I have no issues running Polar Express cars behind a command engine (or otherwise). I'm using a 135 watt brick to power 1 loop of Fastrack. I haven't measured the track voltage. I also ran everything with a CW-80 with no issues behind various engines.
Greasy or loose fitting track pins will create an open or high resistance connection. Electricity will take the path of least resistance. In this scenario, if a car uses 2 trucks for power, the path of least resistance would be the wires connecting the trucks. When it bridges the bad track joint, most or all of the juice will flow through the wires.
If the track is the culprit, I have a feeling there may be more than 1 bad joint.
Dampfmann,Since you now know how to post pics, can you post a pic of the layout in question and then explain where your lockons/terminal sections are located, and what wires are going to each lockon connection/terminal section wire plug? This way we can determine if there could be a wiring problem.Have you tried a simple loop, only on lockon/terminal section?Also, have you checked the bottom of each section of track to make sure the tublar center rail is insulated from the outter rails? On the FasTrack you would need to turn the pieces over and make certain nothing is crossing the outter rails with the center rail.Thing is if the track were shorting your transformer would be cutting out.I was testing my 4-4-0 Christmas General pulling my new Christmas passenger cars, I was changing routes from the outter loop to the inner loop and the train just stopped, the ZW shorted and I knew I had crossed the wires, swapped the wires and it runs across the switches no problem...
Lionelsoni - I know I know! Been meaning to ask you, is there a way to wire the layout (two loops with a double crossover - 4 switches) so that I prevent the situation you have been preaching about?
Yes, Brent. One is to power the entire layout from a single transformer output and control speed with rheostats. Most folks probably won't want to do that, although Daan for one has.
The other, usual, way is to arrange for each block to be switchable between the two transformer outputs. You can do this most easily with a single-pole-double-throw center-off switch for each block. The train never needs to cross between transformer outputs because the track on both sides can always be switched to the same source. Notice that, with this scheme, you can have more blocks than transformer outputs. In fact, it is convenient to subdivide the loops so that two trains can take turns using the crossover when you want to swap loops. This scheme also works with more than two transformer controls; you can use a rotary switch or multiple toggle switches.
As for the Polar-Express problem, it does seem like we have eliminated everything but imperfect center-rail joints. I have wondered why they are consistently bad enough to divert the locomotive current through the cars but not bad enough to stop the train entirely. Perhaps this is the reason: The track is in a loop. Suppose that there is a completely open joint fairly close to the lockon. A locomotive traveling from the lockon and then across the nearby open joint will find itself being fed the long way around after it passes the open joint, with some voltage drop, which may be substantial if the loop is large or the joints generally of high resistance. As the following two-pickup cars cross the open joint, they will carry almost all the locomotive current around the joint, burning out the wires.
Martin, is "Dampfmann" your real name; or does it indicate a particular interest in (perhaps German) steam locomotives?
Bob Nelson
ADCX Rob wrote: Dampfmann wrote:Rob, can you explain how to check for the "voltage difference between the two center rail pick-ups"? (I have a voltage meter.)MartinThe easiest way is with a single bulb - & nothing else - wired directly between the 2 rollers and supported up where you can see it as the train travels your layout. Try a 6 or 8 volt bulb, run the entire consist as you have been. The bulb should be out/dark at all points, if/when it illuminates, the fault is between the two rollers of the car on the center rail.Rob
Dampfmann wrote:Rob, can you explain how to check for the "voltage difference between the two center rail pick-ups"? (I have a voltage meter.)Martin
The easiest way is with a single bulb - & nothing else - wired directly between the 2 rollers and supported up where you can see it as the train travels your layout. Try a 6 or 8 volt bulb, run the entire consist as you have been. The bulb should be out/dark at all points, if/when it illuminates, the fault is between the two rollers of the car on the center rail.
Rob
Earl
The problem with the swapped-wire hypothesis (aside from the fact that he has assured us that it didn't happen) is that only the wires connected to the center-rail pickups seem to have burned.
The lamp-between-pickups test might not show anything if the problem is as I speculated in my last posting. The voltage drop around the loop might not be nearly enough to get any light out of an incandescent lamp, even though almost the full current would flow if the gap were bridged by the car wiring.
