Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
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.
Jerry
Rio Grande vs. Santa Fe.....the battle is over but the glory remains!
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
As in almost every aspect of this hobby, what is acceptable to some is totally inadequate for another. There is no absolute right way to wire a layout. Some, like myself find the DCC/Electrical aspect to be a very interesting and stimulating part of the hobby. There is nothing that I enjoy more than tinkering with a soldering iron and getting things to work. Every single piece of my track is soldered to something. It may be an adjacent piece of flextrack or a pair of feeders. At no point on my layout is electrical continuity dependent on a press fit rail joiner. This is what works for me, and IMO this will significantly add to the long term reliability of my layout. For me the attachment of feeder wires is neither a chore or a great expense. (You can get a lot of color coded feeders out of mis-cut lengths of thermostat wire). If someone else has great reliability and success with a layout connected with 2 wires from the transformer then great! I guarantee that there is someone who thinks my approach to the wiring is overkill. It is just as likely that they have a greater obsession with another aspect of the hobby that is of less interest to me.
I don't think anyone is saying that their method is "The Right One" simply that it is the one that works for them.
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
Hum, more feeders needed. Boy I have heard that before! I am new to this hobby and was told when my DC MRC 6200 was not doing what it should the main wires where to small (from 6200) to blocks where to small and I needed to up grade the sizes of the feeders. I did, results was the MRC 6200 was junk! I replaced it with a smaller MRC 9500 and ever thing worked as it should.
I have two main lines, B is now DCC with a cheap and under powered E-Z with only 1 amp. B has 7 feeders and is around 95 feet. One of the reason I had not went DCC sooner is fear of more wiring. If I have done the math right there is only 1 feeder per 13.57 feet, far short thand 1 per 3 feet.
So far there has been no problem, yes the joints I attache (spell check) the feeders are solder but that is it.
My track laying skills are much better that what I came to this site with, thanks to the help i have gotton. But, like many things I have been told you have to find what works for you. Start cheap and add as you need to get what you want.
You don't need to spend $12.00 + for ready to run rolling stock, you don't have to have 22" turns to run steam, be Bob Villa to bulid a bench, and don't need feeders ever section of track.
Cuda Ken
I hate Rust
I am not going to pass judgement on the "correct" way to wire rail sections or the "correct" wire gauge. Here is what works for me with no maintenance. I use DCC. My bus is 14 gauge stranded wires. Runs are as long as 90 feet from the power source. I use about 4" of 22 gauge solid wire from the rails and solder to 14 gauge stranded wire. The 14 gauge wire is then connected to the bus using suitcase connectors. All rails are soldered. I heat the rail until the solder is "sucked" into the rail joiner. Feeder wires are spaced between blocks. Yes, I have blocks for detection and singnaling purposes. I have check voltages from one end of the layout to the other and there is no more than 0.2 volts difference in the meter readings. Engines run smoothly over the entire layout. So, do I overkill? I don't know. I do know that my railroad runs very well with the standards I use.
Steve B.
Mark,
You make an excellent point - one I'd forgotten when I responded to the original post. To each his own. This may sound snide, but I mean it sincerely: shame on me for suggesting my way was the right way. Whatever I know about layout wiring I learnt from my father. He was an electrician/fine instrument maker and, if you can believe it, even more of a perfectionist than I.
It's too easy to forget that everyone comes into the hobby with different experience and ways of tackling problems. I'll probably continue using feeder wires on every three-foot section because that's the way I was taught and because I enjoy soldering and electrical work generally. I'm also really lazy; so, nothing spalts my bricks more than having to go back and correct earlier mistakes.
Y'all have a good one.
Lynda
My name is Jim, and I don't lay rail very well, but I lay rail better than I paint it, and ballast it, and do scenery, and ... But, I'm getting better.
