# Modelling a pumping station

The building (now demolished) seen in the following links was an old pumping station at Barry Docks in South Wales, site of the famous Woodham's
scrapyard : http://philtpics.fotopic.net/p5478140.html http://philtpics.fotopic.net/p29164884.html I want to estimate the size of building, which I have done using the time-honoured method of counting brick courses. Assuming a brick course to be three inches, I come out with an unfeasibly small height for the building (from ground level to ridge line) of about twenty feet. In view of the twelve foot tall locomotive near the building this figure is obviously wrong.
Possible explanations are: - it really is a tiny building - my arithmetic is no good - they have bigger than normal bricks in Wales - what look like brick courses are an illusion caused by the resolution of the JPEG image
Can anyone suggest a realistic estimate of the size of the building?
John
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
The peak of the roof looks to be about twice the height of the locomotive. Presuming that the loco's stack is the same height as the 'divider' between the main floor and the rafters. So, twenty to twenty four feet might be right.
--

Frank Rosenbaum
Please support the following train meets if you can
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>

You are being bit by perspective. The loco is much closer to the camera than the building. A building height of 20 feet for an *apparently* single story brick building is probably not unreasonable.

--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Linux Installation and Administration
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
wrote:
John,

As others have noted, the loco is a lot nearer to the camera than the building, so you can't really use it as a measure. Also the disticnt 'bricks' are the ones on the chimney and they look a lot larger than the agerage house brick - possibly a special brick designed for the chimney.
I would reckon that the building is at leat 30 feet to the roof peak.
Jim.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
John:
Is that a ladder I see leaning against the building in the second picture? That might be helpful.
Cordially yours: Gerard P.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
I don't think it's a ladder but you might care to speculate on the purpose of the large guillotine-like structure in the background. Any ideas?
J

<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
That is a ladder as you can barely see it in the first picture. I'd also consider using the rungs as a measurement (I'm not going to count the rungs!) and see if that compares for size.
-- Why do penguins walk so far to get to their nesting grounds?
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Jim Guthrie wrote:

I agree with the 30' range. If you look not at the loco but the car behind it ( which seems to be about 10' if the loco is 12' tall ), the car is closer to being in line with the building corner. If you guesstimate .....it appears to be three cars high to the ridge line.
OR
pull up the picture and put a scale model piece of rolling stock close to the car behind the engine. Get as close to scale as you can then use the scale ruler for that scale and ................oh never mind, it's not THAT funny I guess...............
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
wrote:

Perspective makes it difficult to estimate from the locos, but the brake van in the first phot looks to be about the same distance from the camera. I'd put it closer to 20ft to the eaves rather than the ridge. Keith
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
John Rampling wrote:

I've read the other replies, and want to add that the circular vent/window in the end gable would be about 2ft in diameter. I printed the pic, did some measuring, and came with a gable peak height of about 30ft. That sounds close enough to me.
HTH
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Years ago, I had to remove one of those vents (and replace it with a fan) that appears in the wall of your structure - the building was of similar construction but not as high. The vent required a blanking panel 3ft 4 inches in diameter. By using that as a measurement, I believe this building would be at least 45 to 50 feet high, which seems about right to me at least, as I sit in my home which is 24 feet to the roof peak.
Steve

<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
http://philt.org.uk /
Steve
ps. turn your sound off when you visit the site though
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
http://philt.org.uk/feedback.htm

<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
There's a third photo with the buildings in it, too:
http://philtpics.fotopic.net/p29164883.html
John Rampling wrote:

<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Not demolished after all ! http://www.acanthus.co.uk/holden/project.aspx?mide&sectorID )&type=&pid2
Thanks everyone for your replies. I now know where to go for the information.
John

<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
wrote:

You might even get scale drawings :-)
Since it is quite a large building, you might find that a scale model would tend to dominate your layout. Sometimes it is better to get the proportions of a building correct, then adjust the scale to suit your layout. You can assess the size by making cardboard mock-ups until you get the size that suits you.
Jim.
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>

Thanks Jim for that wise advice.
John