Page 1 of 3

Greenhouse Sidings by Richard Andrews

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 8:16 pm
by Steve Bennett
I dont get the opportunity to do one of these threads very often, but it always raises a smile on my face when Richard sends me a bundle of photo's of his latest creation. Today was one of those days and my eyes lit up when these landed in my inbox.
There are rather a lot, so I hope nobody minds that I couldnt bring myself to cull the number of pics down :lol:
In Richards words "Layout is 24inches long and by 12 inches wide with small fiddleyards each end."
Brief and to the point, so I guess I had better let the pics fill the gaps :wink:



Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

I hope others enjoy them as much as I did, though the versions I have are a lot bigger and all the better to closely examine all the detail
:D

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 9:35 pm
by Blackcloud Railways
Wonderful mix of textures on the buildings, especially the brickwork which looks superb.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:09 am
by Steve Bennett
Blackcloud Railways wrote:Wonderful mix of textures on the buildings, especially the brickwork which looks superb.


Yes, I guess you could say that Richards hand carved brickwork is his way of putting his signature on his work :)

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:49 am
by DCRfan
Great modelling. Cat on a hot tin roof :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:45 pm
by Broadoak
I think the whole model is very good, like a well tended garden. 8)

Re: Greenhouse Sidings by Richard Andrews

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:32 pm
by chris stockdale
Steve Bennett wrote::
In Richards words "Layout is 24inches long and by 12 inches wide with small fiddleyards each end."


Hmm, so that's 48" x 24" in 1/12. Plus fiddle yards. These large scales just eat space.

Please tell Richard it's a delightful layout.

cheers,

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 3:19 pm
by Si
That's rather nice.
Wonder if you could ask the gardener chap what he feeds his strawberries with? :wink:

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 3:41 pm
by MrPlantpot
Si wrote:Wonder if you could ask the gardener chap what he feeds his strawberries with? :wink:


Looks like it says 'Marvel Grow' on the sacks, Si.

Steve, please pass on my admiration with the other's, cheers :D
One day, I might have a layout this nice.

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 3:50 pm
by Carlo
Nice, but I thought baby chicks are yellow.
Carlo

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 4:45 pm
by Gerry Bullock
Richard described the layout to me a few weeks back, I must say it's even better than his description, as one has come to expect from Richard. 8)
Welcome back to the Gnuthouse.

Nice, but I thought baby chicks are yellow.
Carlo


These aren't:
http://www.dreamstime.com/baby-chicks-h ... 904722.jpg

:wink:

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 3:28 am
by Simon Andrews
Very nice 8)

Simon.

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 12:18 pm
by Wesleyb
Thats some great work. Thanks for posting.

Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:32 pm
by Booga
Great stuff! Thanks for sharing.

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:31 pm
by Narrow gauge Nutter
Ditto, ditto, the brickwork is superb :!:

How is it done, with what?

Looking at the first 2 pics, shouldn't the brace on the gate go the other way? Open top corner to bottom hinge corner? Don't really know but it looks wrong to me :oops:

Hope Richard doesn't mind but I think I am going to steal the track design for my Apa :wink:

Great job, any more photo's :?:

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:35 pm
by tebee
Well I'll add my admiration for the brick work too - think the fence is superb too.

But I'll also agree the bar on the gate is the wrong way round - it should be in compression.

But just to find you an equally wrong prototype for this have a close look at these doors on the West Lancs light railway.

Image

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:17 am
by Gerry Bullock
Narrow gauge Nutter wrote:Ditto, ditto, the brickwork is superb :!:

How is it done, with what?



As Richard doesn't come by to often I'll answer that based upon his previous layouts.
It will be handcarved using an air drying clay applied to card.

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:22 am
by richard andrews
:oops: :oops: I think I got that one wrong :!: :evil: :evil: Will now have to sort that gate out :lol: :lol:
As Gerry said, I use DAS air drying clay put on to card or foamcore board and when dry I scribe it with a sharp pointed dental tool. A small screwdriver will also do the job.
I also brush the lines scribed using a small wire brush.
I am very pleased you like my latest project.
:lol: :lol:
Richard

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:12 am
by Larry
Narrow gauge Nutter wrote:
Looking at the first 2 pics, shouldn't the brace on the gate go the other way? Open top corner to bottom hinge corner? Don't really know but it looks wrong to me.


