Re: Feeder line issues
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I've attached a diagram of the track layout. One is just a diagram of the track layout (all black). The second is in color and identifies the individual reversing segments. (The black siding on the colored version is electrically and physically isolated from the rest of the layout. It will operate on DC and can be used by grandchildren to operate a switching engine and freight cars.) The green mainline passes over the blue line via a bridge, as does the yellow siding. The siding is on a plateau above the blue loop line. With the exception of the yellow siding, most of the left quarter of the layout is in tunnels under a mountain.
As you can see, the basic figure 8 design can be reversed in both directions. That capability is the defining characteristic of the track plan.
The yellow siding doesn't have to be a reversing section and will probably be wired with the green mainline segment to which it is connected. Thee is really no need for it to be an AR segment because, with DCC, I can operate a train on that siding independently of what's going on in the mainline; and even if the polarity on the mainline switches, that should not affect operation of a DCC controlled locomotive on the siding. Had considered wiring as separate reversing segment only to reduce length of 22 AWG feeder lines.
Because of the double reverse arrangment, there are what I would describe as "intermediate" reversing segments that increase the total. A simple reverse would require 3 segments. The addition of a second reversing capability splits one of the first three reversing segments and adds another segment, for total of 5.
The layout has the capacility to run a train on the figure 8 pattern without any switching issues. Throw a couple of switches and the train reverses; then return those switches and the train continues in reverse around the figure 8. Throwing a couple of more switches and an almost endless variety of patterns is possible. I wanted the flexibility for great variety on a small (5' x 9') layout.
I don't encounter any difficulty using 14 AWG directly from the bus on the input side of the hex juicer. But 15' of 22 AWG feeder line from the frog juicer to the track seems a bit long. I've asked Duncan McCree (Tam Valley) about that, and have not received an answer yet. If he tells me that no significant operational issues have been presented by 15' long 22 AWG feeder wires, then I should be in great shape with just 3'-4' of 22 AWG feeder lines from the outputs of the hex juicer.
Nevertheless, the safer solution might be to splice in a 14 AWG segment from the 22 AWG "stub" wire at the output of the hex juicer to within about 6" of the connection with the track. The downside of doing so of course is risk of splice failure and possible signal degredation due to the splices. Do you think that exercise is unnecessary?
On Saturday, January 25, 2020, 03:10:16 PM EST, Max Maginness <m.maginness@...> wrote:
If I recall you wanted to use 20ga wire from the track connections to the juicer terminals. 4 feet of this has a resistance of about 0.04 ohms. This does not matter, some small resistance is actually needed to control the peak current flow.
In fact the hex juicer instructions read:
“Use #22 or bigger wire (up to 3 feet from the bus) on the input side of the board and between the frogs use #28-22 ga. wire (up to 15 feet from the frog to the juicer)”
I am a little curious why so many reversing sections – are you sure they all are actually that?
And BTW, I just checked – the terminals on the juicers will take up to 12 ga. Wire but as above, its not required or recommended for the frogs and might only be used for a very long connection from the juicer to the main DCC bus.
From: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Behalf Of mgj21932 via Groups.Io
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2020 6:23 AM
Yes. All in single power district.
Planning to address the concern about voltage loss on 3’-4’ feeders by spicing in 14 AWG wire for most of the length.
Do you have an opinion on electric conductivity efficiency of soldered vs physical butt connections?