Remove the spring, or not to remove, that is the question !

[malc-c]

I'm in the process of fitting my linear servo point motors to my N gauge layout. Now partly my fault in that I drilled the hole for the wire slightly oversized in both the tie bar and the rack on the point motor, so there is a little play in the action, but when thrown the servo begins to move the point at a nice slow speed, but as soon as it's passed the point the spring comes into play and it snaps across. So I'm considering removing the springs on all the points. Either that or the tolerance for drilling the holes in the rack of the point motor and tie bar needs to be better so there is no play what-so-ever. My thinking is that with the spring removed the torque of the servo will hold the switch rails in place. Just interested in others opinions or comments. Granted it means that I would have to use the same set up if I ever ripped this layout up and started again, but is that really a problem ?

 

[Ediswan]

My understanding is you remove the spring. The purpose of the spring is to hold the switch rail against the stock rail. The servo takes over that role.

If you were to eliminate free play at the tie bar, and leave the spring, you may find there is still sufficient free play in the servo itself to be annoying.

If you can state the model of point motor, you may get more detailed advice.

 

[malc-c]

The point motor is a custom 3d printed design with standard 9g RC servos, and I use my own Arduino based controller that uses a PCA9685 module.

I think for now I'll leave things as is so that if I ever need to rip up the layout and sell the track I'm not handicaped having a load of points that lack normal functionality the spring offers