I'm hoping that the layout I am building will operate well enough that I don't have to rebuild it in the foreseable future. I fiddled with rail joiners, squeezing them in a vice, etc. but I could not convince myself they were tight enough to work forever. I did discover that soldering feeders onto every track section is really not too hard or time consuming, and I discovered that I enjoy doing it! Now I have a layout with lots of track sections joined by unsoldered joiners with a forest of feeders dangling below the table. I hooked up ONE SET of feeders to my DCC system. I'll get to the rest, and a bus eventually. Oh, I do have one piece of track which has NO soldered connections: it's a 25 degree crossing, and I just couldn't figure out a good way to put feeders on it. It does have 4 sets of rail joiners though. My feeders are 20 gauge stranded wire, and will eventually solder them to a 14 gauge solid bus (Romex) not more than 24 inches from the track.
Wanna hear about my turnouts? I soldered one set of feeders to each turnout, AND soldered 30 gauge stranded wire loops between each moveable point rail and it's stock rail. I'm not expecting any electrical problems with them! I did NOT attempt to power the frogs (these are Atlas customline with insulated but powerable frogs). I'll do that in the future if I find I must.
I have an OLD layout (30 years maybe) and it DID have a rail joiner which had failed to conduct power. Once I found the offending joiner, I slid it back and forth once and it's been find ever since.
Enjoy YOUR trains! How permanent is YOUR layout? Will it be a source of frustration if it isn't perfect forever, or are YOU willing to perform troubleshooting and maintenance or rebuild as required?
I am inclined to agree - there's some degree of overkill recommended. I personally find the overkill part of the fun :-)
Jim
There is another important reason to use more track feeders other than worrying about ,or trying to compensate for, track laying skills. It is very important for DCC operation, and that is "resistance" per linear foot. As you load down the track system with more and more equipment drawing current, the voltage drops begin to add up, and that can spell Trouble.
We spend thousands of dollars on our rolling stock and locomotives, isn't it logical to spend the time and money to wire our layouts to ensure trouble free operation?
After reading many of the replies above, and "should haves", it reminded me of an old saying that I loved in industry: "It is the duty of all good engineers to anticipate all possible problems before they occur, and to have ready corrective actions when and if something goes wrong. However, it is very difficult to remind oneself, that the original objective was to drain the swamp, when your up to your neck in alligators". ( Some words have been changed to protect younger readers from industrial slang ).
From my experience, most rail joints fail in conductivity because of poor track installation at those points, not because of any inherent fault with the rail joiners. By the way, you won't get failure issues from corrosion at the rail joiners like some have with Scotch-lok and similar connectors, because there's no galvanic reaction unless you use the wrong type of rail joiners.
Installing feeders on every section of track to avoid (or overcome) continuity problems at the rail joiner is simply over-building in one way to compensate for less-than-adequate work in another, IMO. But hey, that's just my view - to each his or her own. Installing a bazillion feeders isn't my idea of fun, so I'm extra careful when I install the rail joiners, which is why I've NEVER had one fail electrically (or otherwise) since I started doing it the way I described earlier.
The main point from everyone seems to be that their way is the best way. Maybe a little indication also that you need more feeders for DCC, but I know that's impossible because DCC is vastly superior in every way.
I think I will just keep on doing what works for me too.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Safety Valve,See this old yard layout? No blocks,no feeders,no soldered joints just 2 wires from the power pack powering the whole thing.The thing to remember with rail joiners is be sure they are tight on the rail..This may require squeezing the joiner with pliers.
Feeders and more feeders.
Enough is enough at some point. Im planning a feeder every other section so all track gets power multipule ways.
Rail joiners are never enough.
In the Hobby Shop we just finished each switch with up to 6 additional wires running off the Torquises so that each frog will be live etc.... We ran a train that was rather "Picky" and after following with a file and removing bad sections of rail, it ran flawlessly forwards and backwards. It would be years before we have electrical problems on that line.
