I am using a Walthers Code 83 30 deg crossing to get the two legs of my scissors-type turning wye to cross each other. I am getting a short indication from my DB150 on power-up. I have all rails at the crossing soldered to the exit rails of the crossing, thinking it would be internally isolated. Is it the crossing, or do I have a short elsewhere?
I did to a couple of searches, but found nothing specific on this.
Crandell
Bummer. Did you test the crossing itself before putting it into the wye? Unfortunately, I do not know about that specific piece of track. The old Shinohara crossings were hot and required the user to gap them. Do you have a close up photo of the crossing we could look at?
Is it this one?http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/948-830
From this photo it looks like it should be internally isolated.
Yes, that's the one, TZ. Since testing the ramp complex to which it connects, followed by a Peco #6 Code 83 Insulfrog that is gapped at the two legs that scissors and connect at this crossing, a test which worked flawlessly, including the PSX-AR reverser that was meant to reverse the tail of this wye that doubles as the ramp down to staging, all I have done is solder flex track lengths that curve to join two leg-ends of this crossing, and then I carried on to curve in a divering way to a single Peco #6 that is otherwise unpowered. The fourth diverging leg isn't even powered beyond the crossing. So, if the crossing is internally isolated to prevent conflicts at its frogs, there must be something else I have done, or that when I added to it confounds the wiring. It should be simple, but.....
I have verified all feeders to ensure there are no conflicts. Red and black only, and they are correctly assigned on each of their ends to the correct rails and bus wires, even accounting for 270-360 degree curves already laid out on my helix ramps.
Here is a diagram, crude though it is. The dotted line at left means it is the climbing ramp below the main level which spirals and ends at the far right Peco. Rails are gapped (pretty sure, but one is very tight...will have to ensure no connection there), powere, and converge soldered to the crossing. As depicted, only one of the two diverging segments beyond the crossing, moving left across the diagram, is currently powered, and it is connected to the lower Peco. There is no power to that turnout except what the segment feeds it, and the secondary main moving north from the through route of that Peco has no feeders.
I don't see the conflict, except that I may need to ensure the one really tight gap, and that should not be a problem as things are currently powered anyway. So, the crossing is suspect.
Here is the crude diagram.
I went for a long run in the meantime to clear my head. I'll go back later with a fresh brain and fresh eyes to see if there is something I missed.
Thanks very much for your response.
Ok I copied the diagram into PC-Paint and drew red and black on it. I assumed the dotted lines were OK and ignored them. But I got myself confused..
... the lower Peco. There is no power to that turnout except what the segment feeds it...
And the Peco #6 toward the upper left is not really connected to anything yet?
Yes, only the diverging route on the Peco in the lower left of the diagram is powered. The points end and through route, even though it is joined to a segment of flex, is unpowered, and so is that straight flex on the main.
The Peco that affords the Y- component (that really crosses itself at the crossing) at the end of the long curved ramp is powered at the points. However, it is gapped at all four leaving rails (I will have to verify that one really tight gap is actually free and making no contact. It is the left-most rail as we view the diagram...the one that crosses and ends up at the lower left Peco.
I solved the matter. I tidied up the very tight gap at the right-hand Peco, but that was a none issue anyway. What I did do was to use a razor saw and cut the small soldered joiner quarters I have been using (instead of the looong joiners) on the one route through the crossing that starts at the lower left Peco and runs diagonally up and ending at the diverging route for the right hand Peco.. That left the lined route soldered. I then performed the urgent test I had been waiting to do all along in the first place, which was to run my newest steamer, the Sunset Selkirk, to see if it would go around the curves in that area. They are at the minimums. Happily, everything worked, including the steamer running across the crossing and well beyond to the one unpowered segment curving upper left in the diagram. That, more than anything, tells me the crossing is live all the way through.
Meaning, it will have to be reversed. Meaning I will have to move the PSX-AR over to the crossing to reverse it, and not the nether spiral ramp.
Live and learn.
So you cut the joiners basically adding a gap at the crossing or at the lower left Peco?
Yes, and when I tested those routes clamped again with metal to restore the continuity, it was at the lower left join to the crossing as we see it that the sparks flew. Once I looked more closely at the polarity, it made more sense. I must have been tired the other day and should have waited. So, I restored the upper right solders, and left the lower right and the upper left soldered. I will reverse all of those three using the PSX-AR and gap the upper left curved segment at the upper left Peco.
Crandell, I'm curious....What is the purpose of the 30/60 crossing? If you removed the crossing and connected the inside tracks (about a 30 degree curve) and the outside tracks (another 30 degrees, or so you would have two decent length tracks to meet or pass trains, and need only the lower (outer) track for a reversing loop.. I'm not criticizing, just curious?????? JWH
JW, the diagram doesn't show the 'fast' main just to the left of the one at the left of the diagram running north/south. The drawing only shows the slow lane meant for drags/faster freight and for access to this complex with the crossing. It may not be apparent from anything I have stated in describing this layout to date, but the helix, all three levels except for the scissors part out in the open flatlands, will be within a mountain, and the foot of the mountain will run pretty darned close to the diverging route exiting that right hand Peco. So, I don't have a ton of room there. The only way I could get the wye to work effectively and not encroach on my operating space in the loft was to have the legs cross themselves.
