The wiring looks to be correct.
Have you tried adjusting the TTC (Tunable Trip Current)?
Turn the plastic screw counter clockwise all the way till it stops. That is the 0.25 amps setting. Run a train through. If it shorts, turn the TTC screw clockwise 1/4 turn and run the train again. Keep doing this till the short ceases to occur or until you cannot turn the TTC screw any further. That is the 8.0 amp setting.
Rich
Alton Junction
Thanks Rich.
richhotrain The gaps in the South Main Bypass aren't necessary since the South Main Bypass is wired in phase with the South Main outside of the reversing section. But that shouldn't cause any problems as gapped as long as there are feeder wires inside that South Main Bypass section of track.
The gaps in the South Main Bypass aren't necessary since the South Main Bypass is wired in phase with the South Main outside of the reversing section. But that shouldn't cause any problems as gapped as long as there are feeder wires inside that South Main Bypass section of track.
Yes I gapped the South Main when I was 'troubleshooting' but it made no difference.
richhotrain The gaps at either end of the two mainline sections that form the reversing section including the two crossovers are correctly placed. So it should work.
The gaps at either end of the two mainline sections that form the reversing section including the two crossovers are correctly placed. So it should work.
Operative word here is SHOULD, but it doesn't.
richhotrain Either the gaps are not placed as shown or the wiring is screwed up. All feeders inside the reversing section should connect to the output side of the AR-1.
Either the gaps are not placed as shown or the wiring is screwed up. All feeders inside the reversing section should connect to the output side of the AR-1.
Gaps seem to be fine. Here is my AR1 wiring:
BMMECNYC What type of turnout is that at the bottom left, are you using a toroise motor to control it? Are there more gaps than the ones shown, please show all gaps.
What type of turnout is that at the bottom left, are you using a toroise motor to control it? Are there more gaps than the ones shown, please show all gaps.
All gaps are shown.
BMMECNYC Let me make sure I understand this the reversing section are the 3 tracks at the bottom? The North Main, South Main, and South Main Bypass?
Let me make sure I understand this the reversing section are the 3 tracks at the bottom? The North Main, South Main, and South Main Bypass?
It didn't work!!!!!! HELP please.... as the lengthy posts above explain I am trying to build a reversing section with an AR1.I am getting a persistent short in one location after building the reversing loop as suggested. I have attached an image below of whats happening
Direction of travel is from left to right with a train entering on the south main and exiting on the north main. I believe that the AR1 is working because when a train moves through the south main bypass it can exit the north main. However when I try to move from the north main to the south main with the turnouts in the Reversing Loop - I get a short at the GAPPED RAILS in the SOUTH MAIN (Circled in Red).Any help is greatly appreciated as I have been 'troubleshooting' this for days and am about to go insane!!!!!!!
Please put me out of my misery :-(
Bernard
trafficdesign richhotrain The OP's track plan has a lot of similarity to mine with the end loops and the shape of the layout itself with the positioning of the two end loops and the 90 degree turn of the layout. I'd love to see your trackplan, Rich.
richhotrain The OP's track plan has a lot of similarity to mine with the end loops and the shape of the layout itself with the positioning of the two end loops and the 90 degree turn of the layout.
The OP's track plan has a lot of similarity to mine with the end loops and the shape of the layout itself with the positioning of the two end loops and the 90 degree turn of the layout.
I'd love to see your trackplan, Rich.
I will send you a PM.
rrinker But Rich, it sounds like yours is wired the way I suggested. LOL
But Rich, it sounds like yours is wired the way I suggested. LOL
Randy, it may have been the way that I said it, but this is how my wiring is done on my layout. It follows a continuous loop protocol with the outer rail wired one way and the inner rail wired the other way. All wiring is in phase since non of the crossovers or single turnouts fold back onto themselves.
In the spots where I have created reversing sections, I merely gap the rails to isolate the reversing section.
I drew the attached track plan quickly, but it has two end loops, similar to the OP's plan.
Yes, mine will be a double track main, possibly with loops on the ends fo continuous run. And all will be wired in phase, so i can add passing sidings and crossovers whereever I need. Sounds like what you did.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
The OP's track plan has a lot of similarity to mine with the end loops and the shape of the layout itself with the positioning of the two end loops and the 90 degree turn of the layout. The big difference, though, is that my layout is a double mainline. Although my wiring follows the continuous loop protocol, as does the OP's wiring, I have no problems with crossovers since the wiring is in phase between the two mainlines.
I also have 5 reversing sections on my layout, but none of them are inside the end loops. I guess that explains our biases, Randy, regarding placement of the reversing sections and wiring protocols.
