This stuff is only 2.5" wide. Is that wide enough for MTH realtrax, or will it need to be wider? I wanted to set "0 height" on a .5" riser for most of the track, and then go up from there with the 2 degree incline.
Thanks,
Wes
I just got back from the LHS. They are ordering me the 2% grade (16' x 2.5" wide), and some of the 2" and 4" risers. Since they only offer this stuff in one width, I'm sure it will be fine.
Have a good day!Wes
Wes, I use these and I just doubled them up side by side which gives me a 5" width. You can see them in this photo. The top circular track was never built. This is where the barn is now setting. See the small piece of wood where the track goes under the upper track.
Celebrating 18 years on the CTT Forum.
Buckeye Riveter......... OTTS Charter Member, a Roseyville Raider and a member of the CTT Forum since 2004..
Jelloway Creek, OH - ELV 1,100 - Home of the Baltimore, Ohio & Wabash RR
TCA 09-64284
From the looks of it, you used foam board more than the WS inclines! I ordered two of them, so we will see how it works. I would think that the inclines would start "drifting" around corners though, since the outer is longer than the inner loop when you put them side by side. Maybe it's not enough to matter.
Your picture brings up a good question. I am also working on mapping out my mountain, and there will be a tunnel housing a loopback at ground level. Is 4" (two pieces of 2" foam stacked) enough height for the tunnel, or should I buy a sheet of 1", bringing the total tunnel height to 5" inside. By using 2" foam for the flat mountain top, I will have to rise 7" from the base track to put track on the top of the mountain. I don't want to go any higher than 7" rise, and less if possible. That's the problem with 2" foam, but I like the weight savings.
If I didn't describe that well, just let me know.
Wes Whitmore wrote: From the looks of it, you used foam board more than the WS inclines! I ordered two of them, so we will see how it works. I would think that the inclines would start "drifting" around corners though, since the outer is longer than the inner loop when you put them side by side. Maybe it's not enough to matter.Your picture brings up a good question. I am also working on mapping out my mountain, and there will be a tunnel housing a loopback at ground level. Is 4" (two pieces of 2" foam stacked) enough height for the tunnel, or should I buy a sheet of 1", bringing the total tunnel height to 5" inside. By using 2" foam for the flat mountain top, I will have to rise 7" from the base track to put track on the top of the mountain. I don't want to go any higher than 7" rise, and less if possible. That's the problem with 2" foam, but I like the weight savings.If I didn't describe that well, just let me know.Wes
Wes, the track on the back side of the layout except for the bridge is sitting on the risers. After you get so high with the riser, the next riser needs to be sitting on foam. Unfortunately during construction, we did not take any photos of the backside!!
If you could get a 6" tunnel height you will be much happier. My lower loop has a 5" clearence...No double stacks through here. The upper loop has a 6 inch plus and everything can be run on that loop, but I must use more power to make the grade I guess it is somewhat like a real railroad.
Cheat and use foam board if you have one or two clearence problem areas. Foam board can span across a track. If you need to see inside my layout again, we can make that happen. I also can pull the front panel off so you can see inside under the farm. There are little foam columns that hold up the foam where the farm is sitting. (I'm missing a die-cast and now I wonder if it is under the farm. )
Another view
I can make it 6". I have 32' to raise 8" (The top of the foam on a 6" mountain), which is exactly 2 2% incline sets. I'll just have to buy some 4" risers as well. Thanks for the pictures. They help a lot. I still don't know how that turned into what you have now...
I measured the MTH realtrax, and its 3" wide.
My 2% incline foam kits came in today. I purchased 2 sets of them (2.5" wide x 16' long). I am going to to try to keep them side by side as instructed, keeping a 5" wide roadbed for the 3" wide MTH track. I'm curious to see what happens on the corners though. They definately won't stay aligned around the corners, but I might just cut the inner track into little blocks of foam and glue them down the best I can. My goal is to work the incline up to the 6" height, so I will be using another 8' of a 2% incline to work up to that height so I can cross over an existing track that is set to ground level. I haven't had trains running for over a week now, and I'm anxious to get this incline set up for testing. I'll post some pictures when I have them.
Thanks,Wes
Here are a few pictures I just took. I used 1 and a half kits to raise to 6", and then maintained that height around the top loop. It's the general idea of my track layout.
