Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Smoke for my DCC train

15872 views
22 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 8 posts
Smoke for my DCC train
Posted by MICP3389 on Saturday, June 2, 2012 10:12 PM

Hello everyone. I have been rerading the posts and threads in the past about adding smoke to engines. I thought about amperage etc... I have a few of the Rapido "Oh so steamy" smoke generators and I was wondering if anyone knows how to wire them, or if they at least will wire into a DCC decoder function or do they have to go to direct track power.

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
  • 13,757 posts
Posted by cacole on Sunday, June 3, 2012 8:48 AM

The first thing you must determine is the current draw of the smoke generator -- it may be beyond the capability of a decoder.  Most decoders are limited to 250mA current draw.

Most serious modelers abhor smoke because it leaves an oily, sticky residue on everything.

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 8 posts
Posted by MICP3389 on Sunday, June 3, 2012 12:33 PM

I know that smoke can be a bad thing. The Rapido claims in the paperwork state that the smohe will help "clean" the track. I said the heck with it last night and placed it on track power. The smoke doesnt stink that bad (at least not anywhere as bad as other smoke fluids) and I didnt feel any smoke residue left behind after testing. Now let it be said my carpal tunnel has been pretty bad lately so I just might not be feeling it.

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
  • 13,757 posts
Posted by cacole on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 10:34 AM

MICP3389

The Rapido claims in the paperwork state that the smohe will help "clean" the track.

The smoke doesnt stink that bad (at least not anywhere as bad as other smoke fluids) and I didnt feel any smoke residue left behind after testing.

I think Rapido probably means the same thing as AristoCraft, who touts their smoke fluid for use as a track cleaner; but it's still oil based and is going to leave a sticky film on the track that will just attract more dirt.  The "track cleaner" claims mean to use it in place of another product; not that it will clean the track as you run.

The effects of using smoke will not appear immediately, but will build up over time.

A few years ago a chemist who is a model railroader diagnosed several different brands of smoke fluid, and reported that practically every one of them was mineral oil with different scents added.

His findings were reported in the Garden Railways Magazine forum.

 

Moderator
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 17,249 posts
Posted by tstage on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 11:53 AM

Just leave the smoke switch in the off position on your smoke generator car and push the "pretend" button in your mind instead.  Your track and any scenery will stay cleaner longer.

Tom

https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling

Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • 805 posts
Posted by narrow gauge nuclear on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 1:21 PM

I, personally, would not use smoke as no smoke on any scale model train, no matter the smoke generator make or model, will ever look even 2% prototypical.

The modern sound presentation, at its best, is getting really good at being prototypical,  smoke trailing like off like a nearly finished cigarette just spoils the impression of good sound.

Smoke is fine for large scale toy trains as it is traditional and goes along with the toy impression and look as the trains move about at 100mph on 10 inch radius turns.

For many folks working in a serious scale environment, smoke, as currently presented is a buzz kill.

But.....To each his own....

Richard  

Richard

If I can't fix it, I can fix it so it can't be fixed

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 8 posts
Posted by MICP3389 on Wednesday, June 6, 2012 1:44 PM

Well... This seems to clench my decision regarding smoke usage... NOT such a hot idea. Thank you all for your input. I guess that it is time to loose some Rapido smoke generators...

  • Member since
    June 2005
  • From: Lynnwood, WA
  • 287 posts
Posted by dave hikel on Thursday, June 7, 2012 2:04 AM

Hi all,

MICP3389, welcome to the forum!

I would tend to agree that the Rapido smoke generators are probably not worth the effort.  Their smoke output is pretty anemic, and while I'm not certain, I think it likely they draw too much current for most decoder function outputs.

However, some of the comments on this thread reflect a lot of "common knowledge" that is now out dated.

Originally posted by: cacole

"Most serious modelers abhor smoke because it leaves an oily, sticky residue on everything."

Originally posted by: narrow gauge nuclear

"I, personally, would not use smoke as no smoke on any scale model train, no matter the smoke generator make or model, will ever look even 2% prototypical."

