And so ends a thread outdone in length only by the novel War and Peace.
hon30critterI think it would be a blast to see how their minds work.
I was keen to see that as well.
Aside from this, Brendan seems to belong to those people asking for advice but then having difficulties to accept it. Well, you can´t win them all.
mobilman44Ha, a good portion of this lengthy and overly complicated thread could have been avoided if Rich's suggestions and advice were given their just due.
I have to agree. When I posted the "Credit where credit is due" message I got a rather vociferious PM from Brendan trying to defend his actions. He said that he wasn't angry with either Rich or myself, but the wording implied otherwise. His refusal to make further posts pretty much proves that he is not happy with us.
Despite the apparent vitriol I have asked Brendan to keep us up to date on what his grandkids come up with regarding scenery. I think it would be a blast to see how their minds work.
One point I will make is that I'm not going to think twice in the future about trying to help newbies. I think Rich probably feels the same way. I have been burned a couple of times by newbies ultimately reacting badly to my (and others) good intentions. I'm going to impose myself on the newbies regardless!
Best wishes to all, including Brendan!
Regards,
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Dave, I thought the same - that Rich identified the problem much earlier - but was essentially blown off. Ha, a good portion of this lengthy and overly complicated thread could have been avoided if Rich's suggestions and advice were given their just due.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Just for posterity, Rich posted this on June 19th:
richhotrainIt's just that the problem that you are experiencing has all of the elements of a conflict between a PSX-AR and PSX.
Rich did not suggest that the PSX settings be changed, but he did identify the problem.
Credit where credit is due.
I just received updated information from Larry at amhobby.com Larry is the Technical Support Specialist at Tony's Train Exchange. He responded to a question I asked him about the PSX-1 and PSX-ARSC units I have installed.
The information is better than what I had originally written here. I didn't want to leave anything here that was incorrect. The advice Larry provided does not appear anywhere else. I believe it is an undocumented fix.
I followed Larry's advice and everything works perfectly. I have returned the jumper on my PSX-1 to the 1.27 amp setting and programmed that board's CV55 to a value of 1.
Among other thing's this means I will not have to upgrade my PowerCab. I have circuit breaker protection everywhere on my layout and each circuit breaker is set for 1.27 amps which is what is recommended for the NCE PowerCab.
I am really finished this time. My email to him and his to me are below.
This is the email I sent him:
Hello Larry,
I was advised to write you by the folks at Tony’s.
I have a medium size ho layout with 3 power districts. I use NCE’s PowerCab starter set to control the layout. I have 2 reversing loops. Each reversing loop is a separate power district. The other power district covers the rest of my layout.
The power going from my Power Cab is separated into 3 separate circuits. One circuit goes to a PSX-ARSC and then out to a reversing loop. Another circuit does the exact same thing on the second reversing loop. Each of those circuits have only one track feed going from the PSX-ARSCs. The circuit that goes into the PSX-1 comes out of the PSX-1 to a star bus that has multiple track feeds attached to it. I have tested both voltage and current along the entire layout and it is consistent everywhere.
On one of my reversing loops I was experiencing a momentary shut down of power when the locomotive exited the reversing loop and came onto the main layout. This only happened when the locomotive entered the turnout from the main section and took the divergent path through the turnout. If it entered the turnout from the main layhout and went straight through the turnout and returned to the main layout through the divergent route on the turnout this did not happen.
I had all of the PSX boards wired at J6 for 1.27 amps as per the instructions that came with the unit. My Power Cab is rated at 2 amps. When I encountered the problem I read something that said if this happens change the PSX-1 current setting to the next highest value. I remove the J6 jumper from pins 1 and 2 and left J6 open. That raise the current value to 3.81. Everything works, but I am now exceeding the current rating of my Power Cab on my main layout.
I am wondering if there is another solution to this. I can change CV49 to a value of 2, but the 2.54 current rating would still exceed that of my Power Cab. I was also wondering why this is happening.
