Thought some might find this interesting,...another European manufacture managed to build a double slip switch with a single control mechanism. I have some of these.
Profi-track dbl slips by Fleischmann
Nice turnouts that I would be using on my new layout if the radi were so tight,...and if the flangeways weren't so large for my modern USA wheel sets
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
Marc_MagnusBy removing the solenoid, you can reach the two throwbars and made some linkage to work with Caboose Industries throw levers or any switch machines you like to use, but try to use one levers or switch machine, this avoid confusion as I mentionned before.
i hope it's clear that in order to have both routes valid at the same time, the throw bars at each end need to be moved in opposite directions and need to be correspondingly consistent with the setting on the other end.
four separate Caboose Industry ground throws would be needed. two would need to be set correctly to establish one route
four separate (tortoise) switch macines could be used and driven appropriately for the two routes with a single DPDT switch
fewer switch machines could be used with appropriate linkage to multiple throw bars.
Marc_MagnusThe diagram you show with the yellow arrows should have been done and show at the begining of the topic, this would stop all the confusing debate of an not troublemaker piece of track.
the built in switch machine on this slip makes it look simple
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Yes Brian,
These are the only two status ( with "S", sorry for the mistake) you can obtain and you need, to operate a double slip, no more, no less.
No trouble if all the points are set in one status, since only one train can roll through it, you just choice where your train is going for.
By removing the solenoid, you can reach the two throwbars and made some linkage to work with Caboose Industries throw levers or any switch machines you like to use, but try to use one levers or switch machine, this avoid confusion as I mentionned before.
The frog can be powered by soldering a power wire to the small ears of the brass frog, but don't forget to take a look at the excellent animated sketch of @Grecg, for the polarity, anyway a live frog need polarity change like a turnout ones.
Not sure, is a good idea to try to dismantle the small solenoid, because on these models, I think the solenoid is an integral part of the slip and he is not intended to be take away; the removal can easily damage the throwbars and the move of the points in consequences; the solenoid can be concealed in scenery.
A double pole toggle with momentary contact can do the job, or more useful if you can find one an old Arnold Rapido switch designed for double slip, which show with illuminated symbol the status of the slip, these old switch were designed for momentary contacts and solenoid motors switch.
The diagram you show with the yellow arrows should have been done and show at the begining of the topic, this would stop all the confusing debate of an not troublemaker piece of track.
for a train entering from the left, the left point position determines whether the route crosses or diverges (different for each track) and the right points select must be set to match the track on the left that the train enters on whether each end has a common or separate throw bars, doesn't seem to matter. Gregc
whether each end has a common or separate throw bars, doesn't seem to matter.
Gregc
Just for clarification I submit this pictorial view of my 'euro style' Roco dbl slip .
Here BOTH routes are set for crossing:
With a SINGLE selection of the controller, BOTH routes are set for diverging (curving)
This is far less confusing to me,...and has me questioning why the build dbl-slips with 2 controllers??
Arrows added (sorry didn't know how to add curves to those arrow lines)
gmpullman railandsail Probably if I could change one thing it would be to make it manually operated. But I think this might be a real chore. Doesn't this lever operate the points "manually"?? roco_ds by Edmund, on Flickr Did you try flipping it? Good Luck, Ed
railandsail Probably if I could change one thing it would be to make it manually operated. But I think this might be a real chore.
Doesn't this lever operate the points "manually"??
roco_ds by Edmund, on Flickr
Did you try flipping it?
Good Luck, Ed
At first I thought to myself, how stupid of me not to consider this Of course that works.
I believe what I was referring to is how that turnout might be operated manually WITHOUT that stock controller there,...for instance with caboose type switch stands.
I'm not that much of a purest to be worried about using that stock controller. Besides I can probably camouflage it somehow. And in my particular case in this particular location, it will be only be less than 2 feet away.
I like the fact that it has metal frogs, and that they are isolated electrically,...likely a candidate for a live frog if so desired.
NeO6874Think your autocorrect ate some letters there, Mark ("status"?)...
Ed beat me to it because I had to walk the dog.
More likely remnants of Caesar's trip to Gaul.