Most folks in HO got their experience with smoke units from either O-gauge Lionel or Seuth type smoke units in HO or other scales.  Neither is ever remotely representative of a quality modern smoke unit.  Most of the complaints about residue getting on everything come from the Seuth type smoke units.  They actually boil the fluid in a heated pot.  Just like an uncovered pot on your stove, a Seuth smoke generator will splatter fluid all over the place.  They really do cause a huge mess.  The other complaints that the smoke is too weak and or thin to look prototypical were certainly true of postwar Lionel engines.  You had to get them running at 100+ scale miles per hour to ever get much more than a wisp of smoke.  Today a lot of old fashion smoke generators run off constant voltage power supplies, but they still don't make much volume.

However, Lionel, MTH, and a few others have broken through a lot of the technical barriers in recent years to produce clean operating smoke units with remarkable output volume.  Here's the photo that I use as my Avatar.

This is an O scale MTH DM&IR Yellowstone running on an outdoor layout I built about six years ago.  Even with a little cross wind the smoke is full enough to leave a nice prototypical trail.  Results like this are not limited to G and O scales.  Here's a video from Youtube of an MTH HO NYC Mohawk...

 

 

A lot goes into making smoke like this.  For starters, the smoke isn't boiled in a pot.  It's drawn from a reservoir with fiberglass wick onto a pair of resistors that vaporize the fluid without making a mess.  The temperature of the resistors is controlled with pulse width modulation.  When an engine encounters a long grade the smoke can be programmed to automatically get thicker by increasing the pulse width to the resistors.  To create good turbulent flow the unit uses a motor driven fan.  Fan equipped smoke units came out in the mid 90's.  By 2000 the operation of the fan was being synchronized with the chuffing sound.  The real trick to make this look good was to get the fan motor to stop quickly.  If all you did was cut power to the motor the fan would keep spinning.  So, modern smoke units stop the fan by switching the voltage momentarily to actively break the fan.  In short, a good modern smoke unit is quite sophisticated.

 

Dave
  • Member since
    August 2011
  • 805 posts
Posted by narrow gauge nuclear on Thursday, June 7, 2012 12:10 PM

I must agree, Dave has a point.  Things get better over time.  G and O gauge smoke gens are getting better and that large boiler volume HO, 4-8-2 was a bit better than I have personally seen in the recent years at train shows and the like.  However, small boiler HO and certainly HOn3 stuff can't sport that kind of smoke generator yet.  Most small HO and HOn3 boilers are 100% taken up with a large lead plug for tractive effort.  It's still puff puff or whimpy trails of Cigarette smoke for the smaller engines if you insist on smoke.  Just like sound, though, smoke will come and at a price comensurate with its realism.

Right now, for all but the largest scales, smoke is where sound was in the 90's. (Not there yet)

 Since all smoke, regardless of origin, is a mass of microfine particulates, the long term effects of voluminous smoke that mimes realistic operation on our track and frequency of cleaning has yet to be seen.  All this awaits a future tale borne out of experiences.  It is proper to be concerned about this.  One automatically assumes that the smoke making chemical and its vapor has been carefully chosen to be both non-toxic to breathe and non-corrosive in the presence of moisture once settled out on stuff, especially if there is going be be a whole lot more of it to mime realistic operations.

I can readily envision fabulous smoke pouring out of advanced smoke gens in G gauge garden layouts where fresh air abounds and track maintenance is more about acid rain issues that a smoke film on the rails.

Richard

Richard

If I can't fix it, I can fix it so it can't be fixed

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Thursday, June 7, 2012 2:52 PM

 Better, yes. OK, so it isn;t spitting bits of smoke fluid all over - but that cloud of smoke does and will condense and then what? Smoke fluid all over, same as before. Maybe it's not the same material (mostly mineral oil) as before, but it's still oily and has a tendency to attack plastic.

 The plumes of smoke on modern models are pretty impressive, especially properly synched with the pistons. But somethign is still not right - it's too clean. It's like pure steam, as if the fireman had the absolute most perfect fire going producing zero soot. Even on a very well fired loco, that produces little more than a heat blur above the stack when standing still - when it first gets moving, it sure does clean all the soot out of the tubes. The only palce I've ever seen pure white model type smoke come out of a steam loco is the cylinder cocks and the turbogenerator exhaust.