I find it interesting that Modulars dont get thier fair share of feeders. There is ALOT of bus and feeders going on in EACH section.
If a day ever arrives that we set up track, attach two rails and all the joints weld into one leaving no gaps unless needed at specific spots then that will be a day copper prices will fall.
Until then, the availible wire stock is growing in advance of construction.
What I could never understand is why modelers always want to shortcut the 3 most important things when building a layout.
Benchwork
Trackwork
Electrical wiring
I was always told these are the foundation of the model railroad.
I have been in model railroading for over 40 years now and have visited hundreds of layouts. It is amazing how many of those layouts have problems with one or more of those three.
Benchwork while it does not have to built like house it still has to hold the track work level without buckling and causing track problems.
I have seen track laid on ¼” plywood and the risers were 3 feet apart. When the engine crossed over that part the roadbed would actually move. And then others used the sticky tar based roadbed and the track kept coming loose, causing all sorts of kinks.
And the Trackwork, is it so hard to actually get down and site the rail jointers to see if there might be a kink both vertical and horizontal. Apparently it is as almost 90% of the layouts have kinks in the Trackwork. And this includes those that have been in the model magazines. Now I know my layout has a few but as I find them I spend the time getting them straightened out.
You know there is a problem when the owner of the layout waits for the train to pass a certain place so he can reach out and rerail the engine as it goes by or a car derails at the exact same place time after time but not to worry as it jumps back on just down the track, go figure!
And the electrical, this is where most of the arguments are. If the train makes it around the layout even though it slows down a little once in a while, then I guess it is OK!
We had a problem at our club with the Lionel layout that way. We used Gargraves 3ft track sections and everyone had #12 drop wires on them. The Buss wires were #10. Now why would we need to go this heavy? Well in a club environment we didn’t want to have to work on the wiring ever again and when the paying public are there the trains had better be running or they won’t be back!
About this time the 3M scotch locks were all the rage as everyone said that the were the best thing since sliced bread. So we used them. They went together great and the speed of assemble sure cut down on the layout building time. Everything worked well for 7 years. But then we started having problems. At first we thought that the transformers were giving problems as the trains would slow down a little on some sections of track and then the next time everything worked great. Now this display would run for 12 hours a day weeks at a time. As the years moved on the problems kept getting worse. We would try and do voltage drop tests and would check out the connections or change out the transformers. Everything would go back to normal for a month or two, but then it would come back again. One thing I have to say is that the Club Layouts were located in an old basement in the downtown area.
We finally had to run the layout using 2 transformers and set the block switches so that we could jack up the voltage on certain sections of the track loops just to keep the trains from slowing down, during the show, and then we would go back to trouble shooting the problem afterwards.
We finally traced it down to the Scotchlocks! There was corrosion forming where they blade contacted the wires. As we would be testing the wiring we would be moving the wires and it would make good contact again. But weeks after word another bunch of the Scotchlocks would begin acting up. We finally tore the layout down and began rebuilding a new one. This time we soldered every connection. We also used the crimp on wire ends and they all get crimped and SOLDERED !
When we built the Club’s HO layout we soldered every connection and all of the track has drop wires. After it was all said and done it has been in operation for over 15 years now and there are no problems, if we just could keep the members from tearing up the track to make changes! The layout started out as with Dc control. We built tit with #12 buss wires way back in 1992. We never figured on having any other type of control system on it. We just built it bulletproof from the beginning.
Then we learned about the Keller Onboard analogue command control and decided to go that route. Keller’s instructions suggested that we should be using heavy wire which we had. We just disconnected the DC units and replaced them with the New system. No problems from day one. Then DCC finally got itself sorted out and the Club made a decision to go that route. Guess what? The wiring recommendations were the same #12. Gee, what luck the layout was already wired that way. Nothing more than removing the Keller system and in went the Digitrax system. And again no problems!
