I am using Bachmann Nickel Silver HO EZ-Track. I have an outer loop using 22 inch radius track and an inner loop using 18 inch radius. I want to connect the two loops using the #6 Crossover switch unit. However, I want to isolate the two loops (electrically) and run one train on each loop with two power supplies. I want to be able to switch either train to either loop. What do I need to do?
If this is DCC, you probably don't need to go through all that, unless you just wish to. I have 3 concentric tracks, two of them connected with the left and right #6 crossovers, all powered from the same DCC power supply / throttle and I have run 5 engines so far with the EZ DCC controller rated at 1 amp!
If you are saying you wish to use more than one power supply and throttle on each of the two interconnecting tracks separated by isolators, I would strongly say don't do it. First, it is a carnal rule of DCC to never power a track from more than one DCC command controller, but that is not what you seem to want to do. You want to power two tracks from two controllers with them being isolated from each other, but the ability to cross from one to hte other. I'm not sure (and interested to find out) what happens when your engine straddles both systems (forward truck on one system and the rear truck on the other system) and gets conflicting DCC signals.
It may run just fine. It may get a forward direction signal from one truck and a reverse direction signal from the other truck and not know what to do. I don't think it will short, and it may not just shut down. Since there is only one motor to drive two trucks, they will not spin the wheels in opposite directions, thats for sure!
If each system has say 18 volts and the two systems provide voltages at the same time, would it be like DC in parallel where the voltage stays the same and the current available doubles, or like your kitchen oven when it receives 120 volts from one leg of your power panel and 120 volts from the other leg of your power panel to result in 240 volts being applied to your motor windings.
If everything goes fine after the crossover, what happens if your throttle is no longer communicating with that engine? Will it continue to run under the last command or shut down? If the second throttle is not programmed for the engine, it cannot control it.
Guess we need more information about your desired setup so we can all come up with conflicting opinions which will most likely only result in this being resolved by trial & error ;D!
Thanks for all the feedback. I am not using DCC control, just the standard Bachmann power packs. Our local hobby shop advised not to use the #6 Crossover for this application, but rather two #5 Turnouts of the same hand (either right #44566 or left #44565). The metal track connectors have to be removed and replaced with isolators. Any thoughts...I appreciate the feedback.
St Joe
This is the way I can see it, and others please correct me if I am wrong.
Again, I don't recommend doing it, but if you do, watch your polarity. If one power pack is set for forward direction and the other is set for reverse direction, the engine may see both at the same time during the cross over at the isolators. During the cross-over, if the front truck on the engine recieves a "+ to -" signal and the rear truck on the engine receives a "- to +" signal, you may have a direct short via the wiring.
Normal setup on tracks
Left Side Trucks
Rear Truck Front Truck
|---------------------------|
+ o o o o +
_________________ ________________
Right Side Trucks
Rear Truck Front Truck
|---------------------------|
- o o o o -
_________________ ________________
At the isolated Cross-over point if the transformers were reversed
Left Side Trucks
Rear Truck Front Truck
|---------------------------|
+ o o o o -
_________________ ________________
Right Side Trucks
Rear Truck Front Truck
|---------------------------|
- o o o o +
_________________ ________________
Probably not much of a problem if the engine just blows over the joint, but going real slow or stopping may start to burn wires. Just don't waist time or stop there, and even better yet, make sure the transformers are in alignment with each other before doing the cross-over and the problem goes away.
Again, this is how I can see it, if others know better, please respond.
Hello St Joe,
In order to do what you are requesting (without converting to DCC), I think you are going to need more switches, and break your two loops into a number of isolated blocks. This is referred to as Cab Control. For additional reading on this, try this link:
http://www.building-your-model-railroad.com/model-railroad-wiring.html
QuoteI want to be able to switch either train to either loop. What do I need to do?
If you only add one pair of switches, you will be limited to changing loops, at least in reference to the to/from perspective, in one direction only. (In other words, with two RH switches, a train moving forward CW on the outer loop can move to the inner loop, but would then need to back through the switches to get back to the outer loop. Likewise, a train moving forward CCW could move from the inner loop to the outer loop; but won't be able to return to the inner loop in the forward direction). Ideally, for ease of operation, I would recommend 8 switches (two opposing pairs on each side of your concentric loops). This would allow you to switch your various blocks between your DC contollers in a fashion that will prevent the shorting of the two power supplies (cabs), and would allow you to control (with some coordination) two different trains either moving in the same or opposite directions back and forth between your two loops.
