Large Scale Central

Track metal compatibility

I started going through my inventory of track for my outside layout. I have about 600’ of Aristo-Craft SS track and 4,#6 switches also in stainless. I have 7 LGB 1600 series switches in brass, and approx. 600-700’ of LGB track. Can I use the brass switches with the SS track without any issues of chemical compatibility? I will be running track power and will be using rail clamps with spaced joiners at some joints for expansion. Will also be running feeder wires. I know I’ll have to clean the rail tops on the brass switches but was concerned if there were any issues with mixing the metals with power running through the rails. Also, I’ve caught bits and pieces about issues with the Aristo-Craft #6 turnouts. What do I need to know about them?

When I looked at Aristocraft switches I saw small wires which can not carry the current of the newer engines offered today, therefore I wired them with larger wire. Eventually the switch failed and I now just use LGB switches. The wires were OK when these newer current starved engines were not yet available. I only have brass track and I use the Trainli clamps now at the switches as the screws are vertical and easy to get to, otherwise I have Hillman rail clamps.

Oh, you did not like those wires? Mine are fine - NOT!

From my days sailing stainless and brass play nice enough. We used brass and stainless together all the time and in salt water no less. You would see more corrosion on the brass than the stainless so it must be the sacrificial metal. But both would outlive me. Aluminum and brass, another story. Aluminum is definitely the sacrificial metal. Still took a very long time but aluminum always had pitting near brass.

I think your combination will be fine. I don’t know how intentionally running current through it effects the galvanic reaction though. I would presume it speeds it up. But really don’t know.

While I am thinking about it, if it is an issue, I wonder what adding a sacrificial metal would do. Go to a boat supply place and pick up a zinc anode. stick a screw in it and run a wire from that to one of the clamps every so often and bury the zinc. then it will take the abuse and not the rails.

what are “spaced joiners”?

Devon Sinsley said:

From my days sailing stainless and brass play nice enough. We used brass and stainless together all the time and in salt water no less. You would see more corrosion on the brass than the stainless so it must be the sacrificial metal. But both would outlive me. Aluminum and brass, another story. Aluminum is definitely the sacrificial metal. Still took a very long time but aluminum always had pitting near brass.

I think your combination will be fine. I don’t know how intentionally running current through it effects the galvanic reaction though. I would presume it speeds it up. But really don’t know.

While I am thinking about it, if it is an issue, I wonder what adding a sacrificial metal would do. Go to a boat supply place and pick up a zinc anode. stick a screw in it and run a wire from that to one of the clamps every so often and bury the zinc. then it will take the abuse and not the rails.

Hmmm an anode bed … we use them on our water mains… draws off the stray current …

Ted

We started with brass and over time transitioned to SS. The transition took over 19 years and we never saw any issues in the areas where the two types of metal were next to each other. Also at times used SS rail clamps on Brass and again no issues. We are finally all stainless. The deer did a number on the brass but have no effect on the stainless.

Stan

Sean,

Between what I know from sailing and cathodic protection on water lines, this is what gave me the idea. I have no idea if it would work or even be necessary. Is just a thought.

I believe every word Stan said. His practical experience lines up with what I would expect from my experience in sailing.

I don’t disagree with any of the advice given. I can share some corrosion experience though.

I have a double track crossing a walkway with Aristo Stainless embedded in concrete. Never noticed a problem here when I ran track power. HOWEVER - 3 years ago I started running constant 12V through my track to power lights in line side structures. The power is on up to 16 hours per day in winter. Where the track is in concrete one rail has rusted significantly. I guess the combination of moisture in the concrete and the current flowing through the rails is enough to cause the stainless to corrode with rust.

Looks pretty odd it does with only one rusty rail!

I did the same thing as Stan, except I did it in fewer years and no deer. No issues, and while I live in a dryer climate, the sprinklers watered that part of the layout daily (that’s what ate up the wires under the switches).

Jon, your issue is probably not just the moisture, but the alkalinity of the concrete, which is typically high. Also you can read about “Tea Staining Stainless Steel”

Greg

Greg Elmassian said:

what are “spaced joiners”?

When I got my brass track, it came with all Allen head clamps, and when I got my SS track, it also was all clamps so I have a large ziplock full of rail clamps, probably $800-$1000 if I went and bought them today. So with all these rail clamps, my plan is to connect probably 15’ of track with clamps then have a pair of the joiners that can slip some for expansion, then another 15’ or so, then joiners again. I will have feeder wires for each section. If the consensus is I don’t need to do this then please feel free to advise. Ive just heard where people say all rail clamps cause to rigid of a rail and don’t allow enough for expansion and contraction. Maybe here in New England we don’t have to worry about it as much. My outdoor area will get sun but is not in straight sun all day long so maybe I don’t need the joiners.

i realized that there’s probably at least 800-1000 clamps in that bag and all my brass track has the clamps on one end of it. with new clamps bringing $2ea, I’ve probably got at least $2,500 worth! Man, I’m glad I bought this stuff years back when a couple of guys decided to sell their whole layouts.

