simon1966 wrote: Everything worked fine prior to ballasting and weathering the track. After this was complete and the track cleaned it would not run. Capillary action, I assume, had caused my joiners to no longer provide a good contact. Soldering on the feeders to the bus restored power to this section.
jbinkley60 wrote: An urban legend is a comment that additional feeders will make up for dirty track, paint on rails from weathering or similar wheel to rail contact issues. The comparison here is on the order of a few ohms of additional resistance from less feeders vs. hundreds to thousands of ohms of additional resistance from wheel to rail contact issues. Additional feeders will make up for bad joiners but why not fix the joiners ?
An urban legend is a comment that additional feeders will make up for dirty track, paint on rails from weathering or similar wheel to rail contact issues. The comparison here is on the order of a few ohms of additional resistance from less feeders vs. hundreds to thousands of ohms of additional resistance from wheel to rail contact issues. Additional feeders will make up for bad joiners but why not fix the joiners ?
Jeff, no flame intended, but I don't think that anyone suggested that more feeders make up for track that has been made dirty from painting, weathering and ballasting. The conductivity breakdown that can occur here is not the wheel to track (which can and should be cleaned with normal methods), but the conductivity breakdown that can occur in the joiner to track interface. I have had first hand experience with this where I had installed feeders to a siding but had not yet soldered them to the bus. Everything worked fine prior to ballasting and weathering the track. After this was complete and the track cleaned it would not run. Capillary action, I assume, had caused my joiners to no longer provide a good contact. Soldering on the feeders to the bus restored power to this section.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
Soo Line fan wrote: When I first built my layout I had a single set of feeders for each block. Most blocks were less that 8'. I used 14ga stranded connected to 18ga stranded with wire nuts. The feeders were soldered to the bottom of a rail joiner like the ones Atlas sells. None of the wire runs were over 10'. All was well - for about 7yrs.I then began to notice that at low to medium speeds the locos would slow ever so slightly when operating at certain spots of the layout. Other places it was more noticeable. No amount of track or wheel cleaning would help. I decided to find out exactly why this was occurring. I loaded each block one at a time with a .250ma electrical load. Using the voltage drop method, I began to check for losses. Not exactly the wiggle and jiggle method but one that works very well in giving accurate results. I was surprised at what I was seeing on the DMM. Some blocks were losing close to 1v; many were in the .600 to .700mv range. The further from the feeder in each block, the higher the voltage drop. Loose or contaminated joiners caused the losses.I carefully replaced all of the joiners and added extra feeders in all of the blocks over 3'. I used extra caution to not get any ballast glue on the joiners. A joiner never gets reused. After another eight years a recent test showed my drops all under .080mv. No more slow order areas.When you initially build a layout, everything will be (or should be) electrically tight. Over time this will change. How much it changes depends on you. Jim
When I first built my layout I had a single set of feeders for each block. Most blocks were less that 8'. I used 14ga stranded connected to 18ga stranded with wire nuts. The feeders were soldered to the bottom of a rail joiner like the ones Atlas sells. None of the wire runs were over 10'. All was well - for about 7yrs.
I then began to notice that at low to medium speeds the locos would slow ever so slightly when operating at certain spots of the layout. Other places it was more noticeable. No amount of track or wheel cleaning would help.
I decided to find out exactly why this was occurring. I loaded each block one at a time with a .250ma electrical load. Using the voltage drop method, I began to check for losses. Not exactly the wiggle and jiggle method but one that works very well in giving accurate results. I was surprised at what I was seeing on the DMM. Some blocks were losing close to 1v; many were in the .600 to .700mv range. The further from the feeder in each block, the higher the voltage drop. Loose or contaminated joiners caused the losses.
I carefully replaced all of the joiners and added extra feeders in all of the blocks over 3'. I used extra caution to not get any ballast glue on the joiners. A joiner never gets reused. After another eight years a recent test showed my drops all under .080mv. No more slow order areas.
When you initially build a layout, everything will be (or should be) electrically tight. Over time this will change. How much it changes depends on you.
