bearman Sheldon, there is no way that I would even come close to considering the kind of wiring and controls, regardless of it being DC or DCC, that you have done. My regards.
Sheldon, there is no way that I would even come close to considering the kind of wiring and controls, regardless of it being DC or DCC, that you have done.
My regards.
Bear,
I understand. We all have different interests, different skills, different vision for our layouts.
Sheldon
Bear "It's all about having fun."
bearman Sheldon I am not anti-DC. As I indicated if you are happy with your situation then more power to you. I have a DCC system which is only used to power the tracks. with one exception, all my turnouts are manual groundthrows. And I don't try to "sell" DCC. I do know however, that, for me, I would not have the layout I have today if it were not for DCC. I would still be operating a 4 X 8 with two blocks and two locomotives.
Sheldon I am not anti-DC. As I indicated if you are happy with your situation then more power to you. I have a DCC system which is only used to power the tracks. with one exception, all my turnouts are manual groundthrows. And I don't try to "sell" DCC. I do know however, that, for me, I would not have the layout I have today if it were not for DCC. I would still be operating a 4 X 8 with two blocks and two locomotives.
I understand, and I'm glad you found your problem and it was a simple fix.
I did not take any of your posts to be anti DC, the point of my posts was simply that soldering rail joints works, DC or DCC.
To which, from another poster, I was once again met with the implied message that 200 feeder drops (my new layout will have about 600 feet of track) is "better" than soldering rail joints.
In addition to all my comments above, I have known several DC modelers who converted their layouts to DCC without any real rewiring. They simply connected DCC to all their exisiting DC block wiring, giving them one feeder or "drop" per every 15' to 30' of track, most often track with soldered rail joints within each block........
Their layouts all performed well on DCC. Again supporting the idea that the every 3' to 6' thing is overkill of the highest order.
DCC is a great system for the most part. I seriously considered it several times.
But for my specific goals, the additional features it would provide do not justify the very large expense of installing decoders in 145 locomotives - 145 locomotives necessary to operate my layout in the way I desire.
The other thing that kept me away from DCC is the poor design/complexity of the "user interface", in other words the throttles - too many buttons, too hard to see/touch.
With my Advanced Cab Control, the user experiance of controlling a train is much like DCC, but even simpler when there is a Dispatcher on duty. You simply pick up a throttle and a Yard Master says "this is your train, here are your orders".
The throttle has 5 operational buttons - EAST, WEST, SLOWER, FASTER, EMERGENCY STOP - that's it.
The mainline has signals - you obey them - you go, you stop, you read your train order/timetable. Routes are set for you by the Dispatcher, signals and tell you where and when to go, just like the prototype. Moving to your left is always west, moving to your right is always east.
If you fail to obey the signals, nothing bad happens, we have Automatic Train Control like the prototype had in days gone by. You run a red signal, your train just stops.
Yes, a big part of my interest is in Class I railroad mainline operations, set in the 1950's. I like long, realistic mainline trains, typically 35 to 50 cars. The new layout, like the old layout will be large but relatively simple. It will stage about 30 trains and operate 4-6 of them at a time on the mainline.
But my layout also provides switching, yard work, and belt line/branchline operations as well.
The point of all this explaination? Not everyone has the same interests and goals, so the same solutions to control or wiring do not suit every layout.
Example, you mentioned that your turnouts are ground throws. On my layout, if on the prototype it would be a ground throw, I have a ground throw (yards, sidings, belt lines, branch lines, secondary trackage). Only the CTC controlled double track mainline uses switch machines, but those switch machines can be controlled at local towers AND by the Dispatcher at the CTC panel. And they are largely controlled by "route" selection, not individually. Route selection that happens with one button.
Features like this take advanced wiring, no matter what controls the locos, DC or DCC.
Same with the detection and signals - complex wiring no matter the method, DC or DCC.