Likewise, testing with a lamp and probes across the gaps wouldn't show anything, since the gap must be fed from both sides or he would have noticed the train's stopping in the isolated section.
Bob,I have a layout like this. Would installing isolated tracks at the indicated markers solve what you are talking about? I take it I should install the SPDT switches on the tracks marked SPDT?
This requires an operators attention... If I want to have this automated, how do I do that?
If I understand your diagram, you are proposing to have 5 blocks, one of which includes the entire double crossover. This makes it very difficult to run two trains simultaneously and continuously on the two loops. I would create 6 blocks. On each loop, there would be a block including just that loop's part of the crossovers, then two other blocks each comprising about half of what's left. That way, each loop could be fully assigned to one transformer output and trains could run unattended.
Here's a loop-swapping scenario: Imagine that both trains are running clockwise, with the train A powered by transformer output A on the outside loop and train B powered by transformer output B on the inside. When you want to swap loops, stop both trains completely inside the left blocks of the two loops. Switch the outside part of the crossover from A to B and switch the outside right block from A to B. Run train B across the crossover to the outside right block using transformer output B. Then switch both halves of the crossover and all the inside blocks to transformer output A. Run train A across the crossover to the inside loop. Finally switch all the outside blocks to transformer output B and continue running the trains.
lionelsoni wrote: If I understand your diagram, you are proposing to have 5 blocks, one of which includes the entire double crossover. This makes it very difficult to run two trains simultaneously and continuously on the two loops. I would create 6 blocks. On each loop, there would be a block including just that loop's part of the crossovers, then two other blocks each comprising about half of what's left. That way, each loop could be fully assigned to one transformer output and trains could run unattended.Here's a loop-swapping scenario: Imagine that both trains are running clockwise, with the train A powered by transformer output A on the outside loop and train B powered by transformer output B on the inside. When you want to swap loops, stop both trains completely inside the left blocks of the two loops. Switch the outside part of the crossover from A to B and switch the outside right block from A to B. Run train B across the crossover to the outside right block using transformer output B. Then switch both halves of the crossover and all the inside blocks to transformer output A. Run train A across the crossover to the inside loop. Finally switch all the outside blocks to transformer output B and continue running the trains.
You're real close. On toggle switches, the center terminal is usually the one that goes to the block's center rail. The terminals on either side go to the A or D of the ZW transformer. Put the insulating pins or gaps in the center rails and connect them (not the outside rails) to the center terminals of the toggle switches. Wire all the outside rails together and to the U terminal(s) of the ZW. You don't need to run separate wires to the outside rails of each block; but it is a good idea to connect together the outside rails of the loops where they come conveniently close together on the layout, to reduce voltage drop. If you've got turnouts with control rails that need insulating pins, you can get a sneaky problem at the crossovers, where you might wind up with all three rails insulated. In that case, be sure to connect the (non-control) outside rails between loops.
I would suggest arranging the switches on a simplified map of the layout or even what I do, which is to put them on a panel without even drawing a map, but laid out roughly according to where they would be if there were one. I orient the switches so that the handles move left and right, to match the locations of the controls. That's enough for me to remember what controls what.
The fact that your voltage fluctuated wildly from 2 - 10 volts is because the center rail is badly pitted and is probably dirty as well. It does not mean that that track is the cause of your problem but it could be. The heavy pitting on the center rail may be an indication of the problem. You should put the track back in the layout, apply power to the layout, and measure the AC voltage drop accross each junction in the center rail. The voltage drop accross every junction should be zero volts.
After thinking about it I think I know your problem. You mention that each oval is its own block.I have a isolated block section on my outer loop of my layout so I can park a train on the outer loop and bring a train out of the yard and bring it into the inner loop. The PE with all the cars is too long for the section and when I shut off the power to the center rail, the pickups on the observation car at the end completes the circuit to the center rail with the rear roller in the powered section and the front roller of that car in the dead section. All the other cars stay lighted and the loco powered up on that isolated section. If the loco is not in neutral but not moving or you are blowing the air whistle, the current is being drawn through the thin wire going from one roller pickup to the other of the same car to complete the circuit and letting the smoke out of the wire. A car with only one roller pickup does not complete the circuit. My suggestion would be is that you are right. The wires are too thin. I would rewire with a heavier gauge wire to the roller pickups. Maybe around 18 to 20 gauge. Now I will have to inspect the wires on my PE cars.