One other observation from before I changed the jumper on the PSX-1, after the locomotive powered up I could stop it and send it back and forth through the straight route on the turnout without a problem. The polarity of the main section and the turnout were both the same and there was no reversing involved. I also observed that when the power was shutting down it happened after the locomotive had completely left the reversing loop (passing the track insulators) and before it hit the points on the turnout. I initially did not have my frogs powered. When I did power them it made no difference. I initially thought the locomotive was losing power at the frog, but it turned out that what I was dealing with was a short.
This is Larry's response:
Brendan:
If raising the current on the PSX-1 fixed the problem, then the issue is that the PSX and PSX-AR are fighting with each other. On the PSX-1, return the current setting to 1.27 amps. Then set CV55=1. This will introduce a delay in the PSX trip time which will allow the PSX-AR to reverse first. If this does not solve the problem, you can increase the delay by adjusting CV65. The default value is 24, so try 32, 40, 48, etc. until the problem is solved. You should not need to exceed a value of 80.
Larry Maier Technical Support Specialist Tony's Train Exchange 57 River Rd., Suite 1023 Essex Junction, VT 05452-3842
Email: larry@amhobby.com
Brendan BuschiI will not be responding to anything in future.
I certainly hope that is not the case.
Many of us would like to see what your grandkids come up with in terms of "decorations". We also wouldn't mind you bragging about how good operators they become.
Brendan BuschiI will not be responding to anything in future. Add Quote to your Post
To quote Charlie Brown "good grief"
Steve runs a tight ship but he was late to the party, otherwise he would have locked this thread 2 pages ago. In that time you guys have kissed and made up, well almost. I see no reason to take your marbles and leave.
Meanwhile you might look up some posts by DoctorWayne and google Howard Zane, also a member here; you will have to come up with a different term than decorations.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Steven Otte OK, there appears to be some bad blood going on here that I don't fully understand the origin of, nor do I care to understand it. I just want it to stop. Rich, Brendan, go to your corners. I suggest you avoid replying to each other for a while, so I don't have to step in with something more forceful than a suggestion. And the first one to reply with a "But he started it" or the like gets smacked.
OK, there appears to be some bad blood going on here that I don't fully understand the origin of, nor do I care to understand it. I just want it to stop. Rich, Brendan, go to your corners. I suggest you avoid replying to each other for a while, so I don't have to step in with something more forceful than a suggestion.
And the first one to reply with a "But he started it" or the like gets smacked.
I respect your wishes. I have actually now completed my layouts mechanical and electrical work and so my layout is finished except for decorations. I will no longer post on this blog. Thanks to all who have contributed. I will not be responding to anything in future.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Hello All - today is a very good day. I am not responding directly to Rich's last post because my response covers a lot of things I've discussed with other's as well.
First to Rich, My layout is wired correctly - polarity and all. My track is level across the entire layout. The problem was a short - you were right about that, but it wasn't caused by polarity or anything being downstream of anything else because every power district is wired in parallel to my NCE Power Cab - believe it or not.
My layout works flawlessly right now. Not even a hiccup. The problem is not clear to me and the explanations that were provided here were not correct, except that Rich was correct it was a short.
The PSX products all have a jumper to control the current that the units will short at. For my NCE system they recommend shorting the 1 and 2 pins on jumper J6. That sets the trip current to 1.27 amps which is lower than the Power Cab which defaults at 2 amps.
If you do not use a jumper on J6, the current is set to 3.81 amps. DCC Specialties says that if you have a PSX and a PSX-AR unit in place where you are coming out of the reversing loop onto a section of track protected by a PSX you might encounter the problem I experienced. In that case they recommend setting the current at J6 on the PSX board to its next highest rating. In my case that would be either no jumper at J6 or no jumper at J6 and setting CV49 to a value of 2 which would set the current to 2.54 amps. In either case, this would exceed the Power Cab rating of 2 amps.
I removed the jumper at J6 on my PSX-1 unit and the problem vanished. However, this is unacceptable to me since at either 2.54 or 3.81 amps I am beyond the 2 amps of the Power Cab.