My suggestion of moving one crossover was just to make it more obvious on the plan that the loops were the reversing section. It was a 'virtual move", I wasn't suggesting altering the track plan. It's how you typically see a dogbone schematically drawn, with a crossover one way at the left loop, and one the other way at the right loop.
Yes, I guess we will have to agree to disagree here. It clearly works either way, I just like to keep spotting of the reversing section as obvious as possible - a balloon loop, no problem; a diagonal across an oval, also pretty obvious; a wye - pretty obvious. Dogbones with crossovers along the shanks, not always so obvious.
My current layout is wired the way I said, only the other way around - the Red bus wire is in the Rear, white in front. Even though there are no reverse loops on it. I use red and white because a) you can get all sizes of wire in those colors and b) red and white look different even in the dim confines of the underside of the layout. Red and black in the dark, look too much alike. Next layout will almost certainly have reverse section on it, even multiple branch lines. Always the same order of wires, even if the branch is in a different power zone from the main it branches off, so there are no shorts. Depends on the space I end up with, don't know if it will be mostly a dogbone or the continuous run connection will connect the ends to make more like two concentric loops. But that's the future.
rrinker Like so many things, there is more than one way to skin a cat. I'd personally go with the two loops even though it means a second reverser, just because it is easier to understand. A more typical scenario with a dogbone shape layout is that one crossover is near one loop, and the other near the opposite loop.
Like so many things, there is more than one way to skin a cat. I'd personally go with the two loops even though it means a second reverser, just because it is easier to understand.
A more typical scenario with a dogbone shape layout is that one crossover is near one loop, and the other near the opposite loop.
No you do not need to add a crossover at each loop. If the two mains are wired parallel to each other, the loop IS a reverse section. Draw what you did, with both rails showing, WITHOUT the crossover. The label the bus lines, from left to right. red, white, red, white. Bam, reverse loop. All crossovers are the same polarity so it matters not where you locate them, place them for best operation. You can add whatever you want to the shank portion. A third main. Passing sidings. Stub sidings. All with no wiring changes. The only thing you can't add to the main without changing things is a wye, which would make another reversing section at the wye. But that would happen with your plan as well. About the only gotcha would be a passing siding inside the loop, but that would be substandard radius then. If a passing siding was created in the loop, each siding would have to be its own reverse section to allow a train to exit each side at the same time.
All of the loop does not need to be a reversing section, if it's longer than a typical train length.
The key - wire all tracks parallel to each other the same phase, not flip the front and rear tracks. I don't understand why you would do otherwise, this isn't a loop of track on a 4x8 here.
richhotrain Randy, I'll tell you what I don't like about making the two end loops the reversing sections on the OP's layout. When you put a crossover just before each loop, oncoming trains are stymied by the train in the loop until it exits and crosses over to make room for the oncoming train. The OP shows good judgement putting those two crossovers in the center of the layout.
Randy, I'll tell you what I don't like about making the two end loops the reversing sections on the OP's layout.
When you put a crossover just before each loop, oncoming trains are stymied by the train in the loop until it exits and crosses over to make room for the oncoming train. The OP shows good judgement putting those two crossovers in the center of the layout.
A few more thoughts on making the end loops into reversing sections.
If you look at the OP's complete track plan, the end loops do not directly pose a reverse polarity problem. So, to make the end loops into reversing sections, you need to add a crossover just before each end loop. But a single crossover only permits traffic to move in one direction.
If you look at the diagram below, in the first scenario, the train exiting the loop cannot crossover until the train occupying that track passes the crossover and enters the loop. So, traffic stops and now the loop has to be as much as twice as long to accommodate the two longest trains.
In the second scenario, the train coming up toward the loop is in trouble because there is no escape route to avoid a head on collision.
So, you need to put both crossovers in the vicinity of one of the end loops as shown in the third scenario. That way, traffic keeps moving, and there are escape routes for oncoming trains.
Once you establish that you need to place both crossovers near one end loop, the advantages of the OP's placement of the crossovers in the middle of the layout become more apparent. Only one mainline needs to be gapped so traffic moves freely and the problem of oncoming trains is eliminated by the presence of escape routes created by the pair of crossovers.
If you create a third track as a mainline, using the middle track for the reversing section, you add even more flexibility. Space permitting, if you add a fourth track, the outer tracks become the mainlines and the inner tracks become the reversing section, adding the most flexibility.
trafficdesign Rich... I am building it as you suggested and bought the AR1 today. Hopefully by next weekend it'll be up and running and we will put the doubts (and doubters) to rest!
Rich... I am building it as you suggested and bought the AR1 today. Hopefully by next weekend it'll be up and running and we will put the doubts (and doubters) to rest!