John
Bachmann needs to either:
A. Get clear instructions on modifying the #6 Crossovers for use in DC layouts right here on the Bachmman web page.
or
B. Redesign the blasted things for use in DC layouts, with jumpers included to bypass the gaps for DCC use.
Len
St Joe,
Yes, you need to use insulated rail joiners as the local hobby shop advises or gap the rails at necessary places. Both serve the same purpose.
Suggest both you and rbryce1 obtain book(s) about model railroad wiring or use the many good websites and videos on the web about model railroad layout wiring. Although you are planning on using DC control now, consider wiring with DCC control in mind as it will make it easier to switch to DCC control in future.
Bachmann HO turnouts are all routes-live (not power-routing) and layout must be wired with that turnout type in mind.
Really Hunt. Could you be a little more specific about these books and where I am wrong. I have many books and have read a lot on line, but none seem to cover the prospect of putting two transformer power supplies on the same engine with reverse polarity. I am definately willing to learn if I am incorrect, but I'm sure all of us would like to benefit from your knowledge rather from your off color innuendos. Could you include the differences he needs to consider between DC and DCC so he can wire it to accomplish both as you suggest, as right now, he has DC.
Well, you may not feel it was off color, but I do. If that is not how you meant it, I accept that. But the next time you write something like "Suggest both you and rbryce1 obtain book(s) about model railroad wiring or use the many good websites and videos on the web about model railroad layout wiring", you consider whether the person you are writing it about thinks it is off color. I may not have as much experience in model railroad design, but I have a great deal of experience in electrical theory, circuit design and electronics. Again, if you have some suggestions, I'm all ears. If you can tell me where I'm wrong, I'm all ears. But to tell me to go and get educated when you now say you don't have suggestions as to where I am wrong and didn't even read my whole post, I'm sort of confused as to just how to take your comment.
St Joe,
I agree wqith BarnyJack. His sugestion looks like it will provide the protection you will need, in my opinion, to prevent from shorting the power supplies, assuming you are using two seperate power supplies like I think you indicated.
rbryce1:
You are so far off base here as to be on a different planet.
The reason you don't see any information on directly connecting multiple power supplies to adjoining sections of common trackage is because it can't be done safely nor operationally. You also don't see any instructions for putting a full sized V-16 diesel engine in an H0 scale model, building a nuclear reactor in the basement to power trains, nor any of hundreds or perhaps thousands of less than brilliant schemes.
Hunt's suggestion was simply that you find some texts on what is both possible and common practice in using multiple DC power supplies to run multiple trains on a layout. That is typically called block control or block wiring, and there are dozens of both free and for-pay resources for this information.
Acquiring a little knowledge in both common and advanced practice in DC (and DCC) model train layout wiring and control, would (hopefully) cause you to not make suggestions that will most likely result in disaster. Recommending (as you did above) that it might be okay to run a train between power sections that are wired to separate power supplies is just plain wrong. Using your instructions can damage engines, power supplies and tracks.
You claim to be an astute electrical and electronics designer. Why not act like one and learn about the application of those skills to model RRing prior to making public recommendations that at best will not work, and at worst will lead to the damage or destruction of someone's equipment.
As to your ". . . off color . . ." statement, I would again suggest that you do some studying: This time use a dictionary and / or thesaurus to look up words, phrases, and their meanings.
Happy (Well Informed) RRing,
Jerry
Jerry,
In one respect you are telling me I am so far off I am on a different planet, which if I am, I can respect that. But you then say you not only don't say why, but actually agree with me and that I am correct.
I have always been saying, as you stated it, "you cannot directly connecting multiple power supplies to adjoining sections of common trackage is because it can't be done safely nor operationally". This is what I have been saying, while trying to leave the door open if someone does know how to do it.
I never recommended doing it and have tried to show why not to do it unless there are special track wiring conditions to allow it, which I also said I did not know of any.
I did not say Hunt was right or wrong, just that I did not appreciate his tone, and I don't. I appreciate constructive comment. What I don't appreciate is someone telling me I need to go out and get an education and then say he has nothing to offer.
I never stated it was safe to do what he was going to do, in fact, I tried to explain why NOT to do it, for the exact reasons you have just stated. Don't connect power supplies in parallel to run multiple trains on the same layout. You can harm things by doing so.
I said I agreed with BarnyJack and his article seems credible as a way to do it. If you do not agree, could you explain why, not just say we are all screwed up.