I spoke with NCE and they said never use their Power Cabs without circuit protection between the Power Cab and the track. I respect that. The solution for me is simple - upgrade to an NCE SB-5 whcih is rated at 5 amps. That its what I most likely will do.
In the process, I learned how to power a frog. It was very simple and it worked perfectly with my Atlas Snap Relays. The directions Atlas provided with the Snap Relays are for DC not DCC frog powering. If you want to power a frog involved in a reversing loop, tap the track power from the points end or the turnout, not the frog end as Atlas recommends.
I also learned how to examine a turnout and that proved interesting. The turnouts have a guard rail and the gap can be tested using an NMRA gauge. There is a no-go test that you can perform with the gauge and the guard rail on my problem turnout exceeded the proper width according to that gauge. I don't know to what extent if any this contributed to my problem. I simply note it here.
I also performed a simple test that Rich recommended on my locomotive and my locomotive is running properly. I just held one set of wheels off the track and confirmed that the other set of wheels was powered and then did it again with the other set of wheels held off the track.
I like to go slow and easy with technology. If you want to help someone, I think you need to go slow and easy as well. I am posting all this in the hope that it will help anyone else going through this experience.
Rich, you insisted I had one PSX unit wired downstream of the other. I didn't. You talked about polarity and my polarity was perfect. You talked about my track setting and that was perfect too. If there is a production problem with a gap on my turnout, that is something beyond my control. If I do not have another turnout to replace my problem turnout with, that is simply the case. I cannot will one into existence and I will not tear my layout apart to test it with another turnout.
If I go too slow for some, that is who I am. On the other hand I got this problem resolved and I learned a bit in the process. I also started another thread on Rich's advice and that ended up providing me with a lot of new information that I value, but it did not lead to a fix. I also resent being criticized for doing that by the person who urged me to do it.
So the moral of this tale for me is NEVER have your NCE Power Cab or any cab controller go directly to the track without an additional circuit breaker in place and never have a circuit breaker that exceeds the current rating of your power supply.
Brendan Buschi richhotrain So, then, which route causes the pause? When the loco enters the straight through route and exits the divergent route? Rich The problem is only when the engine enters the divergent route and exits the straight route. It happens after the engine has crossed the track insulators and before it reaches the points. It happens at the frog.
richhotrain So, then, which route causes the pause? When the loco enters the straight through route and exits the divergent route? Rich
So, then, which route causes the pause?
When the loco enters the straight through route and exits the divergent route?
Rich
The problem is only when the engine enters the divergent route and exits the straight route. It happens after the engine has crossed the track insulators and before it reaches the points. It happens at the frog.
Alton Junction
richhotrain Brendan Buschi Hey Rich, you have now responded to that question. I only wish I understood the answer. I do not pretend to fully know the term "route", but I would guess that each of my reversing loops is one route. I would add that I can go through that route in either of 2 directions. Are you saying the proper way to refer to this is as 2 routes? Directions, routes, it doesn't matter. It is all a matter of semantics. That said, a standard turnout (which you have) has, what is often referred to as a "straight through" route and a "divergent" route. And the routing through a reverse loop is referred to as "entry" and "exit". Some of the experts get fussy about terminology. I am neither an expert nor fussy. I understand what you mean. So, assuming that I do correctly understand what you are saying, once you complete the route by exiting the reverse loop, you reset the route to default. Let me ask you to repeat something for us to consider. There are two possible routes through the reverse loop. 1. Enter through the straight through route. 2. Enter through the divergent route. Which is your default turnout setting? Rich
Brendan Buschi Hey Rich, you have now responded to that question. I only wish I understood the answer. I do not pretend to fully know the term "route", but I would guess that each of my reversing loops is one route. I would add that I can go through that route in either of 2 directions. Are you saying the proper way to refer to this is as 2 routes?
Hey Rich, you have now responded to that question. I only wish I understood the answer. I do not pretend to fully know the term "route", but I would guess that each of my reversing loops is one route. I would add that I can go through that route in either of 2 directions. Are you saying the proper way to refer to this is as 2 routes?