Mark probably speaks 3 or 4 more languages than most of us, though I'm not counting double negative 'merican as a separate language
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
NeO6874Think your autocorrect ate some letters there, Mark
He's writing from Belgium, so it was probably Google translator: Status would be correct. French, Statu. Or Dutch Statu = statu.
Regards, Ed
Think your autocorrect ate some letters there, Mark ("status"?)...
I don't disagree that the geometry makes it look more complex than it really is though.
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
railandsail Peco Unifrog Double Slip I don't believe that is offered in Code100. And then I run into the derailment possibilities the Ed pointed out earlier due ti improperly set combo of entrance/exit points of double control slips. My thoughts were that since the frog area is insulated on this older style that it just might be a 'route selection' turnout lik a number of euro style were, and are still today? (I think that the correct wording?) Wasn't Shinohara that same electrically? Bottom line I believe that only slight mods are neccesary to make it DCC compatible?? I really like the way the Roco are constructed, and I like the 'unconfusing' manner you can select routes without all the rotary switches and led panels to indicate selection route. Probably if I could change one thing it would be to make it manually operated. But I think this might be a real chore.
Peco Unifrog Double Slip
I don't believe that is offered in Code100.
And then I run into the derailment possibilities the Ed pointed out earlier due ti improperly set combo of entrance/exit points of double control slips.
My thoughts were that since the frog area is insulated on this older style that it just might be a 'route selection' turnout lik a number of euro style were, and are still today? (I think that the correct wording?) Wasn't Shinohara that same electrically? Bottom line I believe that only slight mods are neccesary to make it DCC compatible??
I really like the way the Roco are constructed, and I like the 'unconfusing' manner you can select routes without all the rotary switches and led panels to indicate selection route.
Probably if I could change one thing it would be to make it manually operated. But I think this might be a real chore.
Brian, I already answered about double slip use on other forum about your questions.
I use myself in N scale severals Peco code 55 double slip since 15 years without any troubles, no electrical issues, no serial deraillments when running foward or in reverse.
The use of double slip is not seldom, pictures show in some arrangements more than thirty aligned even in US yard or grill station.
In modeling, they are useful to safe space and are versatile, easy to choice and change track routes, easy to use despite many say about them.
So following are some considerations which resume pages of discussion which,I really beleive are sterile but particulary conduct to confusion and questionnement; this is my opinion.
1. A double slip is really not a track toublemaker.
2. To many people say is" a four routes crossing with side crossing, with diverging routes , which can be used as.....".Forget these please, a double slip is much simpler and has only two statu in one piece of track, a double slip is a full crossing in one statu, in the second statu it allows to follow diverging routes on the same sight....that's all you must keep in mind, the rest is litterature.
3. Following each manufacturer there are two throwbars or four throwbars, they open or close a pair of points; there is no troubles if the four points are set simultaneousely to allow the crossing statu or the diverging routes statu, because only one train can cross the double slip at a time, and this don't affect nothing if the two other exit track of the slip not in use are in this statu.
4. I always use for control panel the "keep it simple" philosophy; because as mentionned, the double slip has only two statu, one toglle can flip the points in the desired statu; I use one toggle and two leds with small symbols, a led light in each position, with a symbol of a cross and the other with two small opposed arc, the led give me the statu of the double slip, but if you ask for, you can also put led for the routes open. I avoid power selector on my panel because they are confusing, especialy for friends operators; all the electrical selection is done with the switch motors contact or relay, frog are powered the usual way as turnout ones.
5. The use of old track could be problematic with DCC, they are not DCC friendly and ask lot of tuning or modifications to be friendly, this is more difficult for sure to modify and tune an old double slip than a simple old turnout, and at the end the old slip will be not really safe for DCC, just my opinion.
6. Remember the "keep it simple " philosophy, things are easier this way to use and to learn, to much questionning is sometimes confusing.
Anyway, use them, they are versatile and not troublemaker for sure.
railandsailProbably if I could change one thing it would be to make it manually operated. But I think this might be a real chore.
railandsail gmpullman, Do you forsee any problems with utilizing this 'euro style' Roco dbl-slip on a DCC layout??
gmpullman,
Do you forsee any problems with utilizing this 'euro style' Roco dbl-slip on a DCC layout??