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804363346813/0
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804363364892/1
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804363346773/2
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804363356326/3
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804363346739/4
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804363342254/5
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2686337901850306215&hl=en
Here is a quick video of my speeder on the track. After I recorded this, I raised the track up another inch, high enough to hold the MTH tunnel portal. It made the heighest track around 7.5 inches from the base. I have a long way to go, but at least I can run some trains again.
My MTH 2-8-0 from the Buckeye set will pull 8 cars (plus tender) with little effort. With throttle set at half way, it climbs and only slows down a little at the top of the hill. It really does a great job. I'll try to get a video of it. So far, so good.
I'm probably going to need wiring help on the "grounding of trigger tracks" to get two trains running automatically at the same time. I have been drawing out some things on paper, but know that people like Brent,Frank53, and Bob have already done this a hundred times, and could make it easy for me. It's not really like Frank53's, since I have a shared connecting line between two loopbacks.
Does anyone have information on stepping down voltages on track segments without removing voltage completely? My MTH train seems to reset to neutral after you kill track power for 15 seconds, and I would like to build an isolated section of track from half of the loop to the switch that hs a different voltage than the incine and the other halfs of the loops. Something on a variable reostat, or voltage stepping switches that I can control after I set the "fast" speed of the train when it's on it's incline/decline between the loops.
Can I do this with another tranformer instead, yet still share grounds between the systems without creating fireworks? If so, I don't really need to build the adjustable voltage device.
Thanks for the help,Wes
I added another video of the MTH 2-8-0 pulling 8 cars plus tender.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9173179019044089613&hl=en
Wes, I often warn against setting up a situation where a train can run between blocks powered by transformers with different settings. This produces a fault current that is often not protected against by the transformer's circuit breaker and can be quite dangerous, to the locomotive or lighted-car wiring, to the layout wiring, and to the transformer. So don't do that.
If your voltage reduction will be simply a matter of switching the track to a lower transformer voltage, not going over a gap between two voltages, that's pretty safe.
In any case, you can reduce the voltage from a single transformer output safely, gap or no gap, with a series voltage-dropping element. The simplest is a rheostat. But its voltage reduction depends on the load current, whose variation could be a problem. One that I often recommend is a string of modified bridge-rectifier modules. Connect the + and - terminals together within each module and wire it into the series string using the ~ terminals. Each module will drop a little over a volt, pretty much independent of the load current.
Bob Nelson
Bob,
I searched around on the bridge-rectifier modules. I found some schematics. Do you have any of the exact components already worked out from previous projects? My electronic circuit knowledge is pretty worthless.
Something like the Radio Shack 276-1181 6-ampere bridge for $2.59 would be suitable, although you can probably find it cheaper and you don't need more than a 50-volt rating. As I said, just connect the + and - of each module together. Then string a bunch of them in series, connecting ~ to ~ from module to module. Connect one end of the string to the transformer output. You can connect the center rail to any point along the string to get the voltage you want. You can even connect to one of the +- connections to get half the drop of a module for a fine adjustment.
Notice that we are not actually using these rectifier modules for rectification. They are just a convenient way to get 4 diodes in one package in an arrangement that is suitable for voltage dropping.
Thanks bob. I'll look at that module. I noticed that they were only using 4 diodes to construct these, but that's about as far as I got. So what do you think the general voltage drop from one module to the next will be? Is there a way for me to figure it out, or should I just keep adding them until it's slow enough for me?
Also, what will happen if I connect the full voltage to a track section that has been reduced through the chain? I'm assuming the diode will protect the chain, and nothing negative will happen? I have an idea if it works, but beyond that, I would think that a locos wheels will bridge two different voltage points as it passes through the "reduction zone", since the whole truck is probably one big conductor. It's all coming form one transformer, so it should be fine, right?
The RMS voltage drop per module is a little more than a volt. (It is not, as one might assume, simply the forward voltage of two diodes in series.) Computing the exact value is complicated and depends anyway on the particular diodes used. So I think your intuition is right, to add modules until you get the speed you want. Don't forget that you have a half-module fine adjustment if you need it.
The reason for doing it this way is just so that there will be no fault current when you bridge the gap between blocks. That should work fine. However, there is a risk you should be aware of: If you have lighted cars with multiple pickups, their internal wiring may be carrying the locomotive current across the gap from the high-voltage block to the low-voltage block through their internal wiring when they straddle the gap. Some cars have wires so small that they have been known to burn out in situations like this. So you might want to check your cars and beef up the wiring as needed.