As far as the term I used, I did use the right term, as that was the way I took his comment. I do not need a dictionary to tell me what "off color " remarks are. I could have used the word condescending ("behaving toward other people in a way that shows you consider yourself socially or intellectually superior to them"), but that was not what I was trying to say.
I have met and discussed many things on this forum with many members. Most all have been very knowlegible, polite and courteous. A few have not.
I have 3 hobbies which I actively pursue, show cars, boating and now model railroading. I did have a layout when I was a teenager, but only recently got back into the hobby as a bad weather day interest.
I am a member of 12 forums. Two are boating forums, four are model railroad forums and the rest automobile forums. I have not seen on a single other forum where people make comments about each other like the one we are now discussing. It is totally rude and uncalled for.
One member of the Model Railroad forum actually warned me of this regarding the Bachmann forum. I didn't use the language he used, as it would not be appropriate either. At the time I supported the Bachmann forum because I had not seen examples of it. Now I have.
I have had conversations on this forum, on line via private messages and even phone calls from many members of this forum, which were all very pleasant. It's too bad there are some who are not like this. Some agreed with me, some sort of agreed and we discussed various points of view, and some disagreed and we politely and intelligently discussed why. No insults, off color remarks or condescending comments, and yes, I am and did use the correct words.
PS. I am a retired Nuclear Engineer, and I can send you a book on building a nuclear reactor in your basement, including the rod drive mechanisms, shielding and instrumentation. But, since a nuclear power plant is only 18-30% efficient depending upon it's size and insulation, that is not something I would recommend doing either ;D
Quote from: rbryce1 on October 24, 2012, 06:08:27 PM
Really Hunt. Could you be a little more specific about these books and where I am wrong. I have many books and have read a lot on line, but none seem to cover the prospect of putting two transformer power supplies on the same engine with reverse polarity. I am definately willing to learn if I am incorrect, but I'm sure all of us would like to benefit from your knowledge rather from your off color innuendos. Could you include the differences he needs to consider between DC and DCC so he can wire it to accomplish both as you suggest, as right now, he has DC.
For books, i'd recommend "the complete atlas wiring book" as well as the use of atlas's modular wiring components. their wiring system is designed to be easy for beginning mosellers to use, yet flexible enough to grow with you as you expand. bachmann themselves offer no equivalent wiring components.
as for differences in wiring between dc and dcc, as long as the wiring can handle the current, there is no reason a dc wired layout, with block selector switches, can't be used to run dcc. i"ve done it on two different layouts without problems. the block selector switches are set up to switch segments of track to either of two controllers, or disconnect them completely. once you convert to dcc, you simply remove your dc controllers, wire the dcc command station in plaqce of one of the controllers, and set all the switches to that position. if you have a short, you can quickly find where it is by turning off your track one section at a time until the short goes away. or if you want to lessen current draw on your dcc system, you can park them on a spur then isolate that track.
to answer the original poster's question, since gapping and insulating the bachmann crossover is such a hassle, it'd be much easier to buy two #6 and make your own crossover. if you use one rail as a common return, similar to a ground in electrical equipment, you only have to use insulating joiners on one rail. just be sure that it's the same rail wherever you insulate. all of this is covered in detail in the book i mentioned.
Jeff,
Thanks for the reference. I have 6 Model Railroad books now, but not this one. It is available on Amazon for about 18 bucks, so I ordered it.
Looking through all of my other books, I can not find a description of what actually will occur for the condition we seem to be discussing which seems to have shifted from the posters original question to that of powering a layout with two seperate power transformers at the same time. Most say you should never do it, some are describing ways around it, and my concern is using a way around it may have unforseen bad results.
If an engine is stationary and it's two powered trucks straddle the track isolation gap, and each side of the gap is powered by two different transformers which are, at that time, connected with opposing polarity, like one in forward and one in reverse, what would be the effects on the wiring inside the loco?.
I do not think the track wiring would be in danger as it is probably 16 gauge wire or better, but I believe it would create a short which would conduct a smoke test on the small 22 gauge wiring connecting the trucks together to the motor, but other than theory, can find no reference's to this situation.
What are your thoughts?
i have run into this condition many times. not only is it something that happens on dc block controlled layouts from time to time, but it can also occur in reversing sections if the polarity is incorrect. what usually happens in these cases is that the locomotive, especially if it is equipped with flywheels, will continue to drift into the section of opposing polarity until the motor slows down and pushes it back into the original section. this may happen 2 or 3 times before it stops. remember, dc controllers are much less sensitive to shorts than dcc ones, so usually there is no harm done. if you are going fast enough, you may derail the train the locomotive is pulling.
on a common rail system, the effect of the power supplies seems to be additive. that is, if you are running the train at half throttle, and the opposing controller is set at full throttle, the locomtive will reverse quicker than if they were both set the same.
as kids we used to call these "dancing engines" and drove my grandfather nuts by doing this on purpose.
