I feel for ya Greg. Last

I feel for ya Greg.

Last spring I had to take apart two modules and it was hard on my body not to mention loading and unloading it into a truck and storage so I can only imagine what you are going through.

https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/39987?page=1

Keep us posted.

Cheers,

Deem

My layout: https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/31151?page=32

TOMA versus "could be cut apart"

Save what you can

Greg,

It's a difficult and complex thing to tear something like a layout apart.  A couple years ago I had to demolish a trailer that was built from the frame up.  It was actually harder tearing the thing apart than it was to build.  Never saw that coming!  But in the end my mother had a water trailer and the time spent tearing my creation apart saved her thousands of dollars that she would have had to spend drilling a well at her homestead.

My point being, you'll just have to save as much as you reasonably can, and accept the loss of whatever gets damaged.  You've got the chance to build something new and learn from the experience.  Starting from the ground up next time, you'll have an even better layout to enjoy.

How to pull TOMA apart once up and running?

Joe F, I have a question.  Once the modules are built and running, how do you pull them out?  Reason I'm asking is that my previous layout was sectional just for that reason.  But in practice it was excessively difficult to break it apart to swing upward, or pull outward.  The modules (sections) were quite tight to each other preventing this.  My intention was to do all the underside work with the section up on edge and me on a stool not breaking my back.  Famous last words.

My modules were bolted to each other  for stability.  Also screwed to an underframe sort of like L-girders.  All to keep things flat and in alignment with any seasonal changes in the wood.  Should they not be fastened to each other?  Yes, I did take the bolts out first !     My wiring was captive to each section with terminal blocks.  Track was cut at each section joint during track laying.  I figured scenery would commence after all electrical work was done underneath.

But it was not possible to lift sections for the intended tasks.  Instead I made a riser on a creeper to help with the underside work.

The new layout, in a new house (ie: new basement....) is awaiting completion of basement "finishing".  I have time to figure out the details in preparation of putting my sections back together and beginning my fun time building the new railroad.  Thoughts on this are appreciated.

"Thoughts on this are appreciated."

  Hi Kevin,  On my current layout I ran the bus wires under the front part of the benchwork ,hanging them on plastic hooks( actually plastic pex pipe clamps that I had laying around). I can pop the bus off the hooks and pull it down enough to connect feeders while sitting in the aisle. This has worked quite well and I rarely need to get under the layout. I think pulling layout section out and working on it at the bench is one of those things that sound better than they work and I expect most folks eventually give up on the idea and just leave the sections in place. The only place it seems like it might work is for layouts that are not hemmed in  by walls so the sections could slide apart anywhere along the chain. You still have the problem of redoing the section joint scenery every time you removed one so that might take up more time and effort than just leaving them connected and working on them as a unit.You'd also need a lot more legs on a layout that comes apart as every area would need individual support instead of the longer spans integrated design can allow........DaveB

The problem with re-using a

The problem with re-using a layout (assuming it was built modular) is it would unlikely be ideal for a new space, even if the space is large enough to accomodate it.  My last home had a 10x18' basement room the layout was in.  I tore it down and saved most of the main componesnt, includeing basic benchwork frames, track, screws, nails etc.  I've reused a good deal of it on the new layout, including some of the open grid frames.

L-Shaped Central Midland

My first major layout was an estate acquisition that consisted the basic benchwork with sectional brass track that the widow sought to clean out of her basement. The interesting thing was that the original builder anticipated eventually moving it,..so he built in basically 3 sections.

But as I discovered he must have been a puzzle fan. The interlocking of those 3 sections was not readily apparent,...and I've always thought I was good at puzzles .

I ended up getting it apart and moving it to my house. But my house was an old style rented one, and I knew I would be moved again. So I did my best to maintain the 3-section layout. Eventually i did have to extract that layout from the small basement doorway to place it into a box van I had purchased to either move it to a new location, or sell it and move on.