Directions, routes, it doesn't matter. It is all a matter of semantics. That said, a standard turnout (which you have) has, what is often referred to as a "straight through" route and a "divergent" route. And the routing through a reverse loop is referred to as "entry" and "exit". Some of the experts get fussy about terminology. I am neither an expert nor fussy. I understand what you mean.
So, assuming that I do correctly understand what you are saying, once you complete the route by exiting the reverse loop, you reset the route to default. Let me ask you to repeat something for us to consider. There are two possible routes through the reverse loop.
1. Enter through the straight through route.
2. Enter through the divergent route.
Which is your default turnout setting?
The straight through route is my default route.
Brendan Buschi richhotrain Brendan Buschi richhotrain If you look on page 5 of that manual that you previously linked to, it shows the relevant diagram when installing both a PSX-AR (SC) and a PSX-1. If you study the diagram, you will see that the PSX-AR (SC) needs to be fed directly from the booster, not from the PSX. In DCC parlance, that means that the PSX-AR (SC) must be wired before (upstream) the PSX, not after (downstream) the PSX. Now, at the risk of belaboring a previous point, and I want to say this as diplomatically as possible, the installation of the turnout (but not the turnout itself) could be the problem. I only say this because you did indicate that you loosened a few nails and then manipulated the turnout which in turn eliminated the pause in the loco's movement. But, if I recall correctly, you were not convinced that the manipulation of the turnout permanently solved the problem. So, I am thinking that it is still a matter of trying to conclude if you are working with a momentary short or a stall due to loss of power. Rich Hey Rich, all the units are neither upstream nor downstream of each other. They are wired in parallel to the booster. They are wired exactly as shown in the graphic I posted. Would you believe me if I posted a photo? Brendan, it is not a case of not believing you. It's just that the problem that you are experiencing has all of the elements of a conflict between a PSX-AR and PSX. I am not sure if a photo will reveal the problem, maybe yes, maybe no. But, hey, let's give it a try. Post a photo. Let me ask you this. Could you temporarily disable the PSX-1? I suspect that I am driving you nuts with my skepticism concerning your wiring protocol, but if a wiring conflict turns out to be the cause, the only happier than you will be me. Mind you, I am saying that you have wired the PSX units incorrectly. But, what I continue to ponder is whether you have placed the two units correctly in relation to one another. Rich Rich I will have to post several photos. I will do that if you first answer these 2 questions. 1. If they units are wired as they are in the DCC Specialties diagram would you still insist that there is a problem with the wiring? 2. What do yo make of the train running flawlessly back and forth between the loops if I return the turnouts to straight through position after they leave each loop? Is this what you meant to say? Mind you, I am saying that you have wired the PSX units incorrectly.