So when I built my latest layout I figured that using the same techniques, which are probably over kill to most modelers, would keep me from having any maintenance problems down the road. And so far I don’t. With 2200 square feet of layout I don’t want any problems as I am not getting any younger!
While other club member’s home layouts are starting to age their maintenance is starting to take up more time than they are getting to run the layout. This is certainly what I had worried about when I started designing current layout. But after having seen how long the club layouts have been operating without a problem I figured that I would use the same methods. And so far I am glad I did.
Now while these techniques are not for everyone, as most modelers teardown their layouts in only a few years, I plan on having this layout until I no longer breathe any air. This is my retirement project. Just about 2 years to go and then I can spend a lot more time working on the layout. Now that I have the major work (Benchwork, Trackwork and electrical) out of the way I can get into the fun stuff, Operations. Yes the scenery and building will come in time it is Ops that keeps me going!
While everyone is free to build their layout the way they want, I just have to smile when everyone asks how I am able to keep such a large layout running with so little maintenance!
BOB H – Clarion, PA
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Feeders at every joint is definitely overkill. I do every other joint which means every section of rail is fed directly from a feeder and the loco is never more than 3 feet from the nearest feeder. Even this much wiring might be more than necessary for reliable running but it doesn't hurt and requires a small investment of time and money to be on the safe side. During initial construction and testing, I hadn't soldered all the feeder wires yet my test runs ran with few problems. Every once in a while I encountered a railjoiner that was less than snug and I would occasionally get a stall. With every other joint now wired, I don't have to worry if a rail joiner works its way loose.
To start off with, there is nothing wrong with over engineering. Up until recently the phone system in the U.S.A. was over engineered to handle everything except for Mother's Day. That is why one could always get a dial tone. This same thing is true for Model Railroads. The more over engineered things are the less likely problems will occur in the future.
As an opposite example, for Christmas I ran the trains around the tree and the room(sort of a infolded figure 8), so the outside track loop was probably 25x16. Fn3 scale on mostly LBG track. Cheepo Bachmann 4-6-0 and Kalamazoo 4-4-0 locomotives. DCC powered connected to the track with standard 22 gauge solid bell wire. I didn't even "connect" the wire to the track. I just shoved the wires into a railjoiner and pressed the track together. It ran just fine, almost constantly, for the three holiday weeks. The only issue was children and dogs knocking the cars off and bumping the track where it crossed the entrance to the room. Would I ever wire a permanent layout this way - no. Does this bust an overengineering myth, no. What it does show is that what will work in this one specific case vs. what we actually do to attempt to account for generic cases.
rrinker wrote: Myth? Yes and no. Case 1: My temorary simply 4x8 oval. Used bachmann EZ-Track. 22" radius curves at each end plus however many straights I could fit in the 4x8 space. Two sets of feeders, equally spaced around the loop. DC and DCC, locos slowed when they were the furthest from the feeders. ANd this was new EZ Track, it hadn't been used over and over again, which usually results in loose joiners. Case 2: my permanent layout. 8x12, double tracked loop plus sidings and a yard. As soon as I completed the track for the first loop, I attached ONE pair of feeders to my Zephyr to test run it and had NO problems with locos slowing even all the way around the other side of the layout. Track was Atlas Code 83 flex and Atlas Code 83 turnouts. Result: inconclusive. Track type and quality plays a big part in the whole thing, obviously. --Randy
Myth? Yes and no.
Case 1: My temorary simply 4x8 oval. Used bachmann EZ-Track. 22" radius curves at each end plus however many straights I could fit in the 4x8 space. Two sets of feeders, equally spaced around the loop. DC and DCC, locos slowed when they were the furthest from the feeders. ANd this was new EZ Track, it hadn't been used over and over again, which usually results in loose joiners.
Case 2: my permanent layout. 8x12, double tracked loop plus sidings and a yard. As soon as I completed the track for the first loop, I attached ONE pair of feeders to my Zephyr to test run it and had NO problems with locos slowing even all the way around the other side of the layout. Track was Atlas Code 83 flex and Atlas Code 83 turnouts.
