This has all the makings of a D**b Blond Joke. Good that we can all have a little laugh. Thanks,
Dennis
TCA#09-63805
When one is talking about low voltage output, toy train, post war transformers, they are talking about transformers, not case problems in "E" engineering school. In CTT Neil is trying to communicate with a general population of o-gaugers and is rightly using certain terminology that although perhaps technically incorrect has become routine useage.
The common conductor from a toy train transformer is in fact a return to complete a working circuit. It ain't a "floating ground" or a "neutral" although it does share characteristics with the household neutral which is also in fact, a return. Peter Riddle author of three volumes of "Wiring Your Lionel Layout" has used the term "ground" consistently and incorrectly in his books. However he and other authors have effectively served to assist many o-gaugers with their work just as CTT is doing with their articles. It is important for entry o-gaugers to know the alternative terminology just as it is to remind them of the technically correct terms.
Many equally learned and practicing professionals use "neutral" as an alternative to "common" in toy train discussion and in actual component labeling as Lou Kovach did with the Track power Controllers.
I am the monster in your head...And I thought you'd learn by now, It seems you haven't yet.I am the venom in your skin --- Breaking Benjamin
HA! HA! HA! That's nothing compared to the guy who asked "How do you wind up that thing?"
Regards,
John O
jaabat wrote: Neil B. wrote:Bob and Dennis,We struggle with terminology because our magazine audience ranges from electrical engineers to folks that are concerned that electricity will "pour off" the rails at the dead end of a track spur and onto the floor (I'm not exaggerating). . . .Thanks,Neil BesougloffeditorThanks a lot, Neil. I thought that "pouring off the rails" thing was supposed to stay between us. Jim
Neil B. wrote:Bob and Dennis,We struggle with terminology because our magazine audience ranges from electrical engineers to folks that are concerned that electricity will "pour off" the rails at the dead end of a track spur and onto the floor (I'm not exaggerating). . . .Thanks,Neil Besougloffeditor
Thanks a lot, Neil. I thought that "pouring off the rails" thing was supposed to stay between us.
Jim
LOL Jim,
That'll teach you to be careful what you say to the press!
Seriously though. Would not the use of negative (-) and positive (+) clarify things considerably? Whether it's technically correct or not isn't the point since it's clear there is already no standard terminology. The point is to standardize something universal that common folk already understand.
Bruce Webster
Regards, Roy
Bob Nelson
Neil B. wrote:Thanks for the feedback on terminology.Here's another one for the "electricity pouring off the end of the rails" concept.A few years ago, a CTT reader set up a loop of track for Take a Train to Work Day. He told me that one of his younger co-workers was absolutely stunned to learn that the track was actually electrified. The co-worker had never heard of such a concept and presumed the train was battery-powered.Neil
I have not had that happen to the layout indoors, but several people have asked about the type or size of batteries I use for the Gardern Railroad LGB Mogul.
BTW, if you put a 5 gallon bucket at the end of the track, you can catch some of that electricty pouring off and use it to run the trains onboard radar so that it doesn't wander off the track.
Celebrating 18 years on the CTT Forum.
Buckeye Riveter......... OTTS Charter Member, a Roseyville Raider and a member of the CTT Forum since 2004..
Jelloway Creek, OH - ELV 1,100 - Home of the Baltimore, Ohio & Wabash RR
TCA 09-64284
Track electrified?
WOW and I thought it was done with mirrors or magic?
laz57
Neil Besougloff
editor, Model Railroader magazine
I thought you knew about the erotica sextion...
Modeling the Baltimore waterfront in HO scale
anjdevil2 wrote:What could possibly be IN that erotica column??? Nude editors with classic Lionels?Makes you think.......
What could possibly be IN that erotica column??? Nude editors with classic Lionels?
Makes you think.......
Ahhhhhh! I'm blind! I'm blind!!!!!