I'll let someone else explain the why's of shorting.
A friendly reminder to add some inline fuses between the transformer and your track. It will help to protect your engines and cars from stuff like this.That track looks like it has seen better days. The insulators on the rails can deteriorate over time. So it is possible that while the center rail looked clean, the insulator wrapped around the bottom of the center rail may have deteriorated and been making contact somewhere. Even the smallest break in the insulator on the rail can cause a short - especially if the ties are no longer tight allowing the rails have some movement.
I don't think a short in the center rail could cause his problem. Almost all of the electricity would flow through the short and not the wires on his PE coaches. His wires would actually see a reduced electrical current if a short existed in the center rail.
What about the time period the car is spanning a good rail and a shorted rail? Wouldn't the center pickups (one on a bad section of track, and one on a good section of track) act as the path of least resistance between the two, resulting in the wires in the cab taking the brunt of the current as the pickups spanned the two tracks?
Chris
I'll offer my most recent diagnosis again: "As for the Polar-Express problem, it does seem like we have eliminated everything but imperfect center-rail joints. I have wondered why they are consistently bad enough to divert the locomotive current through the cars but not bad enough to stop the train entirely. Perhaps this is the reason: The track is in a loop. Suppose that there is a completely open joint fairly close to the lockon. A locomotive traveling from the lockon and then across the nearby open joint will find itself being fed the long way around after it passes the open joint, with some voltage drop, which may be substantial if the loop is large or the joints generally of high resistance. As the following two-pickup cars cross the open joint, they will carry almost all the locomotive current around the joint, burning out the wires."
On further thought, the bad joint wouldn't really need to be that close to the lockon. Even if it were halfway around, the pickups would be carrying about half of the locomotive current, which would be enough to do the damage.
The problem isn't a short circuit; and fuses and circuit breakers, whatever other merits they have, won't solve the problem.
lionelsoni wrote: I'll offer my most recent diagnosis again: "As for the Polar-Express problem, it does seem like we have eliminated everything but imperfect center-rail joints. I have wondered why they are consistently bad enough to divert the locomotive current through the cars but not bad enough to stop the train entirely. Perhaps this is the reason: The track is in a loop. Suppose that there is a completely open joint fairly close to the lockon. A locomotive traveling from the lockon and then across the nearby open joint will find itself being fed the long way around after it passes the open joint, with some voltage drop, which may be substantial if the loop is large or the joints generally of high resistance. As the following two-pickup cars cross the open joint, they will carry almost all the locomotive current around the joint, burning out the wires."On further thought, the bad joint wouldn't really need to be that close to the lockon. Even if it were halfway around, the pickups would be carrying about half of the locomotive current, which would be enough to do the damage.The problem isn't a short circuit; and fuses and circuit breakers, whatever other merits they have, won't solve the problem.
Bob,
Could the situation you describe with an open joint (I understand it's not a "short") be created by grease, rust, or corrosion on the common rails?
I ask this because I am wondering if one is using older track (or track that is getting along in years), and the joint connections look tight, is there something that could cause a condition having the effect of an "open joint"?
Yes, but I don't think that is the case here, since the center-rail-pickup wires were the ones that burned. In general, however, corrosion and dirt can bite you with any of the rails. Usually the center rail is the problem, because the two outside rails have two chances to make a good connection.
When I solder my rail joints, I remove the pins and flow some solder into the railhead. It won't go in if the inside is not clean; so I clean it until the solder is wicked in. Even if you are not going to solder the joints, putting solder into ("tinning") the railheads and then shaking it out might be a way to be sure that the pins make good contact.
From the very first post in this thread: "Before anyone tells me the problem must be with the transformers or the track, let me add one more bit of information to the puzzle-- I have not had this happen to any other, older Post-War lighted passenger cars."
Doesn't that isolate the problem to the PE cars, whether mis-wired or utilizing inadequate wiring? Even though track sections might be shorted, poor track connections, etc., which might not be optimal, it only happens to his PE cars.
