Terrain Dilemma

[tetters]

So, I'm moving on to other things other then track work on my layout. Finally!

I'm currently exploring options on how to best go about building up some terrain for some small hills and dips etc. There are several options out there I know, but these are the few that spring to mind for me. The problem is I keeping flipping from one to another.

1) Cardboard weave with plaster cloth or other plaster medium laid over top of the weave to create land forms.

2) High density foam insulation with straight plaster (or plaster cloth) or dura bond trowelled or skimmed over the surface.

3) Wire mesh screen (not chicken wire) covered with (you guessed it) plaster cloth.

These are the three I'm kinda settled on. However presently, I started with the foam insulation and even though I have several chuncks glued in place, I'm not convinced its the right way to go for me. Presently I'm leaning towards the cardboard weave and plaster cloth method. Although I do have a good supply or wire mesh screening as well.

So I am curious as to what others have tried. What worked, what didn't, and any tips and hints to get some reasonable results.

Thanks in advance as always!

Shane

[doctorwayne]

I used Durabond-90 directly over screen (cheaper than the plaster cloth, although perhaps not as easy to use). I used both aluminum and fibreglass screen - both worked well, although the fibreglass requires more support during application. For that reason, I prefer the aluminum variety. Once fully hardened, it's like reinforced concrete and there are several hard-to-reach areas on my layout where I've leaned on it for support to reach the backdrop. After the Durabond hardens, the support can generally be removed if you have access to the underside (open grid or L-girder benchwork). I used scrap and not-so-scrap lumber, held in place with C-clamps. for these Alp-like creations:




Eventually, a thick forest will tone down these steep contours to more closely resemble the Niagara Escarpment. (Incidentally, the bridge piers and abutments were also created using Durabond.)
To create slight undulations atop areas where the benchwork was covered by plywood, I simply placed some scrap wood blocks before stapling the screen in place. You could also use wadded newspaper, cardboard, or foam sheets. For very slight hills, just apply the Durabond in a thick coat directly on the plywood, with or without screen (it won't crack, no matter how thickly or thinly it's applied, and it still hardens at the same time, as it contains a catalyst).




If you're placing Durabond in direct contact with wood, spray the area with a little "wet" water before applying the plaster - this prevents the wood from drawing moisture out of the mix before the Durabond has set. It's also a good idea if you're applying the Durabond atop or adjacent to previously-applied and hardened Durabond.
All of my "water" scenes are Durabond directly atop plywood (no screen) and the applications are generally about 1/8" thick.








For both landforms and water scenes, I use various putty knives, scrapers, and drywall knives to apply the Durabond and create the final contours - mix it thick enough so that it doesn't drip through the screen, but "work" it enough to press some of it so that it oozes through the openings a bit. If your screen is well-supported, it's not too difficult. To smooth the knife marks before the Durabond sets, I use a cheap 2" brush to liberally apply plain water to the surface, then use the bristles to smooth out any gross irregularities. Scenic foam, etc. will hide any minor flaws. To colour the raw Durabond, I used the cheapest flat interior latex house paint that I could find, then thinned it 30-50% with water. This is much easier to apply than the full-strength paint (use that el-cheapo brush), soaks into the Durabond somewhat, and gives you much more coverage. Most areas receive multiple applications of ground foam and/or ballast, but you can re-stain or paint any areas that require special consideration. The main thing is to get rid of the white glare.

Wayne

[tetters]

Well...

Wayne, my friend, you make a good pitch for the Durabond / aluminum screen approach. I think I also read the idea of spreading it on by hand, wearing some gloves of course.

But I may just lean towards you approach.

Thanks!

[doctorwayne]

One thing which I neglected to mention is that you don't need to limit your choice to just one method: you may have situations where a different method is better-suited.
If you do decide to go the Durabond route, buy it in the 33lb. bags (much cheaper than the smaller boxes) and use a flexible plastic container for mixing. A litterbox or plastic dishpan works well, allowing you to flex it to aid in removing Durabond that's hardened before you've used it. If you have a hardware store nearby, they may have scrap screen from repair jobs that you can get free, and they also sell the new stuff from a roll, rather than pre-cut smaller pieces.