Jim
I am going to climb out on a limb here and guess that this was a DC system. In DCC the voltage delivered to the decoder inputs is not the same as the voltage delivered to the motor. In DC the voltage that reaches the wheels is what gets sent to the motor. That difference can easily make up for small voltage drops that might be incurred from the closest feeder to the locomotive wheels. The DCC driving current for the motor is actually a constant differential DC component of the signal across the rails (i.e. rail A is 180 degrees out of phase with rail B). The differential DC component of this signal creates the maximum available DC voltage (minus the voltage drop of the decoder itself) which is going to be higher than the actual voltage delivered to the motor, unless your throttle is at 100% and you don't have a Vmax set on the decoder.
Engineer Jeff NS Nut Visit my layout at: http://www.thebinks.com/trains/
Brunton wrote:There is this - if all you "feeder fiends" are overdoing it, there's no serious downside. If I'm wrong, in five or ten years I'll be crawling around on and under the layout adding feeders everywhere. BIG downside! Still, I'm bull-headed enough to take that risk! I do run 12-gauge busses, so the main distribution network is there if I have to add more taps.
The main downside is that if they didn't plan for growth and have to breakup a large monolithic buss wiring scheme, there could be some rail cutting and rewiring involved on a finished layout.
jwils1 wrote:Does a higher amp system help to overcome deteriorating track joints, e.g., would a 5 amp system have fewer problems than a 2.5 amp system?
In general the answer to both is "No". Under just the right circumstances it would have the opposite effect but that is an extreme case.
jwils1 wrote: Okay, it sounds like everyone is using flex track so I think I'm the oddball here as I'm using sectional track (Atlas True Track NS code 83 in 9" long sections with regular rail joiners). I'm using 5 amp DCC with 130' of track and 3 sets of feeders roughly equally spaced. It's been running very well for about a year. I've had some discussion on this with Jeffrey Wimberley but now I'm wondering about the future?How do you prevent electrical conductivity problems with sectional track? Please don't say don't use it, unless that's the only answer. I might also point out that all my track is loose-laid on top of foam. No glue. It just floats. I did this at first thinking I may want to move things around but I'm happy with the arrangement and won't be moving much. With the plastic built-in roadbed, everything locks together well and doesn't move, except for possible expansion/contraction. Painting the foam and adding scenery tends to hold the track in place as well.Would appreciate any suggestions.
Okay, it sounds like everyone is using flex track so I think I'm the oddball here as I'm using sectional track (Atlas True Track NS code 83 in 9" long sections with regular rail joiners).
I'm using 5 amp DCC with 130' of track and 3 sets of feeders roughly equally spaced. It's been running very well for about a year. I've had some discussion on this with Jeffrey Wimberley but now I'm wondering about the future?
How do you prevent electrical conductivity problems with sectional track? Please don't say don't use it, unless that's the only answer.
I might also point out that all my track is loose-laid on top of foam. No glue. It just floats. I did this at first thinking I may want to move things around but I'm happy with the arrangement and won't be moving much. With the plastic built-in roadbed, everything locks together well and doesn't move, except for possible expansion/contraction. Painting the foam and adding scenery tends to hold the track in place as well.
Would appreciate any suggestions.
As you read through this thread (and similar ones here) there are some good comments, some urban legends and some things which just don't add up. For instance a general good comment is that more feeders are better than less feeders but taken to an extreme, there are drawbacks. An urban legend is a comment that additional feeders will make up for dirty track, paint on rails from weathering or similar wheel to rail contact issues. The comparison here is on the order of a few ohms of additional resistance from less feeders vs. hundreds to thousands of ohms of additional resistance from wheel to rail contact issues. Additional feeders will make up for bad joiners but why not fix the joiners ? And the things which often don't add up or raise eyebrows, pretty much most comments about the AC characteristics of DCC and such (which often includes voltage drop debates on DCC at speeds less than 100% throttle). So now that I have possibly offended many here, let me give you my simple suggestion.
Focus first on how you will grow your layout once you exceed the capacity of the largest booster. I have yet to see a DCC manufacturer that can cluster boosters so you must plan for what will happen once the total current draw of your locomotives (and those you may get in the future) exceeds your booster (you can buy a bigger one but do we really want 20A boosters in the future ?). Because once you reach this condition you will need to find a way to address it. I suggest breaking layouts into more blocks instead of a single monolithic block that covers the entire layout. This may include the mainline, depending upon its length the current draw of the total number of locomotives on it compared to the booster output. The advantages of multiple blocks is that you don't need to do major rewiring when you reach the booster limit, smaller blocks will allow for shorter buses and potentially smaller wiring, blocks improve troubleshooting when problems occur and having blocks can make adding things like detection systems easier in the future. Once you have focused on the growth and have a reasonable amount of blocks, then you can focus on the actual phsyical wiring characteristics.