 And then to stick a smoke generator in a diesel loco  as the exhaust, not to represent a train heat boiler... Granted, Alco diesels were "honorary steam locos" because of the way they smoked it up - but it was a black, sooty smoke, not white like steam.

 Those old Seuthe smoke generators were great for an industral plant's steam boiler, or a house chimney - or a standing loco. The new fan driven loco smokers definitely are a step in the right direction appearance-wise. But they still DO get a film all over everything when used frequently.

                    --Randy


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    June 2005
  • From: Lynnwood, WA
  • 287 posts
Posted by dave hikel on Thursday, June 7, 2012 11:09 PM

You know, I hear people proclaim the horrors of smoke fluid accumulating everywhere and I have to question how much really experience these people have.  I received my first smoke equipped locomotive for Christmas over 25 years ago.  It was a Lionel O-gauge set that didn't make a lot of smoke, so it never caused a problem.  In my teen year I moved into HO, which didn't have smoke in those days.  Then in the mid 90's I was attracted back into O scale by the quality of sound, smoke, and control features.  I purchased my first engine with a fan driven smoke unit in 1996.  It produced copious amounts of smoke, but it was well vaporized.  I never had any traction problems or problems with oily film accumulating anywhere.  However, my set up was not permanent and my running hours were limited, so one could discount that experience.  In 2002 I started building layouts professionally.  Over the last ten years I have built indoor layouts in N, HO, and O, along with outdoor layouts in O and G.  Some of these layouts operate smoke equipped engines on a regular basis and some have no smoke equipped engines at all.  There is no noticeable difference between them.  There's no noticeable oil build up or extra dust accumulation on the layouts that run smoke.  It's just not an issue.

So where do these horror stories come from?  I don't suggest that people imagined this out of nothing.  Rather, I think people have taken the short comings of earlier smoke units and turned it into a conventional wisdom that no longer holds true.  If your only experience was a Seuth type smoke unit splattering fluid all over a boiler shell and onto the track i can understand having a bad impression.  They make a mess of your engine and deposit enough fluid on the track to cause real traction problems.  Objects that get a thick coating of fluid will hold dust.  But a good smoke unit that vaporizes the fluid without splatter never deposits a thick coating of fluid on the boiler or the surrounding even after years of operation.  The fluid is made from such a light weight mineral oil that nearly all of it evaporates over time.  In fact, that evaporation leads to one of the few operational issues with modern smoke units that draw the fluid with a fiberglass wick.  If an engine sits for too long the fluid will evaporate away.  A dry wick can get charred by the resistors which decreases it's effectiveness.  Lionel has even added a resistance meter to the resistor circuit to detect a dry wick and shut off the smoke unit.

Once there were enough people with some bad experiences it grew into a conventional wisdom that deterred more people from even trying smoke.  Even the OP of this thread was scared off by a half dozen negative posts.  How many people who argue against smoke have ever tried it at all?  In HO, the answer is *** few.

Then there's the argument that the fluid attacks plastic.  At least in the case of ABS and polystyrene the mineral oil used for the smoke fluid has no adverse effects at all.  Lionel, MTH, K-Line, and Atlas have all been producing plastic bodied diesels with smoke units since the 90's.  There are no negative effects on the plastic shells.  I suspect the source of this misnomer is that other oils do have negative effects on some plastics.  People jump to the unfounded conclusion that since the smoke fluid is oil based and the shells are plastic that the same must be true.  IT'S NOT.

As far as smoke in diesels not being prototypical, all one has to do is surf youtube for a few minutes to know that's not true.  The volume of smoke is much lower than a steamer but it's there.  The better quality smoke units all have some means to adjust the volume of smoke output.  You can tune them from a a new engine with a faint haze all the way to a worn out Alco.