richhotrain Brendan Buschi richhotrain If you look on page 5 of that manual that you previously linked to, it shows the relevant diagram when installing both a PSX-AR (SC) and a PSX-1. If you study the diagram, you will see that the PSX-AR (SC) needs to be fed directly from the booster, not from the PSX. In DCC parlance, that means that the PSX-AR (SC) must be wired before (upstream) the PSX, not after (downstream) the PSX. Now, at the risk of belaboring a previous point, and I want to say this as diplomatically as possible, the installation of the turnout (but not the turnout itself) could be the problem. I only say this because you did indicate that you loosened a few nails and then manipulated the turnout which in turn eliminated the pause in the loco's movement. But, if I recall correctly, you were not convinced that the manipulation of the turnout permanently solved the problem. So, I am thinking that it is still a matter of trying to conclude if you are working with a momentary short or a stall due to loss of power. Rich Hey Rich, all the units are neither upstream nor downstream of each other. They are wired in parallel to the booster. They are wired exactly as shown in the graphic I posted. Would you believe me if I posted a photo? Brendan, it is not a case of not believing you. It's just that the problem that you are experiencing has all of the elements of a conflict between a PSX-AR and PSX. I am not sure if a photo will reveal the problem, maybe yes, maybe no. But, hey, let's give it a try. Post a photo. Let me ask you this. Could you temporarily disable the PSX-1? I suspect that I am driving you nuts with my skepticism concerning your wiring protocol, but if a wiring conflict turns out to be the cause, the only happier than you will be me. Mind you, I am saying that you have wired the PSX units incorrectly. But, what I continue to ponder is whether you have placed the two units correctly in relation to one another. Rich
Brendan Buschi richhotrain If you look on page 5 of that manual that you previously linked to, it shows the relevant diagram when installing both a PSX-AR (SC) and a PSX-1. If you study the diagram, you will see that the PSX-AR (SC) needs to be fed directly from the booster, not from the PSX. In DCC parlance, that means that the PSX-AR (SC) must be wired before (upstream) the PSX, not after (downstream) the PSX. Now, at the risk of belaboring a previous point, and I want to say this as diplomatically as possible, the installation of the turnout (but not the turnout itself) could be the problem. I only say this because you did indicate that you loosened a few nails and then manipulated the turnout which in turn eliminated the pause in the loco's movement. But, if I recall correctly, you were not convinced that the manipulation of the turnout permanently solved the problem. So, I am thinking that it is still a matter of trying to conclude if you are working with a momentary short or a stall due to loss of power. Rich Hey Rich, all the units are neither upstream nor downstream of each other. They are wired in parallel to the booster. They are wired exactly as shown in the graphic I posted. Would you believe me if I posted a photo?
richhotrain If you look on page 5 of that manual that you previously linked to, it shows the relevant diagram when installing both a PSX-AR (SC) and a PSX-1. If you study the diagram, you will see that the PSX-AR (SC) needs to be fed directly from the booster, not from the PSX. In DCC parlance, that means that the PSX-AR (SC) must be wired before (upstream) the PSX, not after (downstream) the PSX. Now, at the risk of belaboring a previous point, and I want to say this as diplomatically as possible, the installation of the turnout (but not the turnout itself) could be the problem. I only say this because you did indicate that you loosened a few nails and then manipulated the turnout which in turn eliminated the pause in the loco's movement. But, if I recall correctly, you were not convinced that the manipulation of the turnout permanently solved the problem. So, I am thinking that it is still a matter of trying to conclude if you are working with a momentary short or a stall due to loss of power. Rich
If you look on page 5 of that manual that you previously linked to, it shows the relevant diagram when installing both a PSX-AR (SC) and a PSX-1. If you study the diagram, you will see that the PSX-AR (SC) needs to be fed directly from the booster, not from the PSX. In DCC parlance, that means that the PSX-AR (SC) must be wired before (upstream) the PSX, not after (downstream) the PSX.
Now, at the risk of belaboring a previous point, and I want to say this as diplomatically as possible, the installation of the turnout (but not the turnout itself) could be the problem. I only say this because you did indicate that you loosened a few nails and then manipulated the turnout which in turn eliminated the pause in the loco's movement. But, if I recall correctly, you were not convinced that the manipulation of the turnout permanently solved the problem.
So, I am thinking that it is still a matter of trying to conclude if you are working with a momentary short or a stall due to loss of power.
Hey Rich, all the units are neither upstream nor downstream of each other. They are wired in parallel to the booster. They are wired exactly as shown in the graphic I posted. Would you believe me if I posted a photo?
Brendan, it is not a case of not believing you. It's just that the problem that you are experiencing has all of the elements of a conflict between a PSX-AR and PSX. I am not sure if a photo will reveal the problem, maybe yes, maybe no. But, hey, let's give it a try. Post a photo.
Let me ask you this. Could you temporarily disable the PSX-1? I suspect that I am driving you nuts with my skepticism concerning your wiring protocol, but if a wiring conflict turns out to be the cause, the only happier than you will be me. Mind you, I am saying that you have wired the PSX units incorrectly. But, what I continue to ponder is whether you have placed the two units correctly in relation to one another.