There are pretty good prototypes to allow Richard's method:
Image

Image

Great work

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:33 am
by rue_d_etropal
Larry, looking at those 2 gates, there are important differences , mainly that there is a smaller diagonal supporting the other longer diagonal. The gates are longer, so different stresses, hence the design. Almost some form of cantelever, with pivet point on the top of the smaller diagonal.
I think in that double gate, there is more in the symmetry of the design that engineering, as there would not be much weight on the smaller gate.

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:25 pm
by Larry
Simon,

I submit the small diagonal is a design artifice, mostly. It really isn't necessary at all, as this photo of the same gate by the manufacturer without the small diagonal shows. The diagonal is also, you will note, thinner material.

Image

That little diagonal is apparent mainly in British gates I see, and seems to be a design element no matter which Way the main diagonal goes. I rarely see it in the States. Some sort of Tudor echo, I surmise.

Here is what I consider an ill thought out (British) gate. The small diagonal seems merely added when the builder found the horizontals sagging. The verticals were added when the top horizontal bent. You can justify almost anything in modeling.

Image


But maybe you just aren't used to seeing the diagonal down, so I'll condition you to the idea:


Image

Image

Image

Image

A common retrofit here is an adjustable metal frame that is small diameter material, and then the only way to properly use it is with the diagonal extending downwards from the top hinge:

Image


It's not very elegant, but it is bombproof if a soft wood that doesnt hold fasteners well like cedar, redwood, or treated hemlock or fir is used. ( that gate appears to be Western red cedar with treated ponderosa pine horizontals - both very soft woods).


Or if the whole gate is small size material, it likewise is always in that orientation.

Image

The extreme example is if the diagonal is wire or metal strap, of course.

Image

This isn't to say that the diagonal isn't built as you submit, but I think that is mostly a design choice. The "A" look of a double gate is pleasing,  I will admit. 

When considering the stresses a gate is under, wood is quite strong enough in tension for the task, but perhaps I am being defensive, because given the choice, I preferred the "diagonal down" method when I built gates in my 40 years as a carpenter. The bolts of the top hinge can often also go through the diagonal for added strength (as Richard has modeled). So made, the stresses tend to close well made joints instead of pushing them apart. Then they don't sag over time, especially if softwoods are used, and need fewer fasteners at each intersection for long gates than the other method. Richard's
Gate is rather well engineered, with one minor exception.
Note the long top hinge strap on several of the gates above that also keep the top joint together. That is the joint with the most stress in a gate. If he were to make a change, that is all I would suggest. But there are as many examples above without the long strap?


With the diagonal up, the diagonal, being the longest element in the gate and often thinner material, will bow  in compression when the gates are very wide without secure intermediate fasteners and the gate will sag anyway.

But if you buy a gate pre-made at a big box store here, the diagonal will come one way, and whether it goes up or down will depend on where you decide the hinges need to go.

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 6:28 pm
by rue_d_etropal
For me as a mathematician, the third side of a triangle is the most important. I always think that a triangle with horozontal at top is stronger if suspending a weight on the pointed end, as in a crane or shelf support. Maybe it makes less of a difference in a gate, and these days design looks seems to often go before engineering design. I wonder how many of those gates sold off the shelf last longer than the owner wanting to change them .
Most of the modlk gates I hav seen have the diagonal bottom to top, but now I will keep my eyes open, Not just gats, but also doors, and window shutters(I am off to France end of week, and know how much wear those on my house have had.
Not uncommon to find doors in UK houses lasting over 100 years, and the are very tough.Will have to check out design .

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 6:55 pm
by Larry
The deciding factor for utility often isn't the material but the execution of the joints. You want to minimize stresses and not have the fasteners do all the work in soft woods - More wood at the joint with the most stress. When you travel, take note of which older gates sag.


But the other factor is that diagonals in tension require no intermediate support, as this Pratt truss ( I think) bridge on the Durango and Silverton shows. All the diagonals angle downward to mid span.

Image

I will be heading to South America imminently, so I will see what the British rail engineers did there.

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:36 pm
by ian_g_griffiths
My two pennath.

From an engineering perspective, trained in Civil Engineering longer ago than I care to remember.