The lack of color in the smoke is certainly legitimate criticism.  It would be wonderful to add some black sooty smoke when the fireman starts stoking the fire or when the engine is pulling away from a stop.  A little bluish tint in the diesel smoke would be nice as well.  Unfortunately, that would require actual combustion.  It's hard to image ever getting UL approval for such a device.  However, a good fireman was able to run a clean stack most of the time.  Oil fired engines like SP #4449 only produce thick sooty smoke when the fireman is hamming it up for photographers.  The white smoke we have is prototypical more often than not.

Dave
  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Rhododendron, OR
  • 1,516 posts
Posted by challenger3980 on Friday, June 8, 2012 12:43 AM

Dave,

 Again, I want to say THANK YOU. I have thanked you in the past on another forum for your Generous help in wiring some crossing gates, now I Thank You for dis-spelling these continued, uninformed MYTHS, about smoke units in model railroading. You put it in words much better than I could have, Hopefully coming from someone with your credentials, perhaps at least some will re-evaluate the value of Quality smoke units, sadly, I'm sure that some will never accept the progress that has been made in this part of the hobby.

Thank You (Again) You are truly an Asset to the Hobby,

Doug

May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Friday, June 8, 2012 6:50 AM

 Not sure what BRoadway Limited is using for their smoke fluid then, as since they stopped including a small funnel to make sure the smoke fluid goes intot he smoke unit and not just drips down inside the loco when you refill it, there have been many reports of having to send the loco back for service as the smoke unit stops working. Not from runnign dry, but rom the smoke fluid getting into the motor and fan assembly and causing the plastic fan to get loose on the motor shaft and no longer spin when the motor spins. It didn;t happen with their first smoking loco, which cam with the funnel, but all subsequent models like the T-1 which did not come with the funnel have had this issue

            --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

Moderator
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 17,249 posts
Posted by tstage on Friday, June 8, 2012 7:14 AM

challenger3980

...perhaps at least some will re-evaluate the value of Quality smoke units, sadly, I'm sure that some will never accept the progress that has been made in this part of the hobby.

Doug,

If I were operating my steamers outdoors, I would probably try the smoke units out.  However, since I prefer to not breath in mineral oil "smoke" in my small basement, the smoke unit on my steamers will remain in the OFF position.

Smoke - nor the lack of it - enhances my enjoyment of the hobby.  I can just "pretend" it's there and be perfectly fine with that.

Tom

https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling

Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Bedford, MA, USA
  • 21,483 posts
Posted by MisterBeasley on Friday, June 8, 2012 9:32 AM

My only recent experience with smoke comes from the Amherst Model RR "Springfield" shows I've been to over the past few years.  The whole room near the MTH booth smelled of smoke, and it was pretty unpleasant.  Given that this was a large show venue with high ceilings, I would be very reluctant to use a similar system in a typical layout room.

The higher volume of smoke from the MTH units may look better, but the more smoke you put into the air, the more particulates and irritants you put in as well.  I just can't see this being anything but bad for you.

It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse. 

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • 805 posts
Posted by narrow gauge nuclear on Friday, June 8, 2012 10:38 AM

I would be happy to choke on a ton of smoke and put up with its foulness and possible other nasties if only they made a nice super  high volume cam controlled smoke unit that would fit in my 1/2-inch inside diameter, by 1 1/2-inch long  HOn3 K-27, K-28 boiler volume.  Not there yet nor will it be for a long time, i bet.  If I ever see one, it will be bought on the spot, regardless of price!  Needless to say it will stay turned off for 95% of any run time.  Just there for photo and live video applications and a few visitors.

It would be great to have massive clouds of full scale smoke rolling out of my k-27, K-28!

Meantime all you big boiler volume guys have fun with those modern smokers.

Richard Hull

Richard

If I can't fix it, I can fix it so it can't be fixed

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
  • 13,757 posts
Posted by cacole on Friday, June 8, 2012 11:20 AM

The last time I ever visited a large, permanent club layout in Tucson, Arizona, they had signs at the entrance warning potential visitors with any type of respiratory problem that there was smoke being used and they would not be admitted.

I don't know if this was because of a warning from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality or a result of a threatened lawsuit.