Every layout is different, every modeler has different goals, but soldered rail joints are generally a win/win........
bearman "I assume you use DCC? So much for the idea that DCC means less wiring........" Sheldon, I use DCC. There are two members of my club that still run DC. I have looked at their wiring, and quite frankly it looks like a bowl of vermicelli. I believe that DCC wiring is "less" then DC, but if you are still running DC and are happy with it, then great. A lot of modelers drop feeders from every section of track, which is fine if that is what they want to do. I don't and with the two exceptions I have noted in a previous post on this thread, I have not had any issues in about 10 years.
"I assume you use DCC? So much for the idea that DCC means less wiring........"
Sheldon, I use DCC. There are two members of my club that still run DC. I have looked at their wiring, and quite frankly it looks like a bowl of vermicelli. I believe that DCC wiring is "less" then DC, but if you are still running DC and are happy with it, then great. A lot of modelers drop feeders from every section of track, which is fine if that is what they want to do. I don't and with the two exceptions I have noted in a previous post on this thread, I have not had any issues in about 10 years.
DC or DCC, in my view as an electrician, there is little excuse for sloppy wiring practices.
The "version" of DC I use is likely something you have not seen.
I use wireless radio throttles, have CTC and signaling, and one button route control of turnouts, all intergrated in one system.
Wiring under my layout looks similar to this:
And control panels along the layout look similar to this:
These are photos from a radio throttle Advanced Cab Control system similar to what use that I designed and installed for a friend years ago.
I am very familiar with DCC as well, and have many hours operating on DCC layouts and have designed and helped build several for friends as well.
For me, signaling, CTC, and being able to operate in three different specific modes is more important than the special features of DCC.
But I still chuckle at those who try to sell DCC based on "less wiring".
Sometimes it is less wiring, but as layout size and desired features increase, it quickly becomes simply a different kind of wiring, not less of it.
DCC offers no special advantages to those of us interested in signaling and CTC, that feature will be complex, require lots of wire, and be expensive no matter if you use DCC or DC, or if you use relays or computers.
DCC offers no special advantages in controlling turnouts, at least not in my view.
But the fact remains, no matter how complex my DC sytem is, I don't need a buss following my track around with drops every 3 feet, or 6 feet, or even 12 feet.
The wiring for my system is complex, it is also mostly done on a work bench then installed.........neatly.....
I'm not anti DCC, I just believe two things:
Don't try to sell it based on how "easy" it is.
And, "one size does not fit all".
ATLANTIC CENTRAL dbduck I treat every piece of track as its own section , soldering drops to every piece allowing for any expansion or contraction at the rail joiners. I assume you use DCC? So much for the idea that DCC means less wiring........ I use DC, my average control section (block) is 30' to 40' long. They are each fed by a single feeder which runs thru an inductive dectector first. Multiple drops would be a wiring nightmare. But I have never needed them with soldered rail joints, and never had any expansion/contraction issues. So you mean to tell me you would not simply solder the rail joiners of a short section of track to the ajoining 3' section? I believe the OP indicated that the offending piece of track was only 3" long? Sheldon
dbduck I treat every piece of track as its own section , soldering drops to every piece allowing for any expansion or contraction at the rail joiners.
I treat every piece of track as its own section , soldering drops to every piece allowing for any expansion or contraction at the rail joiners.
I assume you use DCC? So much for the idea that DCC means less wiring........
I use DC, my average control section (block) is 30' to 40' long. They are each fed by a single feeder which runs thru an inductive dectector first. Multiple drops would be a wiring nightmare.
But I have never needed them with soldered rail joints, and never had any expansion/contraction issues.
So you mean to tell me you would not simply solder the rail joiners of a short section of track to the ajoining 3' section?
I believe the OP indicated that the offending piece of track was only 3" long?
I rarely have pieces of track that short.. and have soldered one end to an ajoining piece of track in some cases... but soldering is involved in either situation & in the grand scope of things what is 2 more wires dropped to the bus
"I wasn't sure whether the OP was talking about a failed joiner that was wired to a feeder on not. Apparently not."
In fact, the joiners were wired to feeders at the end of the bus. The only other failure I have had over the course of several years is a soldered joint that contracted throwing the track out of gauge.
