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!

Better wiring control for WYE's Sept. MR Successful?

1796 views
10 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 156 posts
Posted by owen w in california on Monday, September 12, 2011 11:45 PM

Hi Randy: It would be nice to find out that's the case, so here's what I'm trying to do. 

 Main: Turnout A and Turnout B both line for the main. C can be either way.

West Route: Turnout A to West, turnout C to west leg; turnout B to Main,

East Route: Turnout B to East Route, Turnout C to East leg, Turnout A to Main.

This will allow a train to wait on the main while a train heads up the branchline.  

Electronics are the most challenging part of the hobby for me. So a simple schematic with good labeling will go a long way toward sucessful implementation. Thanks 

 

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Monday, September 12, 2011 6:02 PM

 If the 'wait' is on the wrong leg, you just need to rotate the diagram so the turnouts are int he positions you need for your track plan. The concept is exactly the same, and the degination of turnouts A,B, and C are totally arbitrary. If you can describe what you need on the basis of the A,B, and C labeles, the connections can be altered easily enought o affect the change you need.

                                --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
    March 2011
  • 156 posts
Posted by owen w in california on Monday, September 12, 2011 3:07 PM

Randy and anyone following, here's an update. 

MRR forwarded my questions to Dr. Hunt, the writer of the article, and we had a useful email exchange, wherein he explained that the polarity shown in the article (fig 2) for the various legs of the WYE were critical in properly constructing the circuit (this was specified in the first article, but I did not note the importance). He also described a simple way to determine the poliarty (which side of the motor to call negative or positive). 

I followed his directions - which worked and seemed to indicate i needed to change the polarity of two of the three motors to match the drawing polarity.  Then, I went back and re-checked all the connections against the schematic. 

Unfortunately, the circuit is not giving me the results I want. So, I have abandoned the rotary switch approach, and decided to go with three SPDT's for route selection. I just don't have any more patience or time to devote to this one challenge.

Also, in reading the article again (and again, and again), i don't think the circuit is intended to do what I want.

My WYE leads to a branchline; and i want to be able to have a waiting train on the MAIN, between the A and B turnouts, when a train is going into (or coming out of) the wye from the opposite direction.  It seems to me the circuit is intended to allow a train to wait on the other WYE leg.

Thanks for your (and everyone's) help on this.

Joel

 

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Tuesday, August 30, 2011 5:52 PM

 Since they cna go allt eh way around, they may indeed be mechanically flipped. However, if one is flipped 180 degrees, reversing the polarity of the motor terminals will accomplish the same thing as dismounting it and trying to turn it around. There's definitely no electrical difference using Switchmaster motors as opposed to Tortoises since in this edesign it is simply flipping polarity to the motors. Now for that circuit from a few months ago with the Torotises cacaded - yes, it would make a difference because resistors are used to bias the motor and pull a terminal high until one of the contacts closes on a machien upstream - the reistor values would have to change because the current draw of a Switchamster is different.

                   --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
    March 2011
  • 156 posts
Posted by owen w in california on Tuesday, August 30, 2011 12:42 PM

Thanks Rich.  Yes, it is a simple circuit (once I deciphered the schematic's code, since i'd never seen a schematic for a rotary switch before).

I did contact MR and was told by Dana Kawala (in less than 24 hour by the way) that "There was an error in the four-position wye diagram. The connection between Main-West and –V should be removed. We’ll also be publishing a corrected diagram in the November issue.

Unfortunately, that's not the schematic I'm using. But it's nice to get a quick response. And he is following up with the author regarding whether the fact that I'm using Switchmaster machines could be creating some unexpected complexity. These machines can rotate the actuator 360 degrees (although only 180 for any application), so the orientation of the machine may be the problem.

The motors are wired as shown in the schematic  (the negative post of the motor to the common buss) and the positive post of the motor to the central posts of the rotary. A and B positive wires  are connected to the central  post of Deck one, C to the central post of Deck 2, as you discuss.   

I think that you are correct though, that the fix may be as simple as reversing the wires on A so it works the opposite direction. 

I'll report back when I've tried it.



  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Monday, August 29, 2011 9:51 PM

 At a quick glance it looks OK to me, if you are referrign to the schematic in figure 2, left side. I have it in front of me right now, and more carefulyl looking at it, it is correct as drawn. You only need 2 deskc of the switch. The center of Deck 1 goes to motors A and B, the center of Deck 2 goes to Motor C

 In postion 'main', which is the A-B route, botht he A and B motors should be getting V+. Motor C, does not matter, and it shown unconnected. If motors A and B are getting the correct polarity from the rotary switch bot both are not lined for the main, flip the wires on the one night lined for the main.