Rich
Alton Junction
Primarily the focus of this discussion thread was about the geometry of the double/single slip switch and the points arrangement and control. Powering the rails is another animal altogether.
Take a look at this link:
https://dccwiki.com/Crossing
Scroll to "Slips"
The old axiom holds true that if your trackwork performs well in DC then it will perform well in DCC.
One failing of trackwork in DCC is to have too-close of a tolerance in the flange way or wheel back-to-back area and if a wheel contacts a point or guardrail it will cause a short.
In DC a brief short can be tolerated, the momentum of the train (flywheels help here) allow it to continue and the power protection (fuse, circuit breaker) doesn't even react to the short-duration short.
Any DCC supply weather built in to the command station or an add-on circuit breaker WILL react to a brief short and cut the power within a fraction of milliseconds.
Thus the birth of the "oft-misused" phrase "DCC Friendly". A LOT of confusion arises with the powering of turnout points and frogs. There are two basic types.
All Live where the rail configuration is arranged so that no matter which way the points are thrown, the RAILS of the main and diverging routes stay the same. Period. No insulated joints or gaps needed. Slap the turnouts down in any arrangement and the north rail will always be the north rail and south, south.
Reverse loops are a different animal.
Alternately, there is the Power Routing Turnout. Here, the points, closure rails and frog are all electrically ONE and their "polarity" changes as the points engage the north rail or south rail.
This arrangement requires specific rules. Namely, 1: All track feeders to a turnout must come from the point side of the turnout and 2: Any Frog-to-frog connection (i.e. a passing siding) must be gapped (or otherwise insulated)
BOTH designs are DCC "friendly" but the power-routing method requires a little extra finesse and perhaps a few extra gaps and feeders.
SO, in the case of your "vintage" double slip switches, I'm pretty sure they are both of the "All Live" variety. These were most common with train-set trackage and another bonus is that the back-to-back wheel clearances are probably more than generous, thus, that kind of short will probably not be a problem.
Then use your NMRA gauge to check gauge and flange clearance.
What you WILL have to check, too, using your multi-meter, is that all the rail sections are live (no broken jumpers) and that no shorting occurs when your engines pass through them. DO set up a temporary test track and try several combinations of your "fussiest" locomotives, longest wheelbase, shortest wheelbase, etc. through all the route conditions.
It looks like the frogs have the famous "ears" for providing power to the secondary frogs if desired. The brass one could probably be soldered (after a necessary cleaning) but the nickel one looks like the same blackened pot-metal that Atlas uses. You'll have to use a mechanical connection here, small screw and nut OR tapped hole with brass screw.
Powering the frogs has been covered in these forums, ad-infinitum. (I'm a big fan of Tam Valley Depot Frog Juicers)
https://dccwiki.com/Turnout
Hope that helps, Ed
Randy, I was looking for a way to make the newer style slips into an older style operation with ONLY one machine, BUT the problem that arose was that the point rails on either end of the turnout were attached to 2 different crossbars that moved in opposite directions. That could not be duplicated on the newer style double motored slips.
Ed, Good decription of the problems with the newer style double slips.
Certainly not ALL - look at the brass one with the single double-ended solenoid that was posted previously. It has 4 throwbars so that it can all be done from one switch motor. The two at each end are likely on opposite ends of the same crank so when one throwbar pushes away from the motor, the other pulls towards it. That would give the two valid routes with only 2 positions of the switch motor instead of 4.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
gmpullman The Shinohara double slip will not operate with only one switch machine no matter how many rods or tubes you connect to the two throw bars. The point arrangement doesn't allow it to work. There are two "throw bars" so I can not see how I could use four Tortoise machines connected to it? I suppose I could make a diagram or post photos of each of the four necessary conditions but as I said previously, the facing points and trailing points (I called it entrance and exit) have to be in synch and the Shinohara design only allows ONE route to be aligned at a time. Regards, Ed
The Shinohara double slip will not operate with only one switch machine no matter how many rods or tubes you connect to the two throw bars. The point arrangement doesn't allow it to work.
