Note: Originally, I thought I had a problem with the Shinohara turnout, but it turned out that the problem was in an Atlas crossing that was adjacent to the turnout. I've left the original discussion as an historical record.
Has anyone else had this problem? I've got a pair of these, and I have a problem when some engines go through, but not all. By manually moving the engines through the turnout, I've determined that I can avoid the problem if I force the engine over to one side. So, it looks like I'm getting a short somewhere between a live rail and a guard rail, or somewhere along the frog section, as the wheel passes between two conducting surfaces.
Has anyone else seen this? I've tried probing with a meter to see where I might have sections of opposite polarity close enough to do this, but I can't find any. The turnouts have power feeds on all branches.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I had this same problem with some Shinohara #6 code 83 turnouts. And I determined that the same thing was happening as you described. I have some 6-axle Atlas engines (HO) and it seems that the presence of a short depended upon the angle of attack of the engine entering the turnout. Generally the problem was more evident as the engine entered from the frog end.
It might be possible that the wheels on your engine are out of gage, but maybe not. I checked the gage on my engines and they were okay.
What flavor turnouts do you have...DCC friendly or the original version? The friendly versions have insulated frogs. Others on this forum will say that "DCC friendly" is a bunch of hogwash. Maybe so, but I don't intend to argue with them. My original solution was to replace the turnouts with the newer flavor until I discovered how much turnouts now cost. So as an experiment (nothing ventured, nothing gained) I took one of the turnouts and cut gaps around the frog to isolate it. I also eliminated the metal bridle that joins the point rails to the closure rails and installed rail joiners at that location. I bought some circuit board ties and replaced the other metal bridle at the throw bar. When I installed the new throw bar, I cut gaps in the copper cladding top and bottom so that the two point rails would be electrically isolated from each other.
The above eliminated my problem. However, if you already have the insulated frogs, then something else is amiss, possibly with where you have all the feeders connected.
These turnouts are the newer "DCC Friendly" ones. I agree with the "angle of attack" hypothesis.
I think I'll wait for a dark night, and then try this with the lights out to see if I can spot the spark.
Just out of curiosity, how new is "new"? Looking at the Walthers site they show one of the turnouts and in the description under the picture they state "improved point clearance gaps to prevent short circuits from metal wheelsets". I wonder if they did a mod to these and you have an earlier version. http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/948-8801
Or maybe they just mean improved from the non-friendly version.
I think I bought them about 3 months ago, from LHS stock. I suppose they could be slightly older models. I've been using the #6 turnouts with no problems at all. But, I'll check the point clearance and see if there's an issue there.
I first noticed this on a 4-axle switcher, then on a 6-axle road switcher. Running an 0-6-0 steamer over it causes no problems. It's the straight path that's causing the problem, by the way, not the curve, which strikes me as odd.
MisterBeasley These turnouts are the newer "DCC Friendly" ones. I agree with the "angle of attack" hypothesis. I think I'll wait for a dark night, and then try this with the lights out to see if I can spot the spark.
Aren't all nights dark, Mister Beasley?
Alton Junction
richhotrain Aren't all nights dark, Mister Beasley?
Well, actually, they're not. My train room is upstairs, and there is a south-facing skylight. So, when the wind is a torrent of darkness, through the gusty trees, and the moon is a ghostly galleon, tossed upon cloudy seas, it's at least bright enough to read the LCD numbers on my remote.
I looked at this a bit more last night. I'm thinking that the problem may actually be in the Atlas 30-degree crossover that the engine encounters right after the turnout. Since this track isn't permanently attached yet, I think I'll remove the crossover and replace it with a straight piece of track, and see if that makes the short go away. I may end up playing some power-routing games to eliminate power on the crossing track.
I have the same exact problem with Code 100 Number 4's that were purchased within the last 6 months. All of them checked out with an NMRA gauge as did the wheelsets and I still have the issue. I am completely stumped and may try isolating the frog as someone else suggested. If that doesn't work, I will reconfigure a few things and replace them with #6's. None of my engines have any problems going through those and I have some that are as old as 10 years and others that are brand new.
There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it over.....
HaroldAI have the same exact problem with Code 100 Number 4's that were purchased within the last 6 months. All of them checked out with an NMRA gauge as did the wheelsets and I still have the issue. I am completely stumped and may try isolating the frog as someone else suggested. If that doesn't work, I will reconfigure a few things and replace them with #6's. None of my engines have any problems going through those and I have some that are as old as 10 years and others that are brand new.
I've noticed the same thing. I recently bought a couple of Atlas #4 code 100 turnouts and they had multiple problems. The point rails were loose, the frogs were high and I was not able to get them to work reasonably well. I replaced them with #6s. It was immediately apparent that they were much better and they worked flawlessly out of the box. It seems like Atlas is using two different sources for their turnouts.
Joe
I just did a quick test. I removed the crossover and temporarily put in a piece of straight track. The shorts went away. I can't see anything obviously wrong with the crossover, but now I know where to look, anyway.
Now I'm thinking that the coupler pin on that engine might be set just a bit low, so that it hits the crossing rail as the engine passes over. That would explain why some engines do this, but others don't.