BigDaddy I wasn't sure whether the OP was talking about a failed joiner that was wired to a feeder on not. Apparently not. Randy is a wired joiner guy and he claims no failures. I am just starting to try that. ATLANTIC CENTRAL 30' to 40' long From what I've read that's really really long for DCC. I see no point in testing the limits of the bare minimum number of feeders needed. It's easier to do more work up front, than go back and problem solve. As I guy who isn't sure where he put the car keys 2 hours ago, remembering what I did in 1985 is hard. Pretty sure I used 1x4 pine for L-girder and at least 1/2" plywood for cookie cutter roadbed, with homosote on top. I soldered every rail joiner. Like George Costanza, I did have shrinkage. The kinks were fixed by dremel cut off disk and adding a bunch of jumpers between the cut sections. When I took it down, unsoldering turnouts did not go well either. It may well be argued that I should have had better soldering equipment, and I should have used better quality lumber, but I didn't glean that from the How To publications from MR at the time. My current construction is modular, anticipating moving late this year. 7.5 and 5 foot. I should have gone for 6 -2 1/2" so they would fit in my SUV. That limits the longest continuous stretch of rail, soldered or not.
I wasn't sure whether the OP was talking about a failed joiner that was wired to a feeder on not. Apparently not. Randy is a wired joiner guy and he claims no failures. I am just starting to try that.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL 30' to 40' long
From what I've read that's really really long for DCC. I see no point in testing the limits of the bare minimum number of feeders needed. It's easier to do more work up front, than go back and problem solve.
As I guy who isn't sure where he put the car keys 2 hours ago, remembering what I did in 1985 is hard. Pretty sure I used 1x4 pine for L-girder and at least 1/2" plywood for cookie cutter roadbed, with homosote on top.
I soldered every rail joiner. Like George Costanza, I did have shrinkage. The kinks were fixed by dremel cut off disk and adding a bunch of jumpers between the cut sections. When I took it down, unsoldering turnouts did not go well either.
It may well be argued that I should have had better soldering equipment, and I should have used better quality lumber, but I didn't glean that from the How To publications from MR at the time.
My current construction is modular, anticipating moving late this year. 7.5 and 5 foot. I should have gone for 6 -2 1/2" so they would fit in my SUV. That limits the longest continuous stretch of rail, soldered or not.
Henry,
My first layout, located in an unfinished basement, when I was only 12, was built for me by my father. The track was TruScale wood roadbed track, all joints soldered, open gaps for blocks, etc.
In fact, the materials used to build that layout were the same plywood platforms and TruScale track my father had used every Christmas to set up a rather large (5x18) Christmas Garden every year since I was about 2 or 3 years old in the days before we had a basement.
My mother actually allowed the 5x18 model railroad to occupy her living room from from Thanksgiving to February......
He soldered and unsoldered the rail joints every year, and soldered wires for the controls and scenic lighting as well.
I remember this well because at age 5, I put my hand on the hot soldering iron......
As soon as we had a basement, and the propect of being in that house for a while, he built me the layout and soon gave me creative control of its future........
Expansion and contraction problems can and do happen, and, environment and materials both can play a role.
BUT, I still consider soldering most or all rails the best method. If one really feels the need for expansion joints, use jumpers rather than soldering the joiners, at least in a few stratigic locations.
The jury is still out on this DCC feeder thing. There are a few modelers on this forum who will tell you it is way over blown and how they have built moderately large layouts with only a few feeders, or even just one per power district, with no operational issues.
I have designed and helped build a few large DCC layouts over the years. Honesty, as an experianced electrician, with considerable machine tool control wiring experiance, I would rather wire my complex Advanced Cab Control DC system than do the stuff I see recommended for large DCC layouts these days.
I do have one disclaimer here - for the most part, I have never been one to salvage track when dismantling a layout, if that track has been ballasted.
For the last 25 years or so, my layout contruction methods have included gluing track (not turnouts) with adheasive caulk. Prior to that most of my layouts had hand layed track and only the rail was salvaged.
I did salvage most of the turnouts from my most recent layout because most of it never reached the scenery/ballast stage, but the track will not come up, I will savage the rail.