Here are a few photos of the disassembled layout setting in the driveway and susequently into the box van.

https://forum.mrhmag.com/post/the-central-midland-layout-by-john-armstrong-atlas-plan-29-12207702

https://forum.mrhmag.com/post/the-central-midland-layout-by-john-armstrong-atlas-plan-29-12207702

This experience, along with some others involving moving/estate sales of layouts was instrumental in my selecting to build my new layout in a stand-alone shed of its own.

Re: moving

Greg,

I've have a blog on my layout 'Ontario South Central' about not only setting it up where it sets up into a living area here in Toronto, in a Condo satisfying the (then) missus. I have since moved my TOMA style layout as Joe suggests, to 4 different locations! It was built to be moved. But with new living spaces there's an add or subtract to the initial plan. And unfortuately there's damage in my bad of not moving the layout sections properIy. But the new planning, I find exciting. For instance, where I live now, my layout can accomodate scenic possibilities and new modeling challenges or ventures I haven't persued before! I never was a fan of the NMRA module standards at Model railroad shows. One scene not matching the other. But as Joe suggests, the TOMA is a better option. 

Don't think about tearing down. Think about what you are going to build! It was a sad day when Allen McClelland had to tear down the Virginia and Ohio but parts of the railroad retained by his friends. 

Sounds like you've got a bigger space. For me planning is half of the hobby (whether it works out or not So move forward. It will hurt tearing down the layout you've been used to, that you built and satisfied with but you'll have a new one. New ideas. New techniques. 

I look forward to your progress. 

All the best,

Brad

TOMA vs Sectional

For a layout that could be moved in the future, sectional is certainly the way to go.  You can build a sectional layout (as people have been doing for the last half a century or more) without it being a "TOMA".  TOMA implies a bunch of other stuff which may or may not be applicable (order of construction, being able to remove a section from the completed layout, yadda, yadda).

If you go sectional, keeping the sections a consistent length and/or width helps stack them for moving.  Sections 6 ft or less in length and less than 30" wide are much easier to work through doorways, up stairs and around corners.

Thanks

Thanks for the comments and support. Reminds me that in any war, the first casualty is always the plan.

I am considering TOMA and other modular approaches -- will be thinking about that after the move is done.

Meanwhile, one item I discovered is the plastic cable raceway made by Panduct for network cabling in a variety of sizes. Have been using a 1.5" square duct for my servers -- one for network cabling and a separate one for power cords. Provides the illusion of neatness anyhow. Going to be using that under the modules to manage the plumbing. Cable ties and plastic sleeves only look neat... but what a mess.

greg

Reminds me of my own experience.

Reminds me of my own experience.  I designed the layout to be taken apart and indeed, it came apart quite easily.

Even still, I ran into issues with destroying scenery, bending trackwork, etc.  There was also another unforeseen problem:  The new location I was bringing the layout to was completely wrong for how I had designed it. Ultimately it was better for me to re-design, re-build everything rather than try to shoehorn in a design that took my current modules into consideration. I wrote more about the move on my blog. 

Better insights for TOMA methods

Sacrificial Modules

@Joe, Sacrificial Modules are an excellent idea.  I can see how something like that could really work when moving to new spaces.  It would take a little more planning and consideration, but that would help alleviate a lot of problems that come from trying to fit a track plan designed for one space into a completely different space.

So long as a modeler understands that they'll never be able to save it all. The goal would be to minimize waste, not avoid it all together.

 

Yep, plan for the waste up front

Yes, plan for the "waste" up front and then work to minimize it, and to maximize flexibility. All part of developing a new body of knowledge around the TOMA approach.

The re-use red herring

Hi all,

Looks like the re-use red-herring has surfaced again as a distraction against using a sectional/modular building plan for a home layout. I quote the key points from my previous response below 

In that post I even quoted an example of the modification and reuse of one of the modules as the layout grew. 

Andrew Martin subsequently chipped in elsewhere that his modules have been repurposed several times over  a period of 10 years+. 

Module reuse can be done, but only if the module/section owner is prepared to put the mental and physical effort in to make it happen - otherwise it's all "dumpster fodder" and back to the "bare floor" option,  

Concept

The other thing that has to survive the move is concept.  For example a move from 1952 to 1900 resulted in a complete redesign and only the benchwork frames survived.  A move to a new space meant the design could be done better.  Everything was redone.

