Date   

Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

scott toro
 

Ok Would like to know the answer to that




On Sunday, December 17, 2017, 5:53 PM, davidghorn@... [WiringForDCC]

 

Thanks.  Would what you looked into lend itself to between an engine and a tender?  What was it?   What were the drawbacks?  Thanks.

Dave


Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

Dave Horn
 

Thanks.  Would what you looked into lend itself to between an engine and a tender?  What was it?   What were the drawbacks?  Thanks.
Dave


Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

Dave Horn
 

Thanks.  Someone told me they had one installed when they got an American Models S gauge streamlined PRR K4 converted to DCC.  I've asked for photos and more information.  Will share what I find out.


Re: Multiple PSx Short Circuit Protection Respond to Track Short

Max Maginness
 

George

 

Wiring PSX units literally  in parallel has no  discernable  virtue.

 If I interpret your  description correctly, you took – or at least intended to take - one (or more?)  PSX protected center section(s) and split it or them into smaller subsections, each protected by newly added PSX  devices.
If this is correct  you should not have any electrical connection  between the subsections or to  the remainder of the original section(s),   if you disconnect both leads on the track side of the PSX units there should be very high resistance between all the now (electrically)  separate  track sections. If not then:

  • When you split the center section did you gap both rails  at  both ends of the new subsections?
  • Check that there were no stray lengths of track with droppers still onto the buss section now on the “wrong” side of the new subsections track gaps – may be from  one of the sidings?

Good Luck

 

Max

 

 

 

 

From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 3:50 PM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: [WiringForDCC] Multiple PSx Short Circuit Protection Respond to Track Short

 

 

My club has a large layout, primarily consisting of two large concentric loops in an 'C' shape.  Each main is about 240 feet long.  There are no crossovers between the two mainlines.  The layout is divided into three power districts powered by one Digitrax DB-150 in each district.  The layout districts can be described as dividing into a left loop district, a central district, and a right loop district.  Facing the central district, as a cross-section, you see four mainlines.  Each center section mainline piece is powered through a PSx short circuit control unit from the one booster.  (Four PSx units.)  Each mainline does have some sidings, but again there is no crossover between the loops.

This summer, the center section track was relayed and rewired. Two additional PSx units were added to this section of the layout.  The project purpose was to improve track reliability and to rearrange the sidings.  This realignment has been in operation for three or more months.

When I "quarter test" one track,  four PSx units sound off.  When I test other tracks, two or three PSx units may sound off.  For each test of a track the same PSx units always sound off.  Test different tracks activates different sets of PSx units.

Other than just very bad wiring, can anyone give me a reason for wiring PSx units in parallel?  I think it can only defeat the purpose of the PSx units.

George

 


Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

rg <richg_1998@...>
 

I have not heard of any.

Rich




On Sunday, December 17, 2017, 12:01 PM, davidghorn@... [WiringForDCC] wrote:



Are any of you familiar with installing DCC in a steam engine using a wireless tether between the engine and the tender?  If so, from whom is that available?  And how is it installed?  Thank you.  


Dave





Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

Edward Sargent
 

Yes, our club looked the it briefly. What we looked at was actually wireless communications between the various locos in a consist eliminating the need for speed matching, not engine and tender. There are numerous draw backs which is why we dropped the idea. For instance you can have it running on your home layout but your engines will not necessarily work on other layouts and vice versa.

 

From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 10:02 AM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

 

 

Are any of you familiar with installing DCC in a steam engine using a wireless tether between the engine and the tender?  If so, from whom is that available?  And how is it installed?  Thank you.  

 

Dave

 


Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

Dave Horn
 

Are any of you familiar with installing DCC in a steam engine using a wireless tether between the engine and the tender?  If so, from whom is that available?  And how is it installed?  Thank you.  


Dave



Re: Multiple PSx Short Circuit Protection Respond to Track Short

john
 

Sounds a little odd. If your districts are isolated by DB150s then only one district should respond. Districts need to be isolated so that a derail doesn't take out the entire layout. 
Our club, CrossRoad RailRoad club,  layout uses PM42s to provide separation, short circuit protection and current limiting and a problem in one district only affects that district (within reason).