Once you gap the rails to isolate the reversing section, the input side of the AR-1 will be connected to the bus wires by means of two feeder wires. This will provide power to the AR-1. Any and all feeder wires that are connected to track inside the reversing section should be connected to the output side of the AR-1. Be sure not to connect any feeder wires from the reversing section directly to the bus wires.
If you experience any problems with the AR-1 not tripping, or tripping repeatedly, there is an adjustment screw on the AR-1 that you can turn clockwise or counter clockwise to increase or decrease the sensitivity of the AR-1. if you need to make adjustments, do them one quarter turn at a time.
Good luck and keep us posted.
richhotrain The OP shows good judgement putting those two crossovers in the center of the layout.
The OP shows good judgement putting those two crossovers in the center of the layout.
Thank you! If it works the way I hope it will then I will be happy.
richhotrain I am beginning to feel like the bad guy for not going along with the end loops as reversing sections - - LOL.
I am beginning to feel like the bad guy for not going along with the end loops as reversing sections - - LOL.
As far as the number of redraws that I offered, the first track diagram that I produced would work just fine. The rest of those track diagrams, redraws as you call them, were merely variations to get the OP thinking about alternative arrangements.
Which is insanely simple, an AR1 is under $30, requires gaps in 4 very obvious places, and means the main line track design in unemcumbered by need to worry about reverse loops. I point to the number of times you redrew what you were thinking as evidence that doing it your way is NOT the simple way.
As long as the power comes through the rails, there is always some consideration needed for wiring. That's where 3-rail and on-board battery power have an advantage. Track loops back on itself? No problem, there's no power, or in the case of 3-rail, the outer two rails are the same polarity anyway.
rrinker How so? The way it is now, the track plan has to be modified to make the crossovers the one and only reversing section and still have a train length clearance. My way, nothing in the track plan needs to be modified. Additional crossovers could be added if desired, but nothing as it exists now would need to be modified. --Randy
How so? The way it is now, the track plan has to be modified to make the crossovers the one and only reversing section and still have a train length clearance.
My way, nothing in the track plan needs to be modified. Additional crossovers could be added if desired, but nothing as it exists now would need to be modified.
If you make the end loops the reversing sections, you need two auto-reversers instead of one, and you need to wire both loops to reflect the fact that they are reversing sections.
But, that wasn't greg's point anyhow. He was simply relflecting on the fact that you cannot set up a track configuration similar to the prototype without taking into account special wiring needs.
Yeah, but Frank, as Randy would have it, the electronics do affect the track plan, so, in effect, you agree with greg and me.
I have been following this thread, but I did not want to get involved, for the simple reason, too many hands in the pot so to speak. But I agree with you RANDY.
Frank
The electronics don't really affect the track plan. The wiring is affecting the electronics placement which is affecting the track plan. Were it wired as I suggest, all parallel tracks the same phase regardless if they are the northbound track or the southbound track, then the end loops would be the reversing section and you could have any arrangment of crossovers and runarounds along the mains as you wanted.
gregc It's just an observation that trackwork that may be prototypical can be impractical to model because of the electrical aspects.
It's just an observation that trackwork that may be prototypical can be impractical to model because of the electrical aspects.
greg, that is a great point and one that I have thought about quite often.
I have a lift out section that spans an aisle and it holds two bascule bridges, an impressive sight, if I may say. The purpose of this section is to return the double mainline back onto itself so that I can reverse the directions of the trains and send them back in the direction that they came from.
So far, so good. But, it takes two auto-reversers to control two separate reversing sections and a lot of complicated wiring, particularly because it is a lift out section.
trafficdesignDo you have a suggestion/solution?
no. It's just an observation that trackwork that may be prototypical can be impractical to model because of the electrical aspects.
i was impressed how Rich managed to control two reversing loops with just one auto-reverser. I haven't been following the thread. did you consider moving one of the crossovers to the other end of the dogbone and have two separate but convention reverse loops?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
trafficdesign Unfortunately I don't have the room to add the 4th mainline right hand side track. I can fit in the 3 track configuration as originally proposed. Guess I'll have to be careful!
Unfortunately I don't have the room to add the 4th mainline right hand side track. I can fit in the 3 track configuration as originally proposed. Guess I'll have to be careful!
Actually, the more that I think about it, the 3-track design is quite satisfactory because two oncoming trains won't have have to pass each other on adjacent tracks. With the 3-track design, the left most track becomes the main line and the center track is only used to cross over to the right side main line. Or, when trains headed north on the right side main line want to cross over, any train headed south would use the left most track as the main line. So, the 3-track design is perfectly satisfactory.
Do you have a suggestion/solution?
it seems unfortunate that the electronics to control the trackwork is affecting the layout design.
I have already built this section and will have photos up soon. Haven't bought the AR1 yet nor have I built the track north of Middlesex, so I have not tested it out yet. Stay tuned....