Dear Lew,

OK, so we have plenty of examples of "lightweight" modules, articles, and anedotal evidence. Indeed, the Micro and Exhibition layout worlds have plenty of module design wisdom which could help other layout builders.

However, I rarely see actual hard data on the structural capability and gross weight of said module designs.

Here's something to start the party...
At the core of my "Brooklyn ; 3AM" layout
 http://www.carendt.com/scrapbook/page87/index.html

is an all-foamcore procenium module,
(IE with fully integrated lighting pelmet/ceiling/lighting rig/viewblock/backdrop)
with dimensions 600mm x 1200mm x 600mm tall.

Base module + lighting rig = 3 kilos (6.6 pounds) gross

To allow permanent attaching of dropleave staging, and make the assembly a bit more "road ready", the foamcore module has a aluminium exo-skeleton, side and end facia plates, and is carpet covered. This is on top of the weight of the structures, track, trains, and scenery.

Completed layout = 12 kilos (26.5 pounds) gross

Given that local WorkCover/OSHA laws state 20 kilos (44 pound) as the max lift for a single healthy male, "Brooklyn" is well within "single man setup" range. :-)

As far as "support for the trains", 3 layers of 5mm foamcore correctly laminated together will support 2 kilos (4.4 pounds) over a 400mm (16" ) span, with <zero> deflection under laser alignment testing. 2 kilos was a "benchmark" based on the know weight of O scale SG equipment. For HO-thru-On30, 2 thicknesses of foamcore is plenty, and N scale can get away with 1 thickness (assuming the underlying module structure is correctly designed and braced).

I'd be intrigued to see some other module designs put their stats on the table... :-)

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

PS : the cost for the above "all-foamcore" module? Under AUD$60! :-)

One thing to keep in mind in the quest for "lightness" is that a standalone small layout section can be significantly less strong than a module that is intended to be combined with others in a large layout. Sometimes there is a need to shift a long line of interconnected modules to align them with others. Those stresses at the endplate and along the rails of the modules are substantial and can argue for a more robust construction method -- at the cost of some weight.

The module club I belong to here in SoCal needs to shift a long line of modules at almost every set up.

Hi all, I am an old 'N' scale modeller  in Adelaide Sth Australia for the last 30 years, as a member of S.A.N.G.S. and the Club has been through the mill in building modules for exhibition and the fixing methods used for module alignment and track connection. I was interested in the end board method of connection in Figure 8 and would like to add my comments about this.

Firstly the board ends appear too deep on your modules and not being necessary; the widest framing we have used is 4" (100mm) deep, which allows for minimum weight and strength. The pin idea is OK but over time the holes wear and get sloppy. We got over that problem by screwing 2" aluminium right angle pieces under the end piece on one end only, which made for quick and easy connecting to align either (your) pins or (our) bolts; also negating the use of legs under the joining module, so only two legs per module are needed. So it is chain gang to erect long layouts each one on the end of the next, very fast, no need to hold it up while aligning.

Regarding rail connectors, we have tried them all, and finally reaching the verdict that with the above accurate end bolting, end butting of track using either (a) sliced (between tracks) circuit board pieces and soldered, or (b) Atlas set track rerailers joined across the boards and cut, or (c) placing set length track pieces inserted after assembly (the worst idea). I have found the Atlas idea the best but one cannot hide them other than painting.

Just a couple of thoughts for to pass o n

Regards

Graham.

PS I have now gone HO, and into permanent layouts.