The one thing I continually hear folks say is that they only have a handful of locomotives or they will never get into sound so they won't exceed the booster output. I don't know about you but my crystal ball isn't polished this well. Who can tell me that I won't buy sound locomotives. When I started my current layout 6 years ago I was on DC and had no sound locomotives. Today I have DCC, multiple boosters and many sound locomotives. I also can't tell you what the manufacturers have planned for the future that might draw more current but whatever it is, I will likely buy it. For me the move to DCC was extremely simple. I swapped DC circuit breakers for electronic ones and then figured out which breakers mapped to which boosters.
So that's my suggestion. Now I put on my fire retardant suit to ward off the flames.
Texas Zepherdoctorwayne All track is soldered together at the railjoiners, with gaps cut where required. Sort of off topic (but serious) question here. Why do you solder the rail joiners and then cut a gap? We have people at the club that do this. They will solder a joint and then cut a gap 1" away. Why not just leave a gap in the track or use insulated rail joiners in those locations? They can't explain why they do it other than habit (or not seriously - a soldering fetish).
doctorwayne All track is soldered together at the railjoiners, with gaps cut where required.
When I first layed the track, the entire layout was one block. After operating for a while, it was easy to see where gaps were needed in order to isolate trains while another was running. Each track in staging is controlled by a separate on/off switch, and its necessary gap, allowing entire trains to be held without disrupting operations elswhere. Likewise, a gap and an on/off switch were installed at passing sidings and anywhere else that I might want to park a locomotive. Of course, gaps were necessary for proper operation of the wye, but it was easier to lay the track first, then cut the gaps where appropriate. Another reason for not merely leaving gaps as you lay the track is that you can get a much smoother flow of the rails through curves. Once the track is fastened in place and ballasted, there's less chance of something shifting out of line when you do cut the gaps. Also, the gaps that present themselves as you lay flextrack and install turnouts seldom fall where you really need them to be. And since I'm no wiring wizard, I try to keep things as simple as possibe.
In this picture, the near siding (with the gondola), plus both main lines have gaps and are controlled by on/off switches, as this is a busy interchange point.
Here, a train on the mainline (centre) is held, while the train on the passing siding (right) runs by. The tender of a third loco can be seen (left): its power also shut off while the move is being made.
Finally, this wye wouldn't function without gaps.
Wayne
I would say that 95% of time it wouldn't make any difference at all for two reasons:
1) If a layouts electrical system sucks that bad then the locos won't be able to draw power, so having EXTRA power does one nothing.
2) Its not really amperage capacity that is the 'concern' of the various approaches detailed in this thread, but more of the degridation of voltage from the power source to the locos.
High Amperage draw across poor connections (read High resistance) can make things worse, but we are talking about amperage, voltage, resistance and wire length values that are just not present on a layout. As has been detailed in this thread, people have run 50+ linear feet of track with a single feeder and never had problems. That being said, any wiring above and beyond that only increases your layouts reliability and longevity.
But to answer your question directly....no a 5 amp system would not have fewer problems than a 2.5 amp system.
Dave Loman
My site: The Rusty Spike
"It's a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your 2 cents in.... hey, someone's making a penny!"
Jerry
Rio Grande vs. Santa Fe.....the battle is over but the glory remains!
doctorwayne wrote: All track is soldered together at the railjoiners, with gaps cut where required.
BRAKIE wrote:The thing to remember with rail joiners is be sure they are tight on the rail..This may require squeezing the joiner with pliers.
It's hard to have too many feeder wires, especially with DCC. There are a couple of spots on my layout that need additional feeders, even though they are only a few feet from a feeder. Again, track joiners, turnouts etc.
Add the feeders, we all need soldering practice anyway.
Hmmm. Seems that I'm a real minority in this one. My room-size layout has been in operation for at least 15 years. No feeder wires, other than the initial hook-up, no bus wires, and no problems. Control is walk-around DC, all track is painted and ballasted, and I run heavy trains with multiple locomotives. All track is soldered together at the railjoiners, with gaps cut where required. What am I doing wrong? (By the way, all track is nickel-silver, and I don't clean it unless the installation of scenery causes a localised mess.)
