Date   
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

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

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/>

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

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


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





Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

sgaugian
 

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

 

Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

Richard Gagnon
 

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

sgaugian
 

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: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

sgaugian
 

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

Edward Sargent
 

First off the system we looked at was RailPro by RingEngineering http://ringengineering.com/

 

I don’t know if it would work with a tender wirelessly, if it does, it is a fairly expensive solution to use just to eliminate wires.

Drawbacks, If you have an existing DCC system to make use  of all the features you need to use JMRI or Ringengineering throttles and replace the decoders in all your engines. If you also take your equipment to other layouts the units equipped with RailPro decoders may or may not function.

Wireless consisting only works if the HC-2 throttle (or CI-1) is used.

HC-2 cannot currently control DCC decoders

HC-2 costs more than other vendors throttles

 

Another way of looking at it is without the HC-2 all the benefits of RailPro are gone, with the HC-2 the engines with normal DCC decoders are DOA.

 

 

From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 6:51 PM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: RE: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

 

 

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

Glenn
 

You can download an HC simulator to a PC.

IMHO The RailPro system is superior to DCC.
1 It is R/C.
2 The controller is touch screen so you choose engines by an icon.
3 You can upload photos of engines / accessories to the controller.
4 You can upload sounds as well.
5 you can run several loco simultaneously, no toggling between just two. If a loco is powered up it is available on the HC.
6 There is no need for a programming track.
7 Programming adjustments (CVs) can be done on the main.
8 You only need the controller and decoders. No base station, just power on the rails or batteries.

I have had no problem running my RailPro engines on either NCE or Digitrax layouts.

Glenn

-----Original Message-----
From: "'Ed Sargent' ed_sargent@... [WiringForDCC]"
Sent: Dec 18, 2017 1:05 AM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: RE: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender



First off the system we looked at was RailPro by RingEngineering http://ringengineering.com/

 

I don’t know if it would work with a tender wirelessly, if it does, it is a fairly expensive solution to use just to eliminate wires.

Drawbacks, If you have an existing DCC system to make use  of all the features you need to use JMRI or Ringengineering throttles and replace the decoders in all your engines. If you also take your equipment to other layouts the units equipped with RailPro decoders may or may not function.

Wireless consisting only works if the HC-2 throttle (or CI-1) is used.

HC-2 cannot currently control DCC decoders

HC-2 costs more than other vendors throttles

 

Another way of looking at it is without the HC-2 all the benefits of RailPro are gone, with the HC-2 the engines with normal DCC decoders are DOA.

 

 

From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 6:51 PM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: RE: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

 

 

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

sgaugian
 

Thanks Glenn.  So RailPro is a dead-rail system - correct?  With which you can have no power to the tracks and run your trains with their wireless or R/C controller or when there is power to the tracks (AC, DC, or DCC) the system utilizes that power but also recharges the onboard batteries at the same time, with a limiter so you can't overcharge them -- correct?  But it's not a wireless tether between an engine and a tender.  At least not intended for that use.  Right?   And Blue Rail would be that plus you can control your trains with Bluetooth devices such as with an app on your smart phone.  

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

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

Richard Gagnon
 


To my knowledge, there is no way to transfer power wirelessly between a loco and tender. Think about this logically.

Dead Rail. Battery time is an issue.


Rich

Failure is not an option. it comes bundled with Windows.





Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

Edward Sargent
 

Glenn’s points are correct, we reached the decision we did because the investment in locos and NCE gear for the club was just too much to set aside for a new system and having 2 types of throttles a little confusing. Additionally club members who like to bring their own equipment from home or other clubs would be a problem.

 

For someone just starting out and not in a club or shared layout environment it would be the best system, if you discount having to swap out the factory installed DCC components on every purchase, not to mention features that some other systems have.

 

From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 7:11 AM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: RE: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

 

 

You can download an HC simulator to a PC.

IMHO The RailPro system is superior to DCC.
1 It is R/C.
2 The controller is touch screen so you choose engines by an icon.
3 You can upload photos of engines / accessories to the controller.
4 You can upload sounds as well.
5 you can run several loco simultaneously, no toggling between just two. If a loco is powered up it is available on the HC.
6 There is no need for a programming track.
7 Programming adjustments (CVs) can be done on the main.
8 You only need the controller and decoders. No base station, just power on the rails or batteries.

I have had no problem running my RailPro engines on either NCE or Digitrax layouts.

Glenn

-----Original Message-----
From: "'Ed Sargent'
ed_sargent@... [WiringForDCC]"
Sent: Dec 18, 2017 1:05 AM
To:
WiringForDCC@...
Subject: RE: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender




First off the system we looked at was RailPro by RingEngineering http://ringengineering.com/

 

I don’t know if it would work with a tender wirelessly, if it does, it is a fairly expensive solution to use just to eliminate wires.

Drawbacks, If you have an existing DCC system to make use  of all the features you need to use JMRI or Ringengineering throttles and replace the decoders in all your engines. If you also take your equipment to other layouts the units equipped with RailPro decoders may or may not function.

Wireless consisting only works if the HC-2 throttle (or CI-1) is used.

HC-2 cannot currently control DCC decoders

HC-2 costs more than other vendors throttles

 

Another way of looking at it is without the HC-2 all the benefits of RailPro are gone, with the HC-2 the engines with normal DCC decoders are DOA.

 

 

From: WiringForDCC@... [mailto:WiringForDCC@...]
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 6:51 PM
To:
WiringForDCC@...
Subject: RE: [WiringForDCC] Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

 

 

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

sgaugian
 

I agree with you Rich.  The only reason I'm asking is a prospective customer asked me to provide him a quote with a wireless tether between the engine and the tender b/c it was done that way for him already by another service provider on another S-gauge engine converted to DCC.  I have asked for more information and photos, but have not received them yet.  Thought I'd find out if I'm missing something here or not.  Never heard of it before, or understand how it would work.  TMCC and Legacy have wireless tethers, but for coded signals, not power.  

Re: Wireless DCC tether between steam engine and tender

sgaugian
 

Thanks for the clarifications Ed.

Dave