Result: inconclusive. Track type and quality plays a big part in the whole thing, obviously.
--Randy
Is the EZ Track steel (black roadbed) or nickel silver (grey)? You'll get a much greater voltage drop with steel, which is the poorer conductor.
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
There have been some excellent points made by the responders to this thread. What it all breaks down to in my mind is this:
I have a layout that we set up every Christmas of a large village, on 6 tables of 4'X4' each. They are made of 3/4" plywood with 2x3 supports at each end to join sections of 4x4 tables. I have to get up on these tables to set the tracks up first before the wife sets her buildings on the tables. So to answer one of the originator of this thread's questions, because it needs to hold my 185 pounds! That's the constructions side.
Now for the electrical side of the question. I have been setting up this layout for 20 years. It uses EZ Track, about 75 linear feet up grades, around curves, over the river and through the woods to grandmothers house. I have ONE feeder to the tracks (DC). The system gets stored in cardboards boxes in the basement level of the house for 11 months through humidity of summer, and winter dryness. The train runs perfect (HO) every year. I have had ONE problem in all these years, a bad connector. For DC this works. This would not be a good way electrically dor DCC. This should answewr the electrical question for DC only!!
My layout will be DCC, HO guage, and will have track feeders every section. Why? Because I know how to solder, I don't mind soldering, I don't want to fool around crawling all over my around the room layout for an electrical issue that I can prevent from the onset. Also, with POSI loks to connect the feeders underneith the tables, it is so easy to connect each section of track. DCC is not 60 cycle (Hz) frequency, it is in the 900Mz band, wiring gauge, connections, resistance, capacitance and inductance, all play a role in good performance, some to a greater degree, some to a lesser degree. For instance, I will twist my buss wires at least 3 turns per foot. Why? To prevent any possibility of RF interference. Ist absolutely needed? Maybe, maybe not, each circumstance/location to interference is varied. I will also use a POWER LINE regulator for the electronics, such as APC 1500. Why? Because power line voltage spikes up and down all day, and their is all sorts of noise on each cycle of the power line sine wave. This is really bad news for delicate electronic equipment. The cost for prevention makes this a no brainer for a one time purchase of a Power Line Conditioner.
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
After all of these contributions, it appears to me that the joiners are the weak link. My experience is that joiners should...should...do a good job of maintaining contact with each rail, even when they are weathered. The fact is, they don't. They don't because they get stressed upon installation, or stressed when they are subjected to the rigours of 16 oz locomotives passing overhead. No matter how well one creates the tracks' roadbed, the various easements and supervelevations that we insist are necessary at scale mean torsion and differential support for the rails across from one another.
My name is Crandell, and I don't lay rail very well. But, I'm getting better. Until I am highly skilled, I will continue to rely on soldered feeders to cover pairs of 3' sections of flextrack. One feeder every 6' is eminently sensible, and saves a lot of time in cutting wire, stripping, drilling tiny holes, etc. In the meantime, one feeder/joiner pair is the way to go for me. Keeps it all manageable.
IRONROOSTER wrote: I have never been sorry where I overbuilt, wish I could say the same for where I hadn't.EnjoyPaul
I have never been sorry where I overbuilt, wish I could say the same for where I hadn't.
Enjoy
Paul
Over-engineering is the way to go. :)
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!"
Having been involved in building layouts in everything from dessicated desert to tropical beachfront venues, here's the system I have come to prefer:
Install insulated joiners wherever your control system, signaling plan or good sense indicates.
Use uninsulated rail joiners to assure rail-end alignment.
Solder one feeder to the rail somewhere between each pair of insulated rail joiners.
Solder a jumper (a little omega-shaped bit of wire) around each uninsulated rail joiner. Don't solder the joiners themselves.