In positions 'east' and 'west', both motors A and B get V- and shoudl both set the points away from the main. In 'east' , motor C shoudl get V- and line towards B, in 'west' motor C should get V" and line towards A.

I suspect from your description of the issue, the wires are the wrong way on Motor A. That would cause AB and AC to be wrong but BC to be correct.

Not sure what you mean by 'the center points are the same' - the center of deck 1 goes to motor A and B, the center of deck 2 goes to motor C only. Position 1 of deck one goes to V+, positions 2 and 3 of deck 1 go to V-. Position 1 of deck 2 is no connection, position 2 of deck 2 is V-, and position 3 of deck 2 is V+. It's actually a simple circuit, basic electricity here, no fancy electronics or diodes for routing power in any way, one of the benefits of using a bipolar power supply like that. Treat it as two seperate switches, one that moves motors A and B, the other that moves motor C.

          --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
    March 2011
  • 156 posts
Posted by owen w in california on Monday, August 29, 2011 7:34 PM

gandy: (may i call you gandy?)  Funny you should say that. As your email came in, I was on the phone with another modeler who suggested the same approach (contact the author). Thanks.  It's true, I have seen plenty of corrections over the years. Just my luck, this will be one of them. 

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Eastern Shore Virginia
  • 3,290 posts
Posted by gandydancer19 on Monday, August 29, 2011 6:57 PM

MR has been known to make mistakes in electrical articles with schematics through out the years.  It may be that through the editing process, someone seems to think that the diagrams / schematics that are submitted have flaws, and the editor of the article knows best, and changes it.  Either by design or accidentally.  Also, changing a hand drawing to a computer graphic can come in to play as well.  I know they do their best, but most of the time they don't build the circuits to make sure they are correct and work as the author says they do.

You have three choices. 1- Try and contact the author and get his diagram.  2- Wait for the next issue or two and see if there is a correction.  3- Try and figure it out yourself, or coerce someone to do it for you.

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.

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 156 posts
Posted by owen w in california on Monday, August 29, 2011 3:50 PM

Thanks, gandydancer, for the suggestions.

I definately checked the polarity, all's correct there.  

Although I did not at first understand the schematic (specifically the dotted line), I made two trips to the local electronics emporium, magazine page in hand to ask questions.

As to connecting to the "proper points" on each deck: I made the assumption that the "points" on one deck correspond with the points on the second deck in the same relative position. Meaning that if point 1 is on the left for deck 1, point 1 is on the left for deck 2.  In the article the * (asterisk) is located on point 1 of deck 2.

The middle point is the same on both decks and the center post connections are obvious. 

So, i'm not sure where i could have made an error, since I followed the diagram precisely.

My last assumption is that the diagram is not correct. But I'd hate to assume that. But  paraphrasing Sherlock Holmes?Sir Arther Conan Doyle : "When you eliminate the obvious, what's left must be the solution, regardless of the likelihood" .

 

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Eastern Shore Virginia
  • 3,290 posts
Posted by gandydancer19 on Friday, August 26, 2011 2:07 PM

The first thing that I would look at is to be sure that you have a positive supply and a negative supply.  That's two power supplies with one wire of each connected to ground / common.  That can be easily missed. 

If you put a voltmeter probe on common / ground (the up-side-down antenna symbol) and the other to -V, you should read a negative voltage.  Then keeping the one probe on common / ground and putting the other one on +V, you should read a positive voltage.

If that is OK, then it is just a matter of making sure that the wires are connected to the proper points.  The dashed line between the two switch decks is not a wire, just in case you didn't know.

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.

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 156 posts
Better wiring control for WYE's Sept. MR Successful?
Posted by owen w in california on Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:25 PM

Has anyone successfully wired the rotary switch for the WYE as described in the September MR  article and shown  in the schematic? 

I am  sure that I have wired a 3 deck rotary switch and 3 motors (slow speed stall motors - Switchmasters)  according to the schematic but the turnouts (and therefore the  routes) are not syncronized in the way described in the text. (I am only using two of the three decks of the rotary)

Only one route is sycronized correctly  (B to C, using the naming convention in the article).  A-C and A-B (main) do not occur.

Has anyone else had this problem?

Any suggestions on what protocal to follow to troubleshoot this? Seems like there are a lot of permutations and combinations of wires to test.

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!