steamnutSorry if I was unclear. I am talking about DCC-equipped locomotives running on DCC power, that have been programmed to have a higher starting voltage. I actually have now heard several stories about this. One version sasy that I am correct, that the decoder is passing voltage to the motor even while stationary, up to the amount programmed in as starting voltage. The main other version is that the decoder is smart enough so that at zero throttle it still blocks all power, then goes straight to the minimum starting voltage at throttle step 1. A final version says that it depends on the specific decoder ... too bad my good ol' multimeter can't read DCC voltages. Regarding the turnouts, it appears that the Shinohara code 100 is still DCC-"unfriendly". Guess I'll rephrase my question: what has Walthers had Shinohara do differently, design-wise, to make them DCC-"Friendly"?
Sorry if I was unclear. I am talking about DCC-equipped locomotives running on DCC power, that have been programmed to have a higher starting voltage. I actually have now heard several stories about this. One version sasy that I am correct, that the decoder is passing voltage to the motor even while stationary, up to the amount programmed in as starting voltage. The main other version is that the decoder is smart enough so that at zero throttle it still blocks all power, then goes straight to the minimum starting voltage at throttle step 1. A final version says that it depends on the specific decoder ... too bad my good ol' multimeter can't read DCC voltages.
Regarding the turnouts, it appears that the Shinohara code 100 is still DCC-"unfriendly". Guess I'll rephrase my question: what has Walthers had Shinohara do differently, design-wise, to make them DCC-"Friendly"?
Having nothing to do with the turnout portion of the question-- you could always pop the shell of one of your locos and put a multimeter across the motor leads to discover the truth.
Here is the other recent thread on Shinohara turnouts - http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/170176.aspx.
I guess I'm not understanding why you feel you have to replace your older turnouts in the yard.
"DCC-friendly" is a much abused term without a clear black and white definition. Turnouts that work very well in DC also work very well in DCC. The only difference between turnouts under DC and DCC is that under DCC a momentary short circuit causes the system circuit breaker to pop, shutting off power to the whole layout (or power district). Under DC, the momentary short is still there, but often the circuit breaker doesn't pop before the short has gone away. Not necessarily a good thing, but it was considered acceptable. DCC-friendly is a spectrum of turnout wiring practices that were good ideas long before DCC was a gleam in somebody's eye.
Unfortunately, these good practices require an external electrical contact connected to the turnout throw mechanism, and separate wires to the contact from the stock rails (or power bus) and frog. Further good practice requires the points not be linked electrically by a conducting metal bar of some kind, and that the points are powered by some method other than mechanically touching the stock rail or through the point hinge or grommet. Depending on the individual modeler, these practices would be incorporated into hand-laid or commercial turnouts as he saw fit. Very few (I know of none) commercial turnouts incorporate all these features.
Despite their "DCC-unfriendliness", most older Shinohara turnouts work just fine in DCC, particularly if all metal wheel sets are correctly gauged. But you won't know for sure until you try. Do your current yard turnouts work smoothly? Or is there arcing and sparking and lurching and light flickering as a train passes over? If the latter, your turnouts need work or replacement regardless of whether you switch to DCC or not. If needed, is reworking existing turnouts easier or harder than replacement?
Shinohara makes their code 100 and code 70 track in annual batches, if that. Production of code 83 for Walters consumes most of their capacity. Given the steady decline in Shinohara code 100 sales (assumed), chances of getting new DCC-friendly code 100 turnouts is not that great. I would bet almost all the Shinohara code 100 is new old stock.
In terms of matching your existing geometry, there are no guarantees. Manufacturers change their design as they see fit. #6 turnouts are much more alike between manufacturers than #4s (you didn;t say which you were using). That said, I would give the following order of compatibility to your existing turnout geometry, with the most compatible at the top of this list:
Then things take a big compatibility hit if you are using #4s because Shinohara lengthened their #4s so as to have a longer effective radius. Atlas used a #4.5 frog for the same reason. So I would put Peco code 83 (not the other lines) Electrofrog next on the compatibility list.Finally, as suggested by another poster, measure the decoder motor leads with your meter to answer your question. My guess is that your answer depends on the decoder, with "better" decoders more likely to have a true off.hope this helps
Fred W
steamnutRegarding the turnouts, it appears that the Shinohara code 100 is still DCC-"unfriendly".