Rich I will have to post several photos. I will do that if you first answer these 2 questions.
1. If they units are wired as they are in the DCC Specialties diagram would you still insist that there is a problem with the wiring?
2. What do yo make of the train running flawlessly back and forth between the loops if I return the turnouts to straight through position after they leave each loop?
Is this what you meant to say? Mind you, I am saying that you have wired the PSX units incorrectly.
As to your first question, I am insisting nothing. I just have a gut feeling from your description of the problem that it is a momentary short. And I continue to concede that I could be wrong. It is simply an educated guess.
As to your second question, I replied in a very recent post. You may have missed it.
Brendan Buschi I am curious what you make of my post about running the train continuously between the 2 reversing loops without any problems - as long as I returned the layouts to their default, straight through position after the train exited each loop.
I am curious what you make of my post about running the train continuously between the 2 reversing loops without any problems - as long as I returned the layouts to their default, straight through position after the train exited each loop.
When you first mentioned it, I thought about it but forgot to comment on it. My initial conclusion is that it consistently works because the "conflict" will only occur on certain routes and not all the time. That is a classic symptom of the "conflict".
Both the PSX-ARSC and the PSX are solid state units, so in the absence of mechanical relays, the response to a short is instantaneous, or so it seem, But the PSX has only one function - - to act as a circuit breaker. The PSX-ARSC has two functions - - to act as an auto-reverser and as a circuit breaker. So, the PSX-ARSC falls a milisecond behind the action of the PSX.
Of course, this entire discussion is nothing more than academic if a wiring conflict is not the problem but, again, there is a simple way to test for this potential problem.
Let me ask you this. Could you temporarily disable the PSX-1? I suspect that I am driving you nuts with my skepticism concerning your wiring protocol, but if a wiring conflict turns out to be the cause, the only happier than you will be me. Mind you, I am not saying that you have wired the PSX units incorrectly. But, what I continue to ponder is whether you have placed the two units correctly in relation to one another.
richhotrain Brendan Buschi I am very interested to try out the test you recommended on the diesel. This Atlas engine operates at about half the speed of my former MTH engine. I didn't think anything of it. Perhaps it is not fully powered. Even if only one truck were powered, the loco would run at the same speed as if both trucks were powered. The reason that I raised the issue of a possibly unpowered truck is that it could cause a stall at slow speeds when traveling over an unpowered frog. With only one truck providing power to the motor, if the powered truck is completely sitting on the unpowered frog, the loco motor has no source of power. Rich
Brendan Buschi I am very interested to try out the test you recommended on the diesel. This Atlas engine operates at about half the speed of my former MTH engine. I didn't think anything of it. Perhaps it is not fully powered.
I am very interested to try out the test you recommended on the diesel. This Atlas engine operates at about half the speed of my former MTH engine. I didn't think anything of it. Perhaps it is not fully powered.
Even if only one truck were powered, the loco would run at the same speed as if both trucks were powered. The reason that I raised the issue of a possibly unpowered truck is that it could cause a stall at slow speeds when traveling over an unpowered frog. With only one truck providing power to the motor, if the powered truck is completely sitting on the unpowered frog, the loco motor has no source of power.
Excellent, this is good to know. Thank you.
The only way the pause was temporarily eliminated was to run the locomotive at 1/3 speed. It was never eliminated.
I am not invested in my problem being either a stall or a short. I want to solve the problem.
As I have said before, I am not saying with any certainty that this is your problem. I have no way of knowing that for sure with actually seeing your wiring protocol. But, the easiest way to test this out is to temporarily remove the PSX-1 from your layout. That way, when the PSX-ARSC detects the short (due to reverse polarity), it will have the milisecond necessary to correct the short (by flipping the polarities) before the Power Cab booster shuts down the layout.