Installed this way my electrical distribution has always been bulletproof, and I use a lot less wire than the 'direct wire every piece of track' folks. (In case you haven't priced any lately, wire isn't cheap.)
Just my . Feel free to disagree.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - MZL, analog DC)
Installing feeders in every section of track is certainly necessary for a trouble-free electrical system if you don't know how to install rail joiners properly. If you do know how to install rail joiners properly, then I think the claims of probable future problems are rather overstated by most folks.
Parts of my layout were constructed over seven years ago (progress is very slow!). Those sections spent some time in a non-climate controlled storage room (very cold and dry to very hot and humid), plus a couple of years in the basement before I controlled the humidity there. Prior to climate-controlling the basement I had some problems with trackwork kinking due to benchwork expansion / contraction from humidity swings. I average a set of feeders every 15 feet or so - every four to five sections of track. I've never had a problem with electrical continuity in the rails.
I'm not saying no one has ever had problems if they properly install the rail joiners - that would be every bit as arrogant as flatly claiming one WILL have problems if one doesn't attach feeders to every separate piece of rail on the layout. Whatever may be - my method has worked very well for me, now and on previous layouts.
Here's how I install joiners to ensurecontinuing good electrical transmission: 1. Clean the rail ends on the top and bottom of the rail base (inside and outside the web on the top of the base) using a cutoff wheel running at low speed in a variable-speed Dremel. At the same time, put very small bevels on the ends of the rail base. 2. Install never-before used rail joiners on one section of track, then align the mating section both horizontally and vertically, and slide it into place against the first piece. Re-using a rail joiner practically guarantees a looser grip on the rails, where paint, dust and debris can collect and slowly inhibit electrical flow. Wiggling the rail joiner around excessively to start it on the rail does the same thing. I wiggle the joiner side to side just the slightest bit, if need be, and right at the end of the joiner to start it onto the rail. Once started, I slide the joiner straight onto the rail without further wiggling. If the joiner slides on easily, I remove and discard it and install one that resists installation somewhat - it's gripping the rail and actually scoring it a bit as it's installed.
Feeders every section is one of the "electron counters'" (to coin a phrase) favorite "rules," so I expect disagreement. But I speak from direct experience, and that can't be so easily debunked.
Bottom line - good electrical conductivity is an absolute requirement, but there are options to the solder-every-joint or drop-feeders-every-section approaches. Choose the approach with which you're most comfortable, and go for it!
Over the years I have also notice a lot of block wiring overkill as well as other wiring overkill.
As far as DCC Digi Traxx suggest a feeder wire every 6-8 foot which sounds reasonable to me.
Now,You can operate a 4X8 foot layout with 2 wires-from the power pack to the track-just ask any 10 year old kid or adult with their first 4x8 loop layout. Heck most use snap track and runs their trains for hours trouble free.Even I have built small industrial switching layouts using snap track and as I recall one early 4 x 8 foot layout.
As far as soldering the rail joints the only time I have done that is on curves made from flex track.
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, but...it becomes immediately obvious where the problem is should one ever develop.
The upside is an expansion joint every six feet.
If, on the other hand, multiple feeds to a section of track are unnecessary, then there should be no objection to twisted wire connections under the table, taped and unsoldered. If this idea makes you shudder, and it should, then you can't advocate electrical feeds that depend on mechanical joiner connections to power the whole layout.
The key is balance.
I agree. Add paint, ballast, weathering, and DCC, and now you're really tempting fate unless every ection of rail has a direct connection to a feeder. One way to reduce the number of feeder drops is to solder 2 or more lengths of rail together and run one set of feeders to that section. For example, I may solder a set of terminal joiners between two 30" lengths of flextrack. But, my track never goes more than 5-6 feet without feeders, and depending on the distribution of turnouts, sometimes feeders are less than a foot apart.
Think of it as insurance. At soem point one or more of your mechanical connections (and probably even a soldered one) will fail.