On the other hand, the Rev. Doug Harding has relocated his layout numerous times with the same concept.  

Some people change concepts every couple of years and never change houses.

The reuse design only works if the modeler wants to reuse the modules/sections.  If concept, era, scale change significantly, the modules/sections, or at least everything above the framework, could end up being scrapped.

Modulair concept

Hi,

As an avid modular modeler (I only have modules and are member of Fremo) I’m only can support the remarks Joe made.

When building modulair (regardless if it is TOMA/Fremo/FreeMo) you have signature modules often also referred to as LDE (Logical Design Elements) and the modules needed to connect those LDE’s. Those intermittent modules are often relative plane and because of that easily discarded or otherwise exchanged.

That is also the big difference between segmental and modular layouts. Most modular layouts have defined endplates which makes them interchangeable. So a change of room means just get another modul which does fit your space.

In mine case, I just have a small switching module to play with between meetings. During the meetings we build big layouts, but that is beyond this topic.

Gino

Fremo US Netherlands

Not so much interested in moving, but in accessibility for wire.

Lots of good comments on the pros and cons of moving a layout.

However my outstanding questions is more along how to utilize the sectional feature for working on the underside while the section is either standing up on its back edge, or perhaps removed completely.

Arthritis is an issue for me, increasing with each year.  I know I could just run bus wiring really loosely at the front edge and just pull it down and out for attaching track feeders.  However, I'd still have to be reaching under to grab the feeder and snake it forward to make the attachment.  I really do not want to have so much wiring length after hearing all the DCC gurus advising about controlling overall wire length for each booster district.  Also long feeders means next larger gage wire, which is then tougher to hide when attaching to rail.  I expect to have 3 track busses and a 12-volt accessory bus along the whole layout.

 Installing turnout motors is still an "underneath" task.  

The itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny yellow polka-dot wires for track signal LED's still need underneath work to correctly draw together for correct wiring.

I have ideas and sketches to make a "lounge chair" to fit onto a creeper to help out underneath as I can't just sit on the floor and look upward, and it's too far to lay on the floor and reach upward.  

So far I haven't been successful in "unlocking" sections to be able to lift them upward and apart.

Maybe something really narrow as a "sacrificial" piece will do the trick.  Time to put the "little grey cells" to work.

Another concept

What I did on my layout was raise the layout above the "frame" or joists by about 8".   That let me sit on a chair in front of the layout and then reach and see into the layout under the roadbed, but above the frame/joists.  Don't have to crawl under the layout.  Don't have to remove layout sections.  Once I get it all wired up, then I can put on the fascia.

I use push rods in recessed pockets for switch control.  On the few times I've had to repair a switch linkage, I could unscrew the pocket, let it hang down and see in through the pocket hole in the fascia to work on the switch linkage.

Me Too!

Greg,

Last year I had to take down my layout as well.  It's not a fun chore, and rather heart wrenching to boot. 

The only things I saved was track, electronics, Super trees, buildings, major benchwork lumber, and of course engines and cars.  The rest just didn't seem worth it. 

I was rather bummed after it was all down and the railroad room was repainted and put back in "sellable" order.  What cured me of the sadness however, was starting work on the track plan for the next layout. Very quickly the past was forgotten, and the prospects for a bright future layout restored a smile.

Hope you will find the same as your plans for the new layout proceed!

Last year I had to take down

Hence the "moving experience" pun in the title.

I saved everything except the basic scenery.  I saved the basic benchwork frames, nearly all the wood, spike, track nails, screws, joiners, track etc.  I've re-used most of it on the layout being built during the past year in one form or another.  Three of the open grid sections have been used in their original form, the others were taken apart and the lumber re-used.

Here is my old layout being torn down summer 2017 in preparation for my "moving experience".

After the move:

Two of the old sections with Homasote tops going straight into the new layout after we spent nearly a year finishing the unfinished basement DIY and passed county inspection.