Alrighty folks,
Since early this morning I have decided this is my feeder plan:
-20 Guage Atlas Wire for feeders
-16 guage Speaker wire (stranded) for bus supply wire
-Barrier strips to hook everything up
I purchased some on ebay some at radioshack, So weekend wring here I come!
Canadian Shield
Dave,
Thanks for the prompt Answer to my question I have one more for you guys. What Device do I use to take the "main power line" down and separate into feeders? Would a Terminal strip work? If so what type am I looking for when I go down to Radioshack?
In the car audio world we call it a distribution block (but the ones for car audio are for 0 or 4 guage wire lol)
CanadianShield wrote: So after reading this post last night at 2:00am I went over to The Ebay and ordered 4 rolls of atlas' 20 Guage Stranded Wire (2 green and 2 black) I model in N scale and use the Digitrax Super Empire Builder System. My layout is in the blue foam stage, and this past Sunday I finished all the tracklaying! I havea Temporary set up of only two feeders for a layout that fills a 8 x10 room, and I of course see locos slow down in spots etc (this was just to test the newly laid track) I always planned on putting in lots of feeders, and I have gathered from this thread that:-20 or 22 guage for feeders, 14 or 16 guage for bus wire-feeders between every 3 and 6 feet (makes sense) My questions are:-I use Code 80 Atlas Sectional track on curves especially and most of the layout. I hate the kinky out of shape flextrack brings and only use it sparingly. Should I solder the tracks together? If so, does each rail or only one rail need to be soldered? Thanks in advance, Canadian Shield
So after reading this post last night at 2:00am I went over to The Ebay and ordered 4 rolls of atlas' 20 Guage Stranded Wire (2 green and 2 black) I model in N scale and use the Digitrax Super Empire Builder System. My layout is in the blue foam stage, and this past Sunday I finished all the tracklaying! I havea Temporary set up of only two feeders for a layout that fills a 8 x10 room, and I of course see locos slow down in spots etc (this was just to test the newly laid track) I always planned on putting in lots of feeders, and I have gathered from this thread that:
-20 or 22 guage for feeders, 14 or 16 guage for bus wire
-feeders between every 3 and 6 feet (makes sense)
My questions are:
-I use Code 80 Atlas Sectional track on curves especially and most of the layout. I hate the kinky out of shape flextrack brings and only use it sparingly. Should I solder the tracks together? If so, does each rail or only one rail need to be soldered?
Thanks in advance,
It's best to solder flextrack together on curves (IMHO); it's absolutely necessary if you're glueing, rather than nailing, the track down. If you're nailing, you may be able to get away without solder, but I'm skeptical (I tried it once, and it still didn't quite look right). You'll need to solder both rails to avoid a kink.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Increasing the amount of feeders and the wire gauge lowers the resistance in the rails, increasing the current handling capacity for those multiple unit lash-ups that multiply the current draw, in addition to bridging mechanical connector failure. I've had fun noodling with big oval test tracks, where I like to see how little I can get away with, but when building a layout it pays major dividends to err on the safe side. Besides, adding extra feeders is one of the less time consuming aspects of layout construction; certainly far easier than that bomb-proof benchwork.
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
I'm sure the OP meant to rankle feathers, knowing full-well that the "common wisdom" as proffered by the hobby press is more feeders are better.
I've added more and more feeders feeders each time I've built a layout... that's through hard experience. Admittedly, part of my challenge is that I build mine to move with me as I change assignments, and even to go to shows, so purely mechanical connections will likely be jostled loose.
But why wouldn't you want to play it safe? I just don't get it.
While everyone has their own way of doing things, it still boils down to having to make work arounds to keep the problems from cropping up. Why does everyone keep trying to reinvent the wheel time after time!
Just as the 3M Scotchlocks and using anti oxidant grease. Why not just solder the wires in the first place and the problem is solved/stopped.
But then there are others that have the mind set, no matter how others suggest doing things “I will do it my way just to show you”. And the funny thing is that they eventually do and will abandon the project after finding out that the others were right. But would they ever admit they were wrong NOPE!
If your method is working well there is no reason to go back and change. This whole dissertation was to help out those that are just starting to do the Benchwork, Trackwork wiring.