If the switch points are the same polarity, or tied together electrically, they are the older or non-friendly DCC type. As the points contacted the stock rail, the points and frog would take on that polarity or phase. When they were switched, the points and frog will take on the other polarity or phase.
If this is the way your turnout is working, then the loco wheels are contacting the stock rail and open point rail at the same time causing the short.
If you can push the loco toward the stock rail side and doesn't short, then you need to be particular about the track gauge in the area of the points. I have found this area to be out of gauge on many turnouts (wide) allowing the loco wheels to contact the points.
I have several of this type of turnout (no.4's and curved) and have re-gauged them, and made sure all my loco wheels are in gauge according to the NMRA gauge. They now work correctly for me.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
Coupler pin sounds plausible: been there and done that! Have you run very, very slowly through the turnout and over the crossing to see exactly where the short occurs?
Dante
MisterBeasley I just did a quick test. I removed the crossover and temporarily put in a piece of straight track. The shorts went away. I can't see anything obviously wrong with the crossover, but now I know where to look, anyway. Now I'm thinking that the coupler pin on that engine might be set just a bit low, so that it hits the crossing rail as the engine passes over. That would explain why some engines do this, but others don't.
Those coupler pins cause a lot of problems. I have used the Kadee adjustment tool to bend every coupler pin on every engine and every freight car so that the coupler pins don't short out turnouts or cause derailments.
Rich
I think I found the problem, although I haven't been able to test it yet. No, I didn't give you enough information to figure out out in this virtual world.
There are two #4 turnouts, with the curved tracks from the frog end facing each other and separated by about 6 inches of ordinary track. There's no problem on that path. The straight tracks off the frog go to the two sides of an Atlas 30-degree crossover, and there are sidings to industries beyond that. I like remote uncoupling, so I put a Kadee under-track uncoupler magnet beneath the crossing.
When I removed the crossing and replaced it with a piece of straight track last night, I no longer had a short as the locomotive traversed the turnout. Somehow, the coupler pin idea didn't compute. This engine is a Proto, not very old, and the pin causes no problems elsewhere. So, it's unlikely that the pin is "hot," wired to either side of the engine. In fact, it should be completely isolated by the plastic draft gear box and shaft.
So, I started thinking about the crossover, but in looking at it I didn't see where a short could occur. All the rail segments are well-protected by plastic. The jumpers on the underside of the crossover looked right, with no extra wire strands or bits of metal stuck there where the wheels could hit.
But, hmmmm, metal jumpers on the underside, eh? And this crossing sits on top of .... a metal magnet. My guess is that the weight of the engine is just enough to make contact between the jumpers and the magnet. A piece of cardboard should solve this mystery tonight.
MisterBeasleyBut, hmmmm, metal jumpers on the underside, eh? And this crossing sits on top of .... a metal magnet. My guess is that the weight of the engine is just enough to make contact between the jumpers and the magnet.
Boy, that made me think. I don't know what kind of magnets you use, but just because they're magnetic doesn't make them metal. I just ran down the basement and checked one of my Kadee non-delayed magnets with an ohm meter and had no conductivity, so I can't see how they would short across the crossing contacts. Maybe you have something different?
No, it wasn't the magnet. I first insulated it with paper, and then removed it completely. It made no difference. I flipped the crossing around so I went over the other track, and it worked OK, but now the other track is bad. I guess the crossing itself is defective. Nothing obvious, but something in there is shorting.
I'd be rather suspicious of the crossing.. either itself or where it is placed in relation to the switches. You said that by moving it somewhere else, the bug changed. Are all legs of it gapped? It sounds like perhaps the loco and tender set could be causing an unintended circuit between the feeds of the switches and the crosstracks. Does the set cross into another power district at this point? Do you have another crossing to try in its place? Failing that, measure everything with an ohmmeter or a continuity checker.
Sounds like a good bug! Have fun, George
When I tested the crossing, I disconnected all the other tracks. So, I had no interaction with feeders or power districts. (It's all on the same one anyway - only one pair of bus wires at that end of the layout.)
This is an Atlas 30-degree crossing. I'm going to order a Walthers one and be done with it. I'm noticing enough other quality issues with Atlas track that I'm not surprised at this.
This is a bit concerning to me. I have an Atlas 30-degree and an Atlas 25-degree crossing, directly connected to each other, that allow a logging road to cross 2 mainlines that are diverging at about 5 degrees from each other. All code-100 size. 3 separate DC power packs, 1 on each line. So far no troubles on the 2 mains, but haven't powered the logging branch yet, as it is still in construction. Maybe I better get at it as a priority.
Hopefully, your replacing of the crossing will be a successful fix.
Let us know how you make out.... G
I've ordered a replacement crossing. I should have it within a week.
I've always used a lot of Atlas track products. The code 100 stuff has been fine. I've been building Phase 2 of the layout with code 83, though, and this is the second time their quality has broken down. Over the past few months, there have been numerous reports of Atlas track shortages, and it wouldn't surprise me if they have been dealing with quality issues at the production plants in China.