I was actually at the old house today doing some more of the layout demo.
Hope to start on the new layout in a few months.
That happened to me some years ago so I immediately turned to my meter and trace the tracks. I might have mentioned it before, I forgot to solder in a feeder in one section.
I have been using a meter since 1955 so it is first in my mind for troubleshooting any electrical issues.
Rich
If you ever fall over in public, pick yourself up and say “sorry it’s been a while since I inhabited a body.” And just walk away.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL30' to 40' long
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
bearman The problem is solved. I cleaned out the ballast around the joiners. Soldered the joiners to the track and I now have juice to the 3 inch segment.
The problem is solved. I cleaned out the ballast around the joiners. Soldered the joiners to the track and I now have juice to the 3 inch segment.
I have been soldering all my rail joints for 50 years. I will never understand why others don't.
Soldering the joiners was the proper and easist fix.
In fact, carl, that just occurred to me. Solder the offending joiners to the rails, and if that doesn't work, then drop feeders from the section of track without power. Anyone have any opinions on this course of action?
In fact, carl, that just ocurred to me. Solder the offending joiners to the rails, and if that doesn't work, then drop feeders from the section of track without power. Anyone have any opiniond on this course of action?
You could just solder the offending joiner(s).
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
The solution is either Henry's or Mike's. I do have a dremel and Mike's is more time consuming and messy. Henry's is a quick fix however there is a joist that may be involved with Henry's fix. Henry, do you have an alter ego that is haunting my house?????????
bearmanReplacing those joiners would mean ripping out close to a 36 inch length of flex track.
I don't think so, Bearman. If you have a Dremel, use a cut-off wheel, and cut through the joiners, cut through the plastic joiners, as well. Remove the short piece.
Take a screw driver and slip whats left of the joiners off the long track, and do the same to the short piece.
Clean up the ends of the exposed rails, on both pieces.
Remove what ties you need to on the short piece, to slip on 2 new rail joiners, on all the way, the length of the joiner.
Set the short piece in place, slide the joiners back into place, half on the long piece, the rest on the short piece, just like it was when you layed the track the first time. Test for power, solder the joints.
Use a piece of styrene to fill in the gap where the plastic joiners were.
Test for power again, replace the pieces of ties you had to remove, by slipping replacements, or maybe the pieces you removed, back under the rails, and then carefully use the salvaged ballast, and reballast the track sections.
Track gang can call it a day.
Mike.
My You Tube
Wire is prototypical
bearmansome foreign material made its way into the joiners
Very likely.
In all the forum discussions, wiring websites and wiki's on the topic, one thing that everybody agrees on is "never rely on an unsoldered rail joiner to conduct power from one rail to the next", or "every piece of rail should be soldered to something - either a feeder or the next piece of rail".
I wouldn't go to that much trouble, just tack a couple feeders on that piece. If there is an underlying joist, sneak a wire from one rail, around the joiner to the rail on the the same side and cover it with balast, or a little vegetation.
I have a auto light bulb and socket with alligator clips. I'll try that, but I have already started cleaning the ballast out from those joints and I am of the opinion that some foreign material made its way into the joiners. It might mean ripping out the joiners and the feeders, then soldering the feeders to the rails and the rails to each other. Replacing those joiners would mean ripping out close to a 36 inch length of flex track.
That's why I made up the light set up I mentioned in an early post. Clip on and see if it lights up.
Take a test lead, paper clip, screw driver, or anything else metallic and bridge the rail joiner. Then see if you have power.
I'm stickin with the theory that the joiners, one or both, have lost connection. There isn't many other possibilities, either the track is getting power, or it's not.
Even if those joiners have feeders soldered to them, if the joint itself wasn't soldered closed, then dirt has migrated into the joint.
Gentlemen, if there is a failure with that rail joiner, which I suspect is the case, I will deal with it. However, this is the first failure since I wired the layout several years ago. I solder feeders to the joiners then solder the joiners to the rails, some joiners without feeders are not soldered to acccount for any possible expansion/contraction of the track. I have never had any issues until now.