Wayne

[tetters]

Thanks Wayne! I already have a roll of the aluminum screen. I guess all that is left to do is get a bag of Durabond and a container to mix it in. Then its look out Scale Model World!!!

[nachoman]

I think the kind of terrain you want to model plays an important factor with what method to use. That is, if you are wanting to faithfully emulate a certain landscape. For a layout that won't have much relief - I'd go with foam carved with a hot knife. For steeper terrain, it seems like you carve away more foam than you leave behind - and that means a method such as described by Dr Wayne is more applicable.

But perhaps more important for most modelers are mess, ease of use, weight, money, and a multitude of factors including trackplan and benchwork design. I wound up using carved, stacked foam because of the way my layout is designed. I needed the self-supporting nature of the foam because I did not have clearance for support structures to hold up a mesh armature. But, the foam approach is not necessarily the best for representing the type of terrain I am modeling.

[BR60103]

Shane:
Also consider what you're going to do with the layout. If it might need to become portable, the foam based scenery is sometimes lighter. But hard shell is also light. You can use foam or crumpled newspaper to form the hardshell.
I've managed to make foam scenery in sections that fit together.
I cover my foam with another WS product (I forget which one) that's like thick latex paint as I don't have much success with plaster. I make more mess with plaster.
I inherited a module once that had a lump of scenery -- modelling a mound of ??? -- that had been made with, I think, chimney cement over a walnut 2x4 (weighed like that, anyway) and a few other bits that were based in cement. There was a bit of fun when I re-did it in foam and someone picked the new mound up for the first time.

[tetters]

I think what I am going to take away from this is that I may end of using any number of methods or combinations of materials to achieve the look I want. Tonight I plan on getting the screen down and applying the Durabond over top. I have a goal to get my lake scene done to point where the water is poured before the end of March. Wish me luck!

[pgandw]

So, I'm moving on to other things other then track work on my layout. Finally!

So I am curious as to what others have tried. What worked, what didn't, and any tips and hints to get some reasonable results.

Shane

Shane

The only layout where I got as far as adding terrain and scenery was a 4x6 adapted from the Tidewater Central in 1957 Model Railroader (this was built in the mid-70s). At the time, hard shell and zip-textured scenery a la Westcott was all the rage. But in Coos Bay, Oregon, I couldn't find Hydrocal. So I reverted to aluminum and fiberglass window screen covered with kitchen paper towels (Teri, the kind with fiber reinforcement) dipped in Plaster of Paris pre-tinted food coloring. The results transformed that little layout.

I prefer the fiberglass window screen because it doesn't tear up saw blades and drill bits the way the aluminum screen did when I went to make changes. Pre-tinting the plaster was a great idea because the occasional chip that came from the 4 moves the layout made didn't show the tell-tale white. And because I mixed in the food coloring free hand, each plaster batch was a slightly different color. I put plastic under the layout while I was applying the plaster-dipped paper towels, which eliminated any problems with the carpet. The plaster-dipped towels, with their wrinkles and ridges, tend to very naturally simulate quite rugged terrain. The big drawback is planting trees by the plethora for Oregon coastal mountains is a lot of work in plaster shell.

On my Dad's layout, I put in some terrain using plaster cloth over various cardboard forms. I learned from that experience that the plaster cloth isn't that much cleaner than the buckets of plaster unless you wet the cloth in place (which I didn't try). I still got some drips and spatters and fall-throughs. The plaster cloth (2 layers needed in most cases) makes for a much smoother terrain. The plaster cloth is also a lot more sensitive to the shape of the forms it is being laid over. It was difficult to get natural looking terrain unless the forms already had a natural shape. Just propping a box in there wasn't good enough.