So running on plain DC with my LGB Moguls, my Bachmann Climax, and my Shay, will these Aristo-Craft switches fail? If so, what is the best way to fix them now before they go down. Also, in my RC plane hobby, I fly a lot of float planes so we spray the electronics with a product that right now I can’t remember the name of it, that protects everything from the water and moisture. I’ve had planes take a full dunk, get soaking wet, and continue to operate normally. Would using this product on the bottom of the Aristo-Craft switches help you think?

Clamp it all together. Let the roadbed handle expansion. Movement at the joiners just causes issues. (dirt, condctivity, corrosion, gaps)

Can you post pix of the 2 types of joiners you have?

Greg

Jon Radder said:

I guess the combination of moisture in the concrete and the current flowing through the rails is enough to cause the stainless to corrode with rust.

Looks pretty odd it does with only one rusty rail!

Portland cement is caustic. its a heavy oxidizer. As I suspect adding that constant current increased the cathodic reaction. I am purely guessing but the alkalinity and and current worked together to oxidize that rail. I don’t know though.

On fixing the switches before use, try here:

https://elmassian.com/index.php/large-scale-train-main-page/track-aamp-switches/aristo-track

Please note there are EIGHT subpages, see the links at the end of the above page.

That should get you started.

When installing track, if there are curves with track floating on ballast, expansion will not be a big problem as the track will expand at the curve. Of course this does depend on the length of the straight run.

Greg,

i looked at the four Aristo #6 switches I have and they all have the straight guard rail spaced too far away and the barely tapered ends. I will be revamping them per your write-up. I thought of trying to increase the taper to a sharper, longer point by clamping the rail in my miller and milling the ends. I’m also going to mill off about .010 from the bottom web so the rail can move closer for the proper spacing To prevent damage to the frog from the wheel flanges. I do have a bunch of brass rail pieces that I could make longer guard rails out of if necessary but the switches would have two different color rails on them. Of course in short time, the guard rails would get a nice brown color to them anyway. Do the guard rails need to be extended if I sharpen and lengthen the angle of the guard rail ends?

If LGB switch motors are used on the Aristo-Craft #6 switches, couldn’t the 1203 auxiliary contact be used to change the polarity of the frog like that POC micro switch under the ties currently does? Couldn’t the Aristo switch motor do the same through its auxiliary contacts too? Though I know the Aristo motors are not that good.

Good deal on your modifications to the guard rails and milling the foot.

Yes a better way to provide power to the frog is definitely recommended.

The length of the guard rails seems more than sufficient, so grinding a bit off to ease the transition “into” the guard rail should be fine.

The inserts to correct the excessive frog depth are available too: https://www.camarillopacific.com/dpfroglegs/

They will make a large difference because the the width of the frog throat, your wheels will be supported by the flange instead of dropping into the throat, it’s a big improvement.

RE: Aristo #6 Turnout Inherent Problems

Illustrated below is a view of the Aristo #6 frog that suffered from wheel drop down.

I had a limited number of “Frog Legs” inserts made that Greg referred to because they were no longer available from their original suppliers. I commissioned Colin Camarillo to offer them for anyone interested via his web site link Greg already had shown. The insert is optimal for deep flange wheels (~0.120 inch flange depth) typical of loco wheels and car wheels from LGB and others.

As to the Aristo #6 turnout problems, the frog is only one issue to deal with. Aside from the guard rails being too far from the outside stock rails and having too abrupt “ramps”, the turnout’s plastic bedding was factory made such that the stock rails are too close together which results in under gauged rails. Where the point rail meets the sock rail, it’s even closer with respect to the opposite stock rail. Consequently, when wheel flanges pass though this area, wheels are pinched and can ride up or pick the point rail and derail.

What made these turnouts work to the extent they do / did was because Aristo wheels were typically under gauged, too - but not good for other vendor products that conformed to the NMRA standard. That said the #6 turnout can be mitigated to work more acceptably.

With several alterations, I have been able to mitigate the #6 turnout to make it usable for wheels set to a back to back spacing of 1.575 inch (NMRA standard target value), but have not yet updated my “vignette” for this turnout (that Greg hosts for me on his web site) that will show the alterations needed.

-The other Ted