I have said all three levels of the helix. Really, the crossing complex comprises the main level of the helix. The dotted ramp comes from staging which will actually be under the yard bench on the opposite side of the loft. I will have to build two lift-out bridges, therefore, the top one for the twinned mains and the lower one for access to the nether staging. That long ramp climbes to the tunnel portal at the points of the right side Peco, and the outer arm on the through route comprises the next level. It curves up and joins the slow main, enters the mountain at the same time, and continues to the 'third' level that will exit the mountain and begin to curve toward the far side of the loft once again.
Crandell, Thanks for the "Splanation". Sorry to be so long in answering: been out of touch a few days...Thanks again...JWH
Hi Crandell,
Not putting a spanner in the works, but might I say you use Insul-fishplates. We're a bit more temperate than you, got a feeling your temprature range could a bit more in BC than here in UK
Been using Peco right from the start (getting past it now) and I've had gaps of Normal 0 ⅛" and more (baseboard joints) close up at exhibitions when punters start pileing in. Just a sugestion mate raizor saw blades are a bit on the thin side.
Be in touch.
pick.
PS the Normal O ain't me
John, you may have a point over time...I probably don't have your time in the hobby and haven't experienced all the problems...yet. However, I have used a razor saw when I could apply it, and I use cut-off disks with a hobby rotary tool, and I also use the marvellous jeweler's saw when I make my handlaid turnouts. In fact, because I have developed an aversion to full-sized joiners out in the open, I am using half or even quartered joiners that I saw using that jeweler's saw. Here is an image showing one of those joiner-quarters in place.
It takes a LOT more time to accomplish a joint, as you can imagine, but I am willing to make this layout better in all the respects that I can stomach...I'm an impatient layout builder, and have taken a month to get this scissors complex right. It would have been two or three days last time around.
I find that properly laid tracks, even when gapped, and when the ballast is well glued, my rails just don't move. In six years, I never had a closed gap on my last layout, and many of them were either made tight by placing rail ends very close to each other at joints, or I used the jeweler's saw...a wonderful tool.
I do use the insulfrog Peco Code 83 turnouts and like them immensely. I have begun to salvage the ones on my old layout by soaking them in warm sudsy water and using a soft nylon brush to dislodge anything that shouldn't be there. The over-center springs still work as they should, and the points move freely. They look good as well.
Finally, I dislike the look of the plastic joiners/insulators. I tried them when building my second layout and just got to finding them horrible to look at and difficult to rely on for alignment. Your point is well taken...there may come a time, even a few years hence, when I will wish I had used a plastic spacer somewhere.
Thanks, again.
First, I am grateful for all the observations and good will shown by so many of you...for the assistance.
I thought this would be fairly straightforward when I commenced this area of track laying. It turns out, now that I have finally gotten a train to run through this complex on both routes, and finding the PSX-AR reversing properly, that I had not gotten it right.
First, to address one important point: the Walthers 30 degree crossing IS an isolating crossing...each route is powered through the appliance, but they are isolated from one another. It took some sleuthing and feeding wire changes and gapping until I found what my trouble was all along...more on that in a second. But, once I isolated the tail/ramp, removed the reverser from the power grid, and just ran the X-shape tracks powered on one end of each leg, trains ran across the crossing and along the other side. So, they are power-routing crossings.
When I restored service from the reverser, I was getting shorts at the right hand Peco. I was about to pull all my hair out when I noticed that I had reversed two feeders on the rails feeding the points of that Peco. I had a reversed feed to a turnout bordering on a reversing section. Short. I thought I had been careful wiring that ascending ramp, but somehow I reversed those two wires. As soon as I cut their ends and soldered them correctly, my Atlas Trainmaster ran across the exit gaps on both routes without stopping and getting that barely audible high-pitched "zing" that starts and stops again while the short circuitry admits and then cuts off power repeatedly.
One thing I found, contrary to what is said on at least one site where they said the Peco Insulfrog turnouts are NOT power-routing, was that when I was metering the right hand Peco to see if any power was getting to the exits beyond the frog, that the diverging route's voltage fell hugely when the points were thrown for the through route. So, it seems they are power-routing.
So, we can close this off. The crossings from Walthers are power routing, and they do effectively isolate the routes for that purpose. Also, you can confound a digital reverser when you confound your own wiring.
selectorFirst, to address one important point: the Walthers 30 degree crossing IS an isolating crossing...each route is powered through the appliance, but they are isolated from one another. ... I was getting shorts at the right hand Peco. ...I had reversed two feeders on the rails feeding the points of that Peco.
One key thing I always do is check with an ohm meter or continuity tester(w/ lightbulb). Trace the track, frogs, point rails, everything to make sure you're not getting one side to make contact with the other. This also allows you to isolate where the short occurs with your track elements. And therefore identify the fix that is easiest. I use electrofrogs and insulated frogs of various mfgrs and haven't had a problem using this approach as I put together the sections, wiring, etc.
Richard