I'm now building a small HO/HOn3 layout as a test and learning platform for the "big one". The layout needs to be portable, so I will be using a combination of stacked foam and 1/2" foam shell. The 1/2 " foam will be set up as a form for Structolite or similar lightweight plaster. I haven't tried either method yet, so any comments would be theoretical and not actual experience. But I'm honestly not looking forward to the foam because of the static mess, and the thickness of the shell. On the other hand, planting Oregon forests should be sheer joy compared to drilling holes in plaster and wire screen.

Fred W

....modeling foggy coastal Oregon, where it's always 1900....

[doctorwayne]

Fred, I thought the foam would be preferable for tree planting, too, and used a block of it to store trees as I made them. Unless the trees are fairly small or of a very regular (uniform) shape, they tend to want to fall over, widening the original hole and rendering it more-or-less useless. The taller the tree, the greater its propensity to fall over (and if a tree falls over onto the foam forest floor, it makes no noise - I listened). Of course, the same trees tend to fall over in plaster hardshell, too, until they're glued in place.
These Elms, roughly 65'-ers, are an example: the distant one is glued in place, while the one in the foreground is listing like a crippled ship: it's not yet glued in place, as I still have to install a lot of fencing along the tracks, then plant some grass for the herd of cows that will eventually reside here. All that is best done without the tree in place.


Another thing I discovered when planting trees around Chippawa Creek is that holes drilled in plaster that's already had scenic ground cover added often disappear, especially if you vacuum up the plaster dust before planting. The riverbanks in the pictures below probably have twice as many drilled holes as they do trees.




Wayne

[pgandw]

Fred, I thought the foam would be preferable for tree planting, too, and used a block of it to store trees as I made them. Unless the trees are fairly small or of a very regular (uniform) shape, they tend to want to fall over, widening the original hole and rendering it more-or-less useless. The taller the tree, the greater its propensity to fall over (and if a tree falls over onto the foam forest floor, it makes no noise - I listened). Of course, the same trees tend to fall over in plaster hardshell, too, until they're glued in place.
These Elms, roughly 65'-ers, are an example: the distant one is glued in place, while the one in the foreground is listing like a crippled ship: it's not yet glued in place, as I still have to install a lot of fencing along the tracks, then plant some grass for the herd of cows that will eventually reside here. All that is best done without the tree in place.

Wayne

Wayne

Thank you for the warning - I hadn't expected that. For Oregon, I need tall trees - minimum of 6 actual inches, and 12 in many places. After all, the Port Orford & Elk River Railway & Navigation Co is the "Home of the Tall Cedars". I may revert to a lightweight plaster on screen yet.

Fred W

[BR60103]

Did we mention: when you use paper towels dipped in plaster, use the industrial grade ones, not kitchen style. You need coarse strength, not soft dimples.

[tetters]

Well, I got the first stretch of Durabond and aluminum mesh down. I still have some smaller areas to tackle, but I figure I'll do a little bit at a time. I'll try and get some pics up tomorrow.

[pgandw]

Did we mention: when you use paper towels dipped in plaster, use the industrial grade ones, not kitchen style. You need coarse strength, not soft dimples.

When I used kitchen paper towels, they were readily available and cheap. I didn't have any easy source of the industrial grade brown paper towels that were recommended. Since I didn't have Hydrocal either, I was making substitutions to get some of the strength back using Plaster of Paris. The fiber-reinforced kitchen paper towels were very effective in this regard. After my experience, I see no compelling reason not to use kitchen paper towels. The dimples don't show through the plaster coating.

The window screen base gives a great opportunity to visualize the terrain before committing to plaster. And the window screen allows use of any cheap plaster, rather than needing the strength of Hydrocal.

Most scenery methods are capable of great results (by others ). So it boils down to personal preferences.

Fred W

[Russ Bellinis]

I would just add for those building modules or a layout that needs to be moved, that I have heard that lightweight spackle can be used instead of plaster as well as for carving rocks. If you have to move it, weight is a serious concern!