Yes, that is my opinion. But I thought that was what you wanted because you said you wanted a live frog. To the best of my knowledge all power routing turnouts, which are the ones that will act as a switch to cut power to a siding, have live frogs. Also, to the best of my knowledge, all of the so called DCC friendly turnouts have an insulated frog, as evidenced by the gaps you can see just before and after the frog in the following link: http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/948-8804. These turnouts are internally wired to be properly electrically live all over with the exception of the frog. But if you want to power the frog, you have to have additional wiring, which I think you said you didn't want.
So on that topic I remain confused as to what you actually would like.
On the other topic, which is the voltage going to the motor remaining at some level above zero but lower than what is required to make the engine move when the decoder is calling for stop, I have never heard nor read this. Someone else can chime in, but I don't believe this to be true.
And yes, your multi-meter is capable of reading the DCC voltage to the motor as long as it can read a DC voltage and you check the voltage directly at the motor output from the decoder or across the two motor connections. This is a DC voltage and there is nothing fancy about it. It is the AC voltage on the track that your multi-meter will not read accurately. But that AC voltage value would still be accurate enough for anything us mere mortals would need it for.
steamnutWhen I program my decoder-equipped locos I set the starting voltage so that they start moving almost as soon as the throttle is cracked. The best of them start at 1.5 to 2 volts; 3 volts is more typical and 5 volts is not unheard of. Therefore when they are sitting on a powered track with the throttle set to nominal zero they are still receiving power up to the programmed starting voltage. I don't think this does them any good.
I think I am confused by this. Are you programming a DCC engine on a DC layout to start moving as soon as the throttle is cracked, or are you programming a DCC engine on a DCC layout to start moving as soon as the DCC handset reaches the first speed step? If it is a DCC engine on a DCC layout, there is always (unless you have a switch of some type to shut off track power) full voltage under the engine. However the motor is not connected to the rails, but rather to the decoder. The decoder then adjusts the power to the motor to make the engine move. So if the decoder is calling for zero speed, the motor will see no voltage and should sit there happily all day long without a problem.
If you have a decoder equipped engine running on a DC layout, the voltage under the train is either zero if you have a switch of some type, or some increasing value as you call for more speed. I don't see how there would be a circumstance where you would have (or want) an engine sitting on a powered piece of track with a continuous 1 to 3 volt value.
As I said, I'm probably not understanding something correctly.
steamnutIn my older turnouts such a photo should have shown clearly a bright copper bar holding the point rails in place (and also conducting power).
The original code 100 Shinoharas had two of those metal bridles connecting the point rails, one at the throw bar, and another where the moving point rails meet the two closure rails. But I just went downstairs and looked at one of mine and the color was silver, not copper. There is a copper piece under each of the two silver pieces, however. So far as I can tell, the construction of the new turnout at the throw bar is the same. The other bridle piece at the point rail to closure rail location has been replaced by the two rail joiners. Functionally, I believe that the old and new designs are the same. Since I don't see any gaps on either side of the frog, I believe that the new design is a power routing turnout with a non-insulated frog.
That's exactly the illustration I was looking at. In my older turnouts such a photo should have shown clearly a bright copper bar holding the point rails in place (and also conducting power). Not sure whether its just a poor picture or whether they have changed the design.
It is NOT an insulated-frog turnout; I explained in my first post why I prefer the live-frog style.