I don't understand your concern about the wheels. The outside rails should be continuous, electrically if not mechanically, that is, all connected to the transformer common. Only the center rail needs to have a gap.
My concern was answered with the lighted car example you just gave me. You have cleared it up for me, I think. The wheels are a constant ground for both outer rails, so I only need to worry about the center contact points. Still, there are usually 2 center rail contacts per car or loco, that would bridge two zones with different voltages. Which voltage will the train see? It sounds like the higher one.
That being a factor now, I would try to gradually slow the train down by using a couple of slow down points in a 5 or 6 section of track. If I still need to beef up internal wiring, that's fine.
In my scenario, I will pass through the switch of the loop, and start to slow down as I go around the loop, eventually cutting voltage so much that the loco isn't moving at all but still technically on, waiting to be released again. The sound should remain on, but I figure all of the lights will dim to almost nothing. I just planned on creating a center rail trigger on another part of the track that would take the higher voltage and apply it to that center rail of the idle train, giving it enough voltage to leave the loop. There are a lot of things to work on, but this is the info that I needed. Thanks a lot Bob. It's nice to have a resident EE to call on!
Thanks again,
You're welcome!
Your idea of gradually reducing the voltage is a good one. You won't need any more rectifier modules to do that. Just make multiple taps into the one string, closer to the transformer for the intermediate steps.
When the gap is bridged, both sides see the higher of the two voltages.
Thanks again Bob. I really appriciate it. I will pick up 5 of those rectifiers and start playing with them, then I will find out how I want to use them. I will need to see how little voltage is needed to keep the train on, but not running. Hopefully almost no voltage at all, well below any trains wheel operating voltage.
Thanks!Wes
I stopped by the local RS and purchased the only two rectifier modules that they had in stock. There are a bunch more of them on my 45 minute commute to work, so I will probably buy them out of stock tomorrow. I just finished testing the voltages with the two that I had. Now that I have them out of the package, your instructions made sense. Each module has 4 conductors. Two with a ~, and a + and a -. I took a jumper and connected the + to the -. I did this to both modules. Then I I connected one ~ from each module together, and one ~ went to the transformer output, and the other would go to the track.
I didn't get 1 volt drop for each module. I got around a 1/2 volt. I don't mind, I'll just add more modules. I wanted to point that out incase I wired up something wrong and I should be seeing 1 volt reduction.
Module 1
Input ~ was 19.54 volts with my MTH 1000 all the way up.
The + and - connection was 19.21 Volts
The output ~ to the other module was 18.93 Volts (same with the input of module #2 since a wire is connecting them).
Total Voltage Drop for Module 1 was .61 Volts
Module 2
Input ~ was 18.93 volts
The + and - connection was 18.64 Volts
The output ~ was 18.39 Volts
Total Voltage drop for Module 2 was .53 Volts
So two modules = 1.15 Volts
So maybe voltage drop isn't linear...I'll discover more as I go I guess. I'm definitely heading in the right direction.
Thanks again Bob,
I got the kid to sleep and did some more testing. I ran the train with the 1 volt reduction, and it already has slowed down a lot. When I touched a full voltage lead onto the lower voltage lead, the train took off like a rocket, just like you said it would. I then slowed the train down to the speed I wanted it to be at the station approach, and the track voltage was 11 volts. The MTH completely stops forward movement at around 8 volts, and the lowest I could go on my MTH controller was between 3.5 and 5 volts before it shut the train off. I will just try to shoot for 5 volts as the idle voltage. This is fun enough to almost not consider DCS or TMCC!
Since it's not a linear voltage drop, I'll keep adding them in and measuring.
Thanks for the help!
Wes, I suspect that you took your measurements without a load on the circuit. The impedance of a typical voltmeter is so high that you wouldn't see much of the voltage drop. You could try repeating your measurements with some substantial load, perhaps a few lighted cars.
On the other hand, with a load, the voltage you measure with an ordinary voltmeter will indicate more of a drop than you are actually getting, since the reduced-voltage waveform is not sinusoidal any more. The best technique is just to try it with an actual train, like you're already doing.
Wes,
Instead of doubling the inclines, I hot glued 1/4" foam board to the sides of the inclines.
It's much cheaper and it works just fine. The 1/4" also bends around curves if your inclines do so.
Good Luck,
Tim C.
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