If your location of your layout is in a climate controlled atmosphere then anything will work – not soldering - Scotchlocks – just twisting the wires together or what ever. But don’t come back complaining later on when the thing fails to operate smoothly
BOB H – Clarion, PA
cpeterson wrote:Maybe this is an aside, but the point was brought up that the 3M scotch lock connectors eventually corroded and caused poor electrical connections, wouldn't that be a similar situation in the long run to suitcase connectors? I realize these are what a lot of people are using and even MR has used them in their projects but I havn't yet used them as I hate to redo wiring. What are your opinions?
Dissimilar metallurgy in contact points will mean galvanic action. Over time, there will be a failure. It depends, to an extent, on humidity, but also on any acids, fluxes, and any number of other contaminants on the wires and connectors.
I believe you can purchase an electrical "grease" that inhibits corrosion. It is meant to be used in areas where humidity, salt air, and other agents are constantly bathing the connection or its housing. Home Depot sells it in a smallish tube.
Well this is they way I approach it, when I buy track I set up an assembly line so to speak.
trim off a few ties in the middle on each piece while the soldering iron is heating up, cut my feeder wires and strip dip in flux ready for tinning. Once that is done lay all the track out and one after another solder the feeders to the bottom of the rails. Then when I am ready to lay track I just place it spike and and cal it done. I can go behind later and tie into the buss line and be runnning and I will know without a doubt each piece of rail is good. Spending lots of prep time up front will get you a better end result.
SIMON:
I think with sectional track I would go with Jeffers' suggested connecting 2 - maybe even 3 - rail sections together which forms a 3 foot section of track, like flextrack.
The caveat is to NOT solder each of the 3 foot sections together, and to leave a 'business card's space between them, allowing for rail expansion.
See if you can put curved 3' sections into the centers of the curves for smoothness, and go and trim from there. Track is the cheapest item to buy.
jwils1 wrote: Okay, it sounds like everyone is using flex track so I think I'm the oddball here as I'm using sectional track (Atlas True Track NS code 83 in 9" long sections with regular rail joiners).
Jerry, prior to starting this layout, I had a fairly basic loop of Atlas Trutrack code 83 with a couple of sidings. Admitedly, this was not permanently set up and would be taken apart and re-used. Within a very short time I would get sections where the train would stop dead. I was always able to fix it by taking it apart, cleaning the ends of the track and tightening the joiners with a slight squeeze of a pair of pliers. If you are not glueing the track down and can easily get to problem areas if they occur then I would not be too worried. My fear with a more permanent setup with ballasted track is that fixing a problem later would be quite destructive and a real pain to do.
Soldering a drop to every track joint is wasteful overkill, electrically. You accomplish the same thing by soldering a drop to every other rail joint such that the rail on either side of the drop is hardwired. The price of doing this is reliance on a single solder joint for direct electrical feed - jeffers_mz
As one who has experienced both power problems from friction-fit rail joiners AND expansion problems ( humidity-controlled basement), I have learned from my own experiences. Perhaps everyone else should do the same. Most layouts don't last 5 - 10 years. (Some of us move).
TIME and ENVIRONMENT work against you. Dirt, dust, oils, cleaning agents, and oxides are your enemies, They become contanimants over time.
A 4'X 8' with flextract mainline will have 6 pieces and 10 friction-fitting rail joiners. Sectional track multiples this X 4.
I don't solder my reail joiners, so I use feeders liberally. Just exactly WHEN does 'RELIABITY' become 'OVERKILL'??
jwils1 wrote:Okay, it sounds like everyone is using flex track so I think I'm the oddball here as I'm using sectional track (Atlas True Track NS code 83 in 9" long sections with regular rail joiners). I'm using 5 amp DCC with 130' of track and 3 sets of feeders roughly equally spaced. It's been running very well for about a year. I've had some discussion on this with Jeffrey Wimberley but now I'm wondering about the future?How do you prevent electrical conductivity problems with sectional track? Please don't say don't use it, unless that's the only answer. I might also point out that all my track is loose-laid on top of foam. No glue. It just floats. I did this at first thinking I may want to move things around but I'm happy with the arrangement and won't be moving much. With the plastic built-in roadbed, everything locks together well and doesn't move, except for possible expansion/contraction. Painting the foam and adding scenery tends to hold the track in place as well.Would appreciate any suggestions.
If you are going to keep your current layout into the forseeable future, I'd go back and check for loose joiners and replace any that aren't gripping both rail ends securely, and let it go at that. Then again, I seem to be the maverick in this crowd!
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton