to use some of the practices I learned such as building the framework and wiring it on the floor and then simply flipping it up and into place.  Just my two cents worth.    

T-Trak Modular Layouts

Here ya go.

http://www.t-trak.org/index.html

Bernd

Talking sectional layouts not modular

Actually, I'm thinking sectional layouts or perhaps FREMO, not traditional race-track modular standards. I'm looking for better ways to do home layouts.