I never go to such a venue because the smoke causes my eyes to sting and burn.

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 8,879 posts
Posted by maxman on Friday, June 8, 2012 3:08 PM

cacole

I never go to such a venue because the smoke causes my eyes to sting and burn.

You're lucky if that's all it does.  There's a train show held twice a year around here and the large scale guys always have a set-up with something or the other smoking.  I have to stay away from that area because it makes it hard for me to breathe.

And down a our HO club someone brought down a smoking engine and the stuff dropped down under the benchwork until it found a place to come up in an operating area.  Same result on the breathing impaired.

  • Member since
    June 2005
  • From: Lynnwood, WA
  • 287 posts
Posted by dave hikel on Saturday, June 9, 2012 1:06 AM

narrow gauge nuclear

I would be happy to choke on a ton of smoke and put up with its foulness and possible other nasties if only they made a nice super  high volume cam controlled smoke unit that would fit in my 1/2-inch inside diameter, by 1 1/2-inch long  HOn3 K-27, K-28 boiler volume.

Hi Richard,

You might not have to wait.  I took a look today at an MTH smoke unit I picked up from their parts booth at a train show.  This is the same unit they use in all their larger steamers, like the one in the video I linked to earlier.  The main body of the unit is .582" in diameter and 1.332" long.  If one of your boilers is a little over 1/2 inch you might just make it.  There are some plastic nubs for screw mounting that would have to be filed off, but it sounds like your engine would be a press fit anyway.  I think I paid $25 or 30 for each unit.

 

Dave
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Saturday, June 9, 2012 3:05 AM

My stand on smoke for my Japanese prototype steam locos is a result of two conflicting facts:

  1. The prototype locos were hand-fired with poor quality coal.  They smoked grey to black, not white.
  2. My wife and I both have breathing problems, which would not be improved by contaminating our local atmosphere with anything that can produce visible smoke.

Combining one and two, there is no way I'm going to deliberately add to my lung congestion, even if someone does perfect a smoke device that can accurately simulate coal smoke.  As for that possibility, it may happen - but my local oddsmaker won't touch it.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with silent, smokeless steam locos)

  • Member since
    June 2005
  • From: Lynnwood, WA
  • 287 posts
Posted by dave hikel on Saturday, June 9, 2012 3:07 AM

challenger3980

Dave,

 Again, I want to say THANK YOU. I have thanked you in the past on another forum for your Generous help in wiring some crossing gates, now I Thank You for dis-spelling these continued, uninformed MYTHS, about smoke units in model railroading. You put it in words much better than I could have, Hopefully coming from someone with your credentials, perhaps at least some will re-evaluate the value of Quality smoke units, sadly, I'm sure that some will never accept the progress that has been made in this part of the hobby.

Thank You (Again) You are truly an Asset to the Hobby,

Doug

Thanks Doug.  I appreciate the kind words.  It's always nice to know people find the posts helpful.

Dave
  • Member since
    December 2011
  • 8 posts
Posted by MICP3389 on Sunday, June 10, 2012 10:15 PM

I want to say thank you again to all of the contributors to this thread. I have received a TREMENDOUS amount of input on what seems to be a touchy subject for some. Please by NO means do I want this discussion to end. If anyone wants to expand on the trials and tribulations of smoke generator installations, along with any associated trauma and/or frustrations, please do so. There has been so much input and sharing of thoughts, I have reopened my thoughts about smoke on the train. I know my son would love it. I just have to figure out how to do it. If I give the Rapido units a shot, It will be a constant smoke, which I don't mind, If i go with another unit, how much more difficult could this become? I am always up for a challenge but, WOW what a challenge.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • 174 posts
Posted by Hergy on Friday, June 22, 2012 12:35 PM

A very interesting and informative thread. After absorbing all of this info I shall remain a non smoker. Not because of health reasons or the like, but, simply because I don't want the hassle because I don' think the experience is worth it. Given a choice between sound or smoke, sound wins hands down. Smoke still strikes me as toylike and gimmicky, but if it floats your boat, have at it.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!