richhotrain What I would suggest at this point is that the shorting/stalling problem be further analyzed and resolved. If it is simply a pause due to loss of power because the turnout is not fully level and stable, then there is no need to power the frog. Brendan continues to express bewilderment over the exact structure of a Dash 8-40 b. Well it is a 2-truck, 4-axle diesel, meaning that each truck contains 2 axles. On the Atlas model, of which I have 3 Dash 8-40b diesels, both trucks are powered, so the loco should not stall when passing over a frog. Have my Dash 8-40b diesels ever stalled on a frog? Yes. Why? Because one of the trucks had lost power when the pick up wire lost its soldered connection. If that, per chance, is Brendan's problem, it is easily diagnosed by lifting one end of the loco off the track to see if the other truck still has power. Repeat the procedure by lifting the other end of the loco to see if power is being applied to the other truck. The fact that Brendan has wired the layout in a star fashion, as opposed to a more traditional bus setup, lends credence to the momentary short due to the circuit breaker conflict. Depending upon the exact design of the star pattern, it may well be that the PSX-ARSC is inadvertently wired downstream of the PSX-1. That would also tend to explain why the other PSX-ARSC is not causing the same problem. Rich
What I would suggest at this point is that the shorting/stalling problem be further analyzed and resolved. If it is simply a pause due to loss of power because the turnout is not fully level and stable, then there is no need to power the frog. Brendan continues to express bewilderment over the exact structure of a Dash 8-40 b. Well it is a 2-truck, 4-axle diesel, meaning that each truck contains 2 axles.
On the Atlas model, of which I have 3 Dash 8-40b diesels, both trucks are powered, so the loco should not stall when passing over a frog. Have my Dash 8-40b diesels ever stalled on a frog? Yes. Why? Because one of the trucks had lost power when the pick up wire lost its soldered connection. If that, per chance, is Brendan's problem, it is easily diagnosed by lifting one end of the loco off the track to see if the other truck still has power. Repeat the procedure by lifting the other end of the loco to see if power is being applied to the other truck.
The fact that Brendan has wired the layout in a star fashion, as opposed to a more traditional bus setup, lends credence to the momentary short due to the circuit breaker conflict. Depending upon the exact design of the star pattern, it may well be that the PSX-ARSC is inadvertently wired downstream of the PSX-1. That would also tend to explain why the other PSX-ARSC is not causing the same problem.
Hey Rich, both PSX-ARSC boards are wired identically. I used a star bus pattern originally because that is what was recommended by MTH for DCS. When I moved over to DCC, I consulted the folks at Tony's and the techs at NCE and they told me the star bus would not be a problem. I also checked this out in a DCC book I read. I did do some fundamental rewiring to create 3 seperate DCC power districts.
For the record, my tracks are dead on level and both the voltage and current are correct and consistent over the entire layout.
I have not been able to get to my layout since yesterday. Hopefully that will change later today. I have a list of things to check out based on the responses I have gotten.
The language of model railroading is all new to me. The DCC sub-language is even newer. I worry that I am not using the right words to communicate.
Here is a graphic of how my power districts are wired. I do not have a Mainline Section B. The graphic is from this DCC Specialties pdf file
http://www.buschiart.com/HO/PSXAR_install_manual_RevN_for_website.pdf
As I understand the language, this shows one DCC Block with 4 DCC Power Districts. I have one DCC Block with 3 DCC Power Districts.
I do not understand the words either upstream or downstream in the context of this schematic.
richhotrain I want to stay away from Brendan's threads because he has made it clear that he doesn't care to hear from me, Rich Hey Rich, I have never said I don't want to hear from you. I have actually said the opposite. I have also said that I prefer to keep things civil, but if you want to push my boundaries I am more than comfortable pushing back. I was just letting you know in advance. Your latest post has some new and interesting things. I need to check them out. Brendan
I want to stay away from Brendan's threads because he has made it clear that he doesn't care to hear from me,
Hey Dave, what you see is what you get with me. If I were disrespectful then I would expect to get heat for it. I try to answer every post.
I felt the long recap a few posts back was necessary. Things got confusing because posts were now spread over 2 threads. I was trying to bring it all back here and reorient everyone to where things are at now.
Thank you.