There are two "throw bars" so I can not see how I could use four Tortoise machines connected to it?
I suppose I could make a diagram or post photos of each of the four necessary conditions but as I said previously, the facing points and trailing points (I called it entrance and exit) have to be in synch and the Shinohara design only allows ONE route to be aligned at a time.
You actually can operate all 4 points on the SHinahara with one Tortoise - and a bunc of brass rod/tubing to make the linkage. Even though there are 4 independent sets of points, there still are onyl 2 valid routes - both lines stay on the same side, or both lines cross. Any other alignment is not really a valid route - or even if it is traversable without running through an open point, it doesn;t make sense to have it set that way.
It's a bit easier to use 2 Tortoises and link them up by havign each Tortoise control diagonally opposite points. 4 Tortoises gets pretty darn expensvice, but still you can wire them all up so only need 2 positions of a switch, one that sets them both to cross and oen that sets them both to straight.
NeO6874Definitely - although technically you only need a toggle switch, same as any "regular" turnout, since you're only ever going to have "straight through" or "diverging".
Not quite...
I remember having an old, brass-rail AHM double slip. Maybe it was made by Roco or one of the other suppliers at the time. The way the points were arranged, all you needed to have, as you describe, was one toggle (momentary) and the route set for X or )( that was the only two choices. I think it even came with a lever-type actuating switch.
Now, on my third layout, I decided to use Shinohara code 83 track which, in the early 1990s, had a rather large inventory of switch configurations.
The double slips had confounded me at first since the "Entrance" and "Exit" points had to be aligned separately. So, you would need two toggles because each route required each Tortoise (or any other machine) to have four different arrangements, as I show A-B-C-D on my panel.
If you simply set the entrance points to normal but didn't set the exit points properly you would have a derailment. So instead of X or )( you could only choose / or \ or ( or ) Each one required its own arrangement of the points.
Using DCC or Panel Pro I'm sure there are route-control macros that you can set up "Entrance - Exit" routes like some interlocking plants have. Again, for MY use, the rotary switches perform flawlessly and operators have a good grasp of selecting the correct routes.
Cheers, Ed
Which Type Double Slip to Use?
So here is my particular situation. I have two spur lines off of the mainlines (those 2 white curves at the top of the photos) feeding my peninsula area. It is desired that these 2 entering lines be able to select between either of 2 lines themselves. The most 'compact' manner to do such a thing is a slip switch.
We have now determined that I have 2 types of double slip turnouts,...one that is controlled by a single mechanism, and one that is controlled by two mechanisms.
First Question: Is there a preference for which style of double slip to use here? Does one have capabilities that the other does not??
Second Question: Switching routines (a subject I am not familiar with at all). Lets suppose a fairly long freight train attempts to enter the peninsula area on one of these two 'spurs' off the mainlines. Then it is desired to divide this consist up into groups of cars that might be taken to either of the 2 container tracks. or switched off that dbl-curve turnout (the one that follows the dbl-slip) into other portions of the peninsula complex. I suspect some of this 'sorting of the cars' would involve the heavy use of this dbl-slip turnout that is in question, and the other incoming track as a temporary holding track? Plus the switching loco, that is pulling these groups of cars, needs some sort of way to get back around to the front of these deposited cars to pick up more singular or groups of cars??
Maybe I should ask this 'switching question' in its own separate subject thread??
railandsail EdI use a rotary switch to choose my routes Are rotary switches still readily available?And I would need to figure out how to do such a 'control board' on a layout that plans on just using a wireless DCC (NCE) system for train control and PRIMARILY manual turnout controls.
EdI use a rotary switch to choose my routes
Are rotary switches still readily available?And I would need to figure out how to do such a 'control board' on a layout that plans on just using a wireless DCC (NCE) system for train control and PRIMARILY manual turnout controls.
Definitely - although technically you only need a toggle switch, same as any "regular" turnout, since you're only ever going to have "straight through" or "diverging".
That being said, the rotary switch would be a helpful indicator that "this isn't a normal turnout".