IMO, in most cases you wouldn't be able to or want to move the old layout and use it in a new space, because you can use the new space more effectively by designing a layout that will fit the space better.

x

Good with the bad

I am more of an advocate of “reusable benchwork” vs. a complete module.  

Modular design is “ok” but not perfect unless your new layout space is exactly the same as your old space.  When I moved, some of my benchwork was reusable without modification, but most had to be taken apart and cut to fit the new space.  “However, even with modifications, all the lumber framework was reused saving money”

Yeah, tearing down a layout is an emotional experience.  But, starting new gives you the opportunity to improve on what you learned.  
 

Joe

Toma, Toma, modular, not my taste for a movable layout

Most of the answers  are, start to rebuild using a Toma concept, use modular concept

Okkkkkk for a new layout but this didn't resolve the move of an old one.

I'm not a hard believer, of the only  Toma concept for move, or standard modular construction or assimilated;  I just say, try to build parts of the layout removable for a move.

A standard  format is not closed and not really necessary, he just help a bit but it's not an inviolable rule.

Last articles in MHR about Dick Ewells new layout is the proof of such possibility, even if Dick didn't design his layout for a move.

I don't like the idea to be enclosed in a format or  in any system like Toma or similar one.

My layout was and will be extended following my only taste and my  point of view about his conception.

But I will keep in mind to build it in parts which can be moved.

That's dad tell me nearly 50 years ago, because we begun together to build my actual layout.

Because he knows one day I would left the family house because of the way of life, he push the idea of possible salvaging parts of the layout during construction if a move was necessary.

I left the family house around 25, I was able  to take these saved parts of the layout and they moved with me.

I have rebuild or corrected some of these parts and upgraded scenery even track in some parts; most of the basic wood frame is still in use today, but  the most important for me, some parts which dad build with me are still alive today 50 years later.

During my way of life, I have build other parts of the layout but I have never followed a real standard module construction, but all the extension where build and designed   to be moved one day; the last upgrade about that was to bolt all the wood structures on metallic frames.

It's not finish; in 2018 because of opportunity and a real tired feeling about the way of live in Europe, I have had the chance to emigrate in Canada,  Quebec…..first with my lovely half, but .with my entire  layout including parts build  50 years ago with dad.

Some parts where roughly 8'x5' but other 5'X6' and a huge one of 12'x3'; no matter, they where bolted on a metallic frame, which where connected together to form the layout; I have just cut some scenery between these parts and electrical wires to move and transport the separated parts of the layout; I admit some where extremely heavy and need more than 4 persons to be moved, but this salvaged all the layout.

This is for me a extraordinary culmination to take it with me after nearly 50 years of start work on this project over the Atlantic…..probably the first American N scale layout build in Europe and seeing  the golden spike put in place on the American continent.!!

No broken  heart and no missing feeling about my layout and no lost of  all the pleasure it has give me during this big life period and most important the salvaged dad memories parts.

I think  one of my most appreciable achievement in my  life is to have had the chance to move and take alive this layout even if it was not  always a quiet river to keep him alive.

Thank You my lord to this idea of movable parts  you push me to use 50 years ago; I miss your vision ( He left us in 2000).

This is the most important part of the layout, which was first build 50 years ago; all the wood structural structure was erected with the help of dad 50 years ago; I have upgraded it during the 90's with new scenery materials ans model structures but also track by passing from Arnold and  Peco code 80 to code 55, this port area will be a very important spot on the new track plan.

This second picture show two models structures build by dad and the servicing track he put in place; this was around 1977, the structure is an early Pola model modified, I renamed for my daughter name later and the water tower is from Model power I believe; the caboose is an early Atlas one; it goes there because our cocker eat the frame…..track was laid by dad and this is  a modified early Arnold Rapido track; this is the only remaining part of track laid by dad on the layout and the only unmodified part since 50 years; this small area is like it was build by dad on the same place of the layout;  some other of his model structures are still on the layout.

For unknow reasons  is one of the part of the layout which I have the most pictured; so much memories !