On Saturday, December 16, 2017 6:50 PM, "modelrr@... [WiringForDCC]" wrote:




My club has a large layout, primarily consisting of two large concentric loops in an 'C' shape.  Each main is about 240 feet long.  There are no crossovers between the two mainlines.  The layout is divided into three power districts powered by one Digitrax DB-150 in each district.  The layout districts can be described as dividing into a left loop district, a central district, and a right loop district.  Facing the central district, as a cross-section, you see four mainlines.  Each center section mainline piece is powered through a PSx short circuit control unit from the one booster.  (Four PSx units.)  Each mainline does have some sidings, but again there is no crossover between the loops.

This summer, the center section track was relayed and rewired. Two additional PSx units were added to this section of the layout.  The project purpose was to improve track reliability and to rearrange the sidings.  This realignment has been in operation for three or more months.

When I "quarter test" one track,  four PSx units sound off.  When I test other tracks, two or three PSx units may sound off.  For each test of a track the same PSx units always sound off.  Test different tracks activates different sets of PSx units.

Other than just very bad wiring, can anyone give me a reason for wiring PSx units in parallel?  I think it can only defeat the purpose of the PSx units.

George






Multiple PSx Short Circuit Protection Respond to Track Short

nwsteamer
 

My club has a large layout, primarily consisting of two large concentric loops in an 'C' shape.  Each main is about 240 feet long.  There are no crossovers between the two mainlines.  The layout is divided into three power districts powered by one Digitrax DB-150 in each district.  The layout districts can be described as dividing into a left loop district, a central district, and a right loop district.  Facing the central district, as a cross-section, you see four mainlines.  Each center section mainline piece is powered through a PSx short circuit control unit from the one booster.  (Four PSx units.)  Each mainline does have some sidings, but again there is no crossover between the loops.

This summer, the center section track was relayed and rewired. Two additional PSx units were added to this section of the layout.  The project purpose was to improve track reliability and to rearrange the sidings.  This realignment has been in operation for three or more months.

When I "quarter test" one track,  four PSx units sound off.  When I test other tracks, two or three PSx units may sound off.  For each test of a track the same PSx units always sound off.  Test different tracks activates different sets of PSx units.

Other than just very bad wiring, can anyone give me a reason for wiring PSx units in parallel?  I think it can only defeat the purpose of the PSx units.

George



Large Gauge Ground Wire in Parallel with Loconet Gound Wires == Groundloop?

nwsteamer
 

In Allan Gartner's Wiring For DCC website, Booster Network Wiring, RECOMMENDATION #4-6: Run a Heavy Ground Wire Between Your Boosters:, the wiring diagram indicates cutting the two ground wires in the booster Loconet wires and adding a large gauge ground connection between the command station and the each of the boosters.  (Yes he was discussing wiring Digitrax equipment which is what my club has.)

The stated reason is to prevent ground loops causing possible erratic behavior. 

On Mark Gurries' website or the only mention of ground loops is in stating not to connect the booster network ground to house earth ground.  Again, erratic behavior may result.

Larry Puckett, the DCCguy.com website also advocates the ground wire but does not mention ground loops.  He did not mention them in his recent Model Railroader article.

Question: does the large gauge booster network ground wire and the parallel Loconet ground wires constitute a ground loop that may cause problems.  Or are they just wires in parallel. 

In the case of my club all the Loconet connections are daisy chained with a lot of intermediate connections.  So the large gauge wire is shorter with no interrupting connections.

Stating you never had a problem with out disconnecting the loconet wires does not answer my question.

George


Re: Starting on the right foot with turnout machines

wirefordcc
 

You could set two of them to the same address. But as Don says, you can put
two Tortoises in series with each other. That would be cheaper as you would
only need to spend money on one turnout controller or if you have a
multi-turnout controller, you'd have an output left over to control another
turnout.