A member in tension equires no lateral support as ther is no tendancy to bow. A member in compression requires some form of lateral support to prevent bowing. This is either provided by moving the material away from the central axis as in a tube or H section or by propping.

Braced, ledged and battened doors, that is those wholly planked doors with horizontal bits to hold the planks together and diagonals to prevent dropping of the unsupported edge. Usually uses compression members, that is they are angled upward from the hinge edge. The support being provided by being nailed to all of the planks, usually 2 nails per plank and the ends being notched into the horizontals.

Field gates usually use a single tension member to provide stability, this is usually a member descending from the top of the hinged edge. There baing many gaps between the horizontals, so less support to prevent bowing.

Ian

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 10:43 pm
by MrPlantpot
Larry wrote:Image


What can't easily be seen in this photo, is that the diagonal on this type/style/design of gate, is usually dovetailed into the curved top of the hinged upright, and is therefore 'joinery'.

Most ledged and braced doors (house or barn) have tongue and grooved uprights, and the ledges and braces just nailed on the back (as mentioned by ian_g_griffiths above), and is 'carpentry'. IMHO :wink:

Generally, wood/cast iron are good in compression, and steel/wrought iron are good in tension (as used in the 'adjustable metal frame' picture, and the trussed bridge).

Also, many doors/gates are bought (or moved from another location), by DIYers with little or no mechanical/structural knowledge, who then hang them incorrectly; but they will still work adequately for many years.... ignorance, as they say, is bliss.

And.... it has often been said on this forum.... there is a prototype for everything :D

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:41 am
by Larry
MrPlantpot wrote:
What can't easily be seen in this photo, is that the diagonal on this type/style/design of gate, is usually dovetailed into the curved top of the hinged upright, and is therefore 'joinery'.

Most ledged and braced doors (house or barn) have tongue and grooved uprights, and the ledges and braces just nailed on the back (as mentioned by ian_g_griffiths above), and is 'carpentry'. IMHO :wink:


Careful Steve, you will get yourself in trouble with the unions and guilds.

Traditionally, a carpenter and a joiner did pretty much the same thing. The difference was where they did it. A joiner worked in his shop " the joinery" and a carpenter was an itinerant in the field.

A bench joiner didn't build benches (unless it was his own). He was an apprentice who made articles with traditional joints at a bench to learn his trade. He might also be sent into the field as an apprentice carpenter to learn the issues of working in the field. ( A carpenter will tell you a joiner can't put stuff- window sash, for instance, without big machines to make the joints for him, a joiner will tell you a carpenter can't find a dry place to work.)

When he was ready to go out on his own, he was sent away from where he served his apprenticeship and was then called a Journeyman. Only after a period of time could he return to either be a master joiner or a master carpenter, depending on where he worked. They both kept their tools in their carpenter's toolbox, which was often their Masterwork that showed they could do all the necessary joinery.

If the carpenter did fine work in the field, he might be termed a Finish Carpenter, which does not refer to his nationality, but rather to whether he will produce the joinery in the field that will be seen by the client. But they are the same trade and serve much the same apprenticeship and journey until they decide which way they want to go.

In Germany, the journeyman is a Zimmermann and must work 100km from his home and when he returns home he is a Titchler and makes titchlerei.

Joinery is a less specific. A simple butt joint is joinery, as is a miter joint if done well. But "true joinery" in the woodwrights sense is a joint that can Serve it's intended functioning without metal fasteners. A carpenter who could pull that off, especially with large timbers, might be termed a woodwright by his peers. He would, of course, have to be familiar with the proper scantlings for a task and not make them too skant. A mortise and tendon joint might suffice, but not surfice, as without a peg it will pull out. In the gate we are talking about , the joint shown would not be joinery to a woodwright. If you pull on the joint it the direction of intended stress, it will pull out. A dovetail joint would conjoined the pieces and fix that issue. ( which also brings us back to whether you want a particular arrangement to pull joints apart or push them together).

I won't even get into the various terms around the world now, other than to mention that in England a joiner can work in metals, and that Joinery in much of the world is the name for the shop a joiner works in, and there are real differences between a woodwright and a millwright in their training, including that the millwright might make the machines a joiner uses in his joinery to give the finish carpenter something to install and trim in the field with joinery.

Is that all clear?