Ken There’s more to the difference than that. What you’re calling the US style ones have a single throwbar at each end to which all four points are physically attached. That simplifies the mechanics. What you’re calling the Euro ones have two throwbars at each end, each with two points attached, that move in opposite directions. I strongly suspect the underlying reason for the difference is that in the four throwbar approach, if you don’t want the giant unprototypical blob next to the slip you’re going to have either a complex linkage under the roadbed, or four switch machines. Where as with the two throwbar approach, you have a simple linkage under the roadbed with two switch machines. Of course if you don’t mind the giant blobs next to your slips instead of scale switch machine linkage standins, then there is some advantage to the four throwbar approach given that you can control it with a single switch and have no possibility of a mis-set point on the far side.
There’s more to the difference than that. What you’re calling the US style ones have a single throwbar at each end to which all four points are physically attached. That simplifies the mechanics. What you’re calling the Euro ones have two throwbars at each end, each with two points attached, that move in opposite directions.
I strongly suspect the underlying reason for the difference is that in the four throwbar approach, if you don’t want the giant unprototypical blob next to the slip you’re going to have either a complex linkage under the roadbed, or four switch machines. Where as with the two throwbar approach, you have a simple linkage under the roadbed with two switch machines.
Of course if you don’t mind the giant blobs next to your slips instead of scale switch machine linkage standins, then there is some advantage to the four throwbar approach given that you can control it with a single switch and have no possibility of a mis-set point on the far side.
Good point Ken, something I hadn't even considered.
One must use that 'included' switch machine with this 'euro style' double slip, because that is where the different mechanical linkage is for the 'opposing throwbars'.
1: The switch motor on the left is designed to throw BOTH sets of points at the same time. Motor on the right only has the "mechanicals" at one end, thus two are required. The manufacturer chose this method so that a standard switch motor could be used rather than a special designed double-ended motor.
2: you are still doing "two operations" just that both are done by one motor (left) or two single-ended motors (right).
I use Shinohara double slips and have a Tortoise at each set of points. There are four combinations needed (Motor A: N or R and motor B N or R)
I use a rotary switch to choose my routes, very easy and straightforward. Everything here is lined for the main: (straight through)
CP_Union_model_C by Edmund, on Flickr
CP_Union_model by Edmund, on Flickr
The LEDs tell me at a glance what my route is lined for.
CP_Union_west by Edmund, on Flickr
If these two are BOTH double slip switches, why is the one on the right so much more complicated then the one on the left??1) requires 2 switch motors rather than a single?
2) requires two operations to change from a simple crossing to a curved diversion
3) and requires a third input to change the crossing function from one side to the other.
The slip switch on the left with only a single switch machine in one position acts like a plain crossing to any trains entering it from either direction, and in the other position it acts like two side by side pieces of curved track. (the one on the right does NOT act in that same simple manner)
7j43k Here is a single slip switch by Roco: Here is one by Peco: Ed
Here is a single slip switch by Roco:
Here is one by Peco:
Ed
rrinker The ones Broan pictures are all double slips for sure. While there may be 4 sets of points in a double slip, there's no reason to use 4 switch motors, because some of the routes are conflicting. Really the only valid settings are for the two tracks to cross over, or to stay on the same side. Havine once unput crossing over and the other input staying straight makes no sense, even though it's possible to set it that way with multiple point motors. Looks like those pretty much just use 2 solenoids, to avoid crazy mechanical linkages to operate all the points from one. --Randy
The ones Broan pictures are all double slips for sure. While there may be 4 sets of points in a double slip, there's no reason to use 4 switch motors, because some of the routes are conflicting. Really the only valid settings are for the two tracks to cross over, or to stay on the same side. Havine once unput crossing over and the other input staying straight makes no sense, even though it's possible to set it that way with multiple point motors. Looks like those pretty much just use 2 solenoids, to avoid crazy mechanical linkages to operate all the points from one.
gmpullman railandsail ...and how would you name it?? They are all double-slip switches. Good Luck, Ed
railandsail ...and how would you name it??
They are all double-slip switches.