I was thinking about this... why not refer to it as 'Transformer Common'? That would indicate that the terminal(s) are not always 'U' or 'A' or 'whatever letter they use tomorrow'...It would read something like this: "Connect the outer rails to 'Transformer Common', then connect the center rail to 'Transformer Variable'." This makes a heck of a lot more sense to me!The problem with switching up the 'A' and 'U' as common can create a real hazard IMHO. Just look at the older CW and the new CW. Since they switched them, you can no longer connect 'U' from the old CW to the outter rail, you would have to connect it to the center rail and connect 'A' to the outter rail, then on the new CW you connect 'U' to the outter rail and 'A' to the inner rail... switch them with two CWs powering adjacent blocks and well... damage to equipment is quite likely to occur...I also can't figure out why they aren't labeled 'O' and 'I', for the ZW it would be 'O1', 'I1', 'O2', 'I2', 'O3', 'I3', 'O4', 'I4'... that would make more sense to me!
Brent
I feel your pain, Neil. Strictly speaking, something like "layout common" is correct; but, unfortunately, there are other commons, like the common terminal of an SPDT switch for example, which are likely not to be connected with that layout common but will be confused with it. "Ground" has a certain appeal to me. It is actually legitimate (in the ANSI and IEEE standards) to use that term for the frame of a vehicle. Furthermore, in a sense, the outside rails can be said to be modeling the (literally) grounded rails of an electrical-railroad prototype. But, as you say, some will infer, not unreasonably, that we mean an actual connection to the earth (which, by the way, is not a bad idea for a layout, though not strictly necessary).
My best suggestion is one that I have tried to follow here on the forum and is actually right there in your question, "What word would you like to see used for the wire going to the outside rail?" It is, of course, "outside rail(s)", or perhaps sometimes "the transformer terminal connected to the outside rails". The latter is a bit wordy, but probably doesn't need to be repeated very often, while "outside rails" compares favorably to "neutral or ground".
Neil, I actually do understand your dilema. I recall a similar discussion with regard to turnouts, etc. Perhaps, you could on the first common term word, put parenthesis around the correct word next to it, or vise versa. Then continue with the rest of the article. This would, I believe, subdue the critical observer, and also educate the less informed. I for one have a lot to learn and that is the main reason I return to the forum as there is a wealth of information to be gained in it's pages.
Regardless, I appreciate your time and efforts....y'all (all of you) at CTT do a wonderful job.
scantilly clad engines...
I, for one, want to find CTT's erotica column...
Doug Murphy 'We few, we happy few, we band of brothers...' Henry V.
This is how I like to start my day!
In one thread I am able to get articulate cogent electromagnetic analysis and witty repartee.
Bob:
Thanks for the clarification. I continue to learn something new about electricity everytime I read your posts.
Dave:
Some of your comments cause me to laugh outloud.
Bob, thanks for educating those of us "less informed". I had thought of the "neutral" thing as being bad, but was not aware of the capacitor issue. Perhaps we could use a "Flux Capacitor" on the Delorian
Joseph Rampolla says in his article "Make a Smoother-Running Rail Truck", "It's critical that you choose a quality, electrolytic capacitor rated for 50 volts. A good rule of thumb is to use a capacitor rated at approximately triple the maximum voltage it might receive." It is not at all critical. In fact, there is no benefit to derating an electrolytic capacitor for voltage. If you use it at a lower than rated voltage, it will gradually lose its ability to operate at that voltage, effectively resetting its rating to the voltage it actually sees. You will have used a more expensive, bulkier capacitor with nothing to show for it. Especially in a situation where you want as much capacitance as you can cram into the space available, use a capacitor rated at or only slightly above the voltage you have. Twenty or 25 volts should be plenty for an application like Rampolla's rail truck.
He also shows a 600-volt, 6-ampere bridge rectifier, which is a considerable overkill. You could justify the ample current rating as useful keeping the rectifier cool; but there is little point to the high voltage rating. Fifty volts would be more than enough.
Neil Besougloff makes a common terminology mistake in his article, "Old transformers: which terminals to use". He calls the transformer return a "neutral or 'ground'". "Ground" could be excused as slang for "common" or "return". But the neutral is a completely different concept, involving cancellation of return currents. While many are familiar with the fact that residential power-wiring neutrals are grounded, that doesn't mean that the words mean the same thing. In fact, those who take pains, often unnecessarily, to get their transformer outputs in phase with each other, actually guarantee that the transformer common will never function as a neutral!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month