Allan Gartner WiringForDCC.com <http://www.wiringfordcc.com/>


Re: Starting on the right foot with turnout machines

dvollrath@...
 

I use the Team Digital SMD84 to operate up to 8 tortoise motors and/or twin-coil switch machines. Has programmable push button inputs, or can be operated from NCE DCC (or Loco-Net) commands. It is powered and takes commands from the DCC buss. Easily programmed by NCE, including multiple path selection macros from a single PB.


For a crossover, I simply wire the two motors in series (truly slow motion) or parallel. You can do that also with the NCE SW 8 MK2.  


DonV

---In WiringForDCC@..., <nick79ostr@...> wrote :

I've been reading up on Tortoise et al and want to make sure I'm starting on the right foot.  I have 7 turnouts that are (mostly) out of reach and will be getting machines.  After all the reading I'm leaning toward Tortoise (without the built-in decoder) and the NCE Switch 8 Mk2 since I have an NCE cab and would like to control the machines from the cab.  That said, my track buses are all done with DCC Specialities PSX and PSX-AR  boards, so does anyone have any experience with the Hare NG or Jack Wabbit compared to the NCE product that I should consider?  Thanks!

 


Re: Starting on the right foot with turnout machines

John Bishop
 

I use the SwitchMaster (SM) machine, controlled by the NCE Switch-It.   

I prefer the SM to the Tortoise because it is so easy to mount and the motion is rotary -- allowing the use of a crank arrangement to move the switch points, and this can be with a hidden crank cut into a recess into (in my case( the Homosote) that actually moves the throw bar. Or more simply, just use the a kind of rotating hook moving the throw bar, as the SM directions show. 
The rotary action is also good if there is a problem locating the switch machine directly under the switch points, because it is easy to use a crank to operate a push-pull rod a few inches away from the switch.  

 The lack of contacts on the SM is not a drawback in DCC operation, you want to use a Frog Juicer to control frog polarity in any case.  Lack of contacts is not hard to work around even in DC.

The Switch-It DCC controller is a snap to install. It allows one to throw the switches either using the DCC address on your DCC cab controller (in my case ProCab), or by a momentary button on the layout. Sometimes the button is quicker to use if you are nearby.  One Switch-It controls 2 switch machines, although I think a larger one is available.  It will work with the Tortoise also.

Hope this helps.

John Bishop


On Saturday, December 9, 2017 7:42 AM, "nick79ostr@... [WiringForDCC]" wrote:


 
I've been reading up on Tortoise et al and want to make sure I'm starting on the right foot.  I have 7 turnouts that are (mostly) out of reach and will be getting machines.  After all the reading I'm leaning toward Tortoise (without the built-in decoder) and the NCE Switch 8 Mk2 since I have an NCE cab and would like to control the machines from the cab.  That said, my track buses are all done with DCC Specialities PSX and PSX-AR  boards, so does anyone have any experience with the Hare NG or Jack Wabbit compared to the NCE product that I should consider?  Thanks!
 



Re: Starting on the right foot with turnout machines

Nick Ostrosky
 

Thanks, Allan, that was not an option I explored at first, but cost wise it looks about the same once you add in the cost of terminal blocks.  I'll take a closer look.  Follow-up question, is getting two machines to act concert a simple matter of giving both machines the same address (I'm thinking of a cross-over situation)?


Re: Starting on the right foot with turnout machines

wirefordcc
 

The Tortoises with the built-in decoders, SMAILS I believe they are called,
are using built-in NCE electronics.



Allan Gartner WiringForDCC.com <http://www.wiringfordcc.com/>


Starting on the right foot with turnout machines

Nick Ostrosky
 

I've been reading up on Tortoise et al and want to make sure I'm starting on the right foot.  I have 7 turnouts that are (mostly) out of reach and will be getting machines.  After all the reading I'm leaning toward Tortoise (without the built-in decoder) and the NCE Switch 8 Mk2 since I have an NCE cab and would like to control the machines from the cab.  That said, my track buses are all done with DCC Specialities PSX and PSX-AR  boards, so does anyone have any experience with the Hare NG or Jack Wabbit compared to the NCE product that I should consider?  Thanks!

 


Re: Reversing Section Wiring question

Blair & Rasa
 

Still can't post anything to files.  Don has helped me determine the best solution, anyway, but it's impossible to provide the final version.  Thanks, folks.

Blair



On 2017-12-06 15:14, smithbr@... [WiringForDCC] wrote:
Don't know what's with groups.  Restarted my browser, entered groups via email link instead of neo, still nothing.  Click on upload, select file, add comment, click save, window grays out and nothing happens.
Oh well.  I'll send the file to Don via email.
Blair


Re: Reversing Section Wiring question

Blair & Rasa
 

Hi Don
New sketch attached.
Regards
Blair


On 2017-12-06 14:43, Blair & Rasa smithbr@... [WiringForDCC] wrote:


Don

In my original email, I described traffic as follows:

"A train from the junction will visit the sinter mill once daily,
arriving by the lower track at right... Generally, all or a portion of
the arriving train proceeds straight to the harbour scene, via the
track at upper right... The train then returns to the sinter mill,
where things get interesting." So what isn't clear? trains arrive
lower right, exit to harbour, and return, via upper right. I didn't
say it, but scale is HO, the grid is 12"; trains are expected to
consist of 4 SD40-2 units plus 25 +/- Ortner ore cars (6" ea), for a
typical length around 15 feet. Surely the visual ratio of switch
lengths to track lengths gives you some idea of the constraints? If a
track is 4x the length of a switch, in HO or N, or likely G, the track
probably holds 6-8 cars, depending on car length and switch size
obviously. The issue is, depending upon how one switches that center
diagonal track pair, one can easily end up bridging from normal-power
main to the reversing section at both ends of the train, even with the
augmented large reversing section as depicted.
But maybe I've found it.  See my new posting to files.  I think this
works, satisfying the longest possible trains.  I added clarification
info where necessary.

Blair Smith




On 2017-12-06 13:37, 'Vollrath, Don' don.vollrath@...
[WiringForDCC] wrote:
Your operating description is a little hard to follow as there are no location names shown on the track sketch.
Also not sure if it is drawn to any scale or if there are other track extensions off to the right of either the upper or lower black stub tracks. Your saving grace is that the plan is to move only one train at a time. The only possible hooker is if you leave a steel wheeled car stuck in a gap at one end while you move the loco out the other end. The fix for that is to make track gaps large enough and fill them with plastic shaped to the railhead so that a steel wheel can never touch both sides of the gap at the same time. A loco is then free to traverse the gaps at the other end and let the A-R unit to do its thing.

On my home layout I got tired of playing with relay or track switched reversing controllers and put in an OGAR. It auto-polarity trips at ~4 amps and acts as a circuit breaker in the case of derailment. Works like a charm from my 5 amp booster. No headlight blinks or sound disturbances at either end.

DonV

-----Original Message-----
From:WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 11:19 AM
To:WiringForDCC@...
Subject: Re: [WiringForDCC] Reversing Section Wiring question

Thanks, Don.  That was my thinking; since the A/D train will often be longer than the green, it makes sense to make the green plus red all one large autoreversing section.  Consists will often be 4 SD40-2 units, lead and trailing units sound equipped, so a relay reverser doesn't really cut it, unless one puts up with the sound resets, or outfits all applicable locos with keep-alive addons to avoid the resets, or artificially restricts the use of the switch at the lower right so that it never needs changing with sound units in the reversing section.  Not prototypical, as they arrived by running LH through that switch, but departed through the RH position after switching the harbour, then the sinter plant.

It does remain a little hairy, however, when I think about all the possible switching patterns, and whether they're adequately covered off by the large reverser.  I'll have to think it through a bit more, and if I see an exposed reversing scenario, I'll be back.

Thanks, both of you

Blair




------------------------------------
Posted by: Blair & Rasa<smithbr@...>
------------------------------------

http://www.WiringForDCC.com
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links





------------------------------------
Posted by: "Vollrath, Don"<Don.Vollrath@...>
------------------------------------

http://www.WiringForDCC.com
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Reversing Section Wiring question

Blair & Rasa
 

Don't know what's with groups.  Restarted my browser, entered groups via email link instead of neo, still nothing.  Click on upload, select file, add comment, click save, window grays out and nothing happens.
Oh well.  I'll send the file to Don via email.
Blair


Re: Reversing Section Wiring question

Blair & Rasa
 

I'll try to post it later.  Yahoo won't let me post it, for some reason.

B


On 2017-12-06 14:43, Blair & Rasa smithbr@... [WiringForDCC] wrote:

Don

In my original email, I described traffic as follows:

"A train from the junction will visit the sinter mill once daily, arriving by the lower track at right... Generally, all or a portion of the arriving train proceeds straight to the harbour scene, via the track at upper right... The train then returns to the sinter mill, where things get interesting."

So what isn't clear?  trains arrive lower right, exit to harbour,  and return, via upper right.  I didn't say it, but scale is HO, the grid is 12"; trains are expected to consist of 4 SD40-2 units plus 25 +/-  Ortner ore cars (6" ea), for a typical length around 15 feet.  Surely the visual ratio of switch lengths to track lengths gives you some idea of the constraints?  If a track is 4x the length of a switch, in HO or N, or likely G,  the track probably holds 6-8 cars, depending on car length and switch size obviously. 

The issue is, depending upon how one switches that center diagonal track pair, one can easily end up bridging from normal-power main to the reversing section at both ends of the train, even with the augmented large reversing section as depicted.  
But maybe I've found it.  See my new posting to files.  I think this works, satisfying the longest possible trains.  I added clarification info where necessary.

Blair Smith




On 2017-12-06 13:37, 'Vollrath, Don' don.vollrath@... [WiringForDCC] wrote:
Your operating description is a little hard to follow as there are no location names shown on the track sketch.
Also not sure if it is drawn to any scale or if there are other track extensions off to the right of either the upper or lower black stub tracks. Your saving grace is that the plan is to move only one train at a time. The only possible hooker is if you leave a steel wheeled car stuck in a gap at one end while you move the loco out the other end. The fix for that is to make track gaps large enough and fill them with plastic shaped to the railhead so that a steel wheel can never touch both sides of the gap at the same time. A loco is then free to traverse the gaps at the other end and let the A-R unit to do its thing. 

On my home layout I got tired of playing with relay or track switched reversing controllers and put in an OGAR. It auto-polarity trips at ~4 amps and acts as a circuit breaker in the case of derailment. Works like a charm from my 5 amp booster. No headlight blinks or sound disturbances at either end.

DonV  

-----Original Message-----
From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 11:19 AM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: Re: [WiringForDCC] Reversing Section Wiring question

Thanks, Don.  That was my thinking; since the A/D train will often be longer than the green, it makes sense to make the green plus red all one large autoreversing section.  Consists will often be 4 SD40-2 units, lead and trailing units sound equipped, so a relay reverser doesn't really cut it, unless one puts up with the sound resets, or outfits all applicable locos with keep-alive addons to avoid the resets, or artificially restricts the use of the switch at the lower right so that it never needs changing with sound units in the reversing section.  Not prototypical, as they arrived by running LH through that switch, but departed through the RH position after switching the harbour, then the sinter plant.

It does remain a little hairy, however, when I think about all the possible switching patterns, and whether they're adequately covered off by the large reverser.  I'll have to think it through a bit more, and if I see an exposed reversing scenario, I'll be back.

Thanks, both of you

Blair




------------------------------------
Posted by: Blair & Rasa 
------------------------------------

http://www.WiringForDCC.com
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links





------------------------------------
Posted by: "Vollrath, Don" 
------------------------------------

http://www.WiringForDCC.com
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WiringForDCC/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WiringForDCC/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    WiringForDCC-digest@... 
    WiringForDCC-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    WiringForDCC-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
    https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/