My reference to the 1 to 3 volts is as follows: no DC motor in our engines starts at initial application of power (some very high quality ones such as Faller or Canon red cap will start rotating under no load almost at initial application of power, but that's only under no load). When I program my decoder-equipped locos I set the starting voltage so that they start moving almost as soon as the throttle is cracked. The best of them start at 1.5 to 2 volts; 3 volts is more typical and 5 volts is not unheard of. Therefore when they are sitting on a powered track with the throttle set to nominal zero they are still receiving power up to the programmed starting voltage. I don't think this does them any good. WIth power-routing turnouts the turnout itself is an effective switch so a loco on a siding or in a yard with the switch lined against it is receiving no power at all. With insulated frogs this effect can only be achieved via considerable additional wiring.
Thanks for your comments.
maxman Actually I believe that live frogs can potentially cause more problems with DCC than the insulated variety.
Actually I believe that live frogs can potentially cause more problems with DCC than the insulated variety.
It is not the live frog that causes more problems with DCC. IMHO, live frogs are highly desirable in both DC and DCC to avoid stalling and flickering lights and possible decoder resets (DCC). The method used to route power to the frog is what can cause momentary short circuits in both DC and DCC.
The preferred method of routing power to a live frog is via an electrical SPDT contact that is switched by the turnout throw mechanism. My handlaid turnouts are all wired in this "DCC-friendly" manner - over 30 years ago.
Unfortunately, since turnout manufacturers (including older Shinohara) don't mandate a contact on the throw mechanism, the turnout manufacturers usually use the points to route the correct polarity to the frog. As detailed in "turnouts and DCC" thread running concurrently, when the points are both of the same polarity there is a susceptibility to intermittent short circuits from the back of metal wheels brushing against the open point.
Most of your older Shinoharas will work just fine if wired as intended. A few will experience the mentioned short circuits. The fix is identified and discussed in the other thread.
I'm not sure what you mean about the locos receiving 1 - 3 (or is it 13) volts when not moving. If you convert to DCC there will always be voltage on the track.
The Shinohara code 100 turnout is shown here: http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/669-103. There were originally two of those metal bridals or connectors. One connected the points at the throw bar, and the other connected the point at the pivot. If I remember from one of these we recently purchased at our club, and looking at the picture, they have retained the connector at the throwbar, but used rail joiners to connect the points to the closure rails. I believe that the old and new flavor turnouts are functionally the same, and are both power routing with live frogs. I don't see any gaps cut on either side of the frog to make this an insulated frog style turnout.
Thank you for your response. However, by "drop-in" I meant that if I can use the current Shinohara switches, they have the same geometry as the ones I need tor replace, hence I will not need to alter the rest of the track. Peco has entirely different geometry, I'd pretty much have to rip everything up.
Secondly, I REALLY want to stick with live frogs. To the point that if it isn't possible I may even re-think moving to DCC. Without live frogs the complexity of the wiring will have to at least triple and paradoxically I would need to ADD block switches because I do not want my locomotive motors to be constatnly receiving 1-3 volts when they are not actually moving.
BTW thanks for the link but I know the site. It does not answer my specific question.
Regards,
Steamnut
Peco insulfrog turnouts are pretty much drop in installations on DC and DCC. Here is a link to Alan Gartners site about your Shinohara turnouts.
http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches.htm
Very helpful info on this site.
Pete
I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!
I started with nothing and still have most of it left!
I currently have a dual-power layout while I gradually install decoders. I've discovered that I'm going to have to redo my yard and terminal area which uses Shinohara code 100 switches purchased 18 to 20 years ago.
I'm confused about the current offering. The pictures look somewhat different, as if they have done something about the copper bar that connected the two movable rails both mechanically and electrically (I've had a couple of these fail mechanically over the years too). But the code 83 sold by Walthers shouts DCC Friendly in the catalog while the code 100 and 70 sold under the Shinohara brand name remains silent about DCC. I sure hope I could use it as they would physically be drop-in replacements.
Does anyone have direct knowledge on this? Is there any Code 100 power-routing turnout brand that is "DCC Friendly"
Thanks in advance for any responses.