To me, the original specific problem (insulation burning off wires on ONLY PE cars) proves it must be within the PE cars themselves...and I'll bet on the incorrect AWG of the wire used. Even though there could be a more efficient track/joint/insulator methodology used in his trackage...
Just trying to understand here because I don't own PW cars.
Would it be helpful to know what type of bulbs are in the PE car and the PW cars, and know what the differences in their power requirements are?
My new O-27 cars use Christmas tree type bulbs with a wedge base. The older PW cars that I have seen schematics of use a different bulb.
If these new christmas tree type bulbs had lower requirements than older PW bulbs (drew fewer amps), couldn't a smaller wire be used?
So while the PE wiring may be smaller than the PW wiring, is it possible that the PE wiring is sized correctly for the power requirements of the bulbs currently in the PE cars?
Jim Duda wrote: From the very first post in this thread: "Before anyone tells me the problem must be with the transformers or the track, let me add one more bit of information to the puzzle-- I have not had this happen to any other, older Post-War lighted passenger cars." Doesn't that isolate the problem to the PE cars, whether mis-wired or utilizing inadequate wiring? Even though track sections might be shorted, poor track connections, etc., which might not be optimal, it only happens to his PE cars.To me, the original specific problem (insulation burning off wires on ONLY PE cars) proves it must be within the PE cars themselves...and I'll bet on the incorrect AWG of the wire used. Even though there could be a more efficient track/joint/insulator methodology used in his trackage...
Goof point Jim. I was wondering the same thing.
dep
Virginian Railroad
Birds wrote: So while the PE wiring may be smaller than the PW wiring, is it be possible that the PE wiring is sized correctly for the power requirements of the bulbs currently in the PE cars? Chris
So while the PE wiring may be smaller than the PW wiring, is it be possible that the PE wiring is sized correctly for the power requirements of the bulbs currently in the PE cars?
It's not just possible: that appears to be the actual case. The wiring for these bulbs is not supposed to carry the current draw for the whole darn train. The wiring isn't flawed: it appears that it's simply being overwhelmed by another fault.
In any case, were the wires too small, this frying would be a common problem. It is not.
Jim, as near as I can tell from his postings, he has only the double-pickup Polar Express cars and one single-pickup Newark (presumably 2434), which cannot be vulnerable to the apparent problem. So I don't think that the fact that he has had trouble only with the newer cars proves anything.
Kooljock1 wrote:The set comes with a loop of FasTrack right? Let him set it up and try to duplicate the problem. If the wires still melt the problem is with the cars, if not the track!Jon
lionelsoni wrote: I'll offer my most recent diagnosis again: "As for the Polar-Express problem, it does seem like we have eliminated everything but imperfect center-rail joints. I have wondered why they are consistently bad enough to divert the locomotive current through the cars but not bad enough to stop the train entirely. Perhaps this is the reason: The track is in a loop. Suppose that there is a completely open joint fairly close to the lockon. A locomotive traveling from the lockon and then across the nearby open joint will find itself being fed the long way around after it passes the open joint, with some voltage drop, which may be substantial if the loop is large or the joints generally of high resistance. As the following two-pickup cars cross the open joint, they will carry almost all the locomotive current around the joint, burning out the wires."
That is his problem. The wires connect from one roller pickup to the other on the car. When it finds that open or high resistance in the center rail joint, all the current flows through that wire in the car from one roller to the other to complete the circuit as the car rolls through it. If he took the PE cars and removed one wire from one roller pickup of each car, he would not be burning the wire. Replace that section of track and replace the wires with a little heavier gauge wire.
Again...it should NOT be up to the consumer to do rewiring to make sure this situation doesn't happen. Obviously Lionel doesn't do ANY consumer or product testing, or these wiring problems that apperar not just in the PE cars, but in other of their rolling stock, wouldn't be going on. If it's a bad design from Lionel for cost cutting reasons, then LIONEL should be the ones to admit it and fix it. Of course, it will be a cold day in the Netherworld when that happens.
Just wondering...when you guys buy a new car and have an electrical problem, do you go out with your handy test probes and meters and try fixing it yourself? I think NOT. You are PAYING for a product that is SUPPOSED to be reliable from the factory. Not something that's partially complete and needs to be re-wired to make it safe/reliable.
Dep
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month