Thank you, that is an explaination that makes sense. Even though the condition does ocur, I am happy to see that the damage to the engine I was concerned about does not actually take place.
There is a guy at one of our local flea markets who sells old HO and Lionel equipment. I'm tempted to go over and get an old DC loco and another DC transformer and try this just for grins.
the key to this is that you have to gap the track between the power packs. if you try to connect both to an ungapped track they will short.
rb-
Just because I like to muddy the waters (not really) let me say that I'm not too fond of the Atlas wiring book or the expense of the Atlas
components. I recommend one of the Kalmbach wiring books. They cover the requirements more thoroughly, in my opinion, rather than
only presenting how to use Atlas products.
Also, I disagree that gapping the rails in a Bachmann crossover is difficult; I think it's easy to do with either a razor saw or a motor tool
wth a cut off wheel.
I must agree with JerryB that your skin was a bit thin in your response to Hunt's post. My take was that it was condescending, but you said
you specifically didn't intend that meaning. What I can also say is that Hunt's information is almost always right on the money. Yes, he can
be condescending and a bit pompous at times (I'm sure he knows this so I don't think I'm telling stories out of school), but maybe that's
the
price of such high quality advice. It would be nice if his manner were more pleasant, I suppose, but I'm willing to put up with his quirks
the same as I hope people are willing to put up with mine. To me, the value of his contributions is in his information, not his style. That's OK.
-- D
I looked at my Bachmann #6 cross-overs and would agree, a simple saw blade or a Harbor Freight $8.00 die grinder could cut the rail easily.
As far as Hunt's comments, thanks, I'll try and remember to consider that. I agree he is usually correct, but even the best comments and/or advice are sometimes discarded if presented in a way that may be perceived as negative to the person receiving it.
for what it's worth, when i first started posting here i didn't much care for hunt either. but i've come to respect what he says. he has a knack for finding the relevent literature for anything you have questions about. i just wish he wouldn't set his posts to delete.
put another way, we've all run into people with whom we couldn't get along. the late atlas forum was so full of them i migrated here. sometimes the best thing we can do is just sit back and listen to what is actually being said, and ignore what we find offensive. there's alot of good info out there and we can all learn from each other.
Well said Jeff
I remember my first attempt at helping someone backfired and you were there quickly to correct the situation.
I took a back seat to this one, as I know I am probably wrong about my judgement but rbryce1 does get a little bent out of shape to fast. Take no offense to that rb it is the way your words come out of the keyboard. You probably don't even realize it.
I own a few books but have found most if not all my answer's from people like Hunt,Jeff,Doneldon, Richg,Jonathan, and my all time favorite Jim Banner (speaking of?) and there are many other's (heck you could start another post on these guy's alone).
QuoteOne member of the Model Railroad forum actually warned me of this regarding the Bachmann forum. I didn't use the language he used, as it would not be appropriate either. At the time I supported the Bachmann forum because I had not seen examples of it. Now I have.
My point rb don't get offended to fast and get defensive. These guy's are the best.
I could care less what the other's say.
St Joe
I agree with Jeff that using 2 #6's would be easier for you to do. I use a left hand and a right hand on my layout but it is DCC. DCC is so simple a caveman could do it. Now why does that sound familiar?
Jerry
so simple a caveman could do it, that is, until you start customizing the speed curves on your locomotives....lol
dcc is as simple or complicated as you make it. its beauty is that most of the heavy lifting has been done for you by others. i have been in this hobby long enough to see some of the d i y stuff from the early command control days, and shied away from it for good reason. what we take for granted to-day was once assembled by hand with components bought at radio shack, and as individual as the person building it. setting the standard, i think, went a long way toward dcc gaining wider acceptance. like the internet, there will soon be a day when we wonder how we ever lived without it.
Quote from: Jerrys HO on October 26, 2012, 04:47:47 PM
I took a back seat to this one, as I know I am probably wrong about my judgement but rbryce1 does get a little bent out of shape to fast. Take no offense to that rb it is the way your words come out of the keyboard. You probably don't even realize it.
My point rb don't get offended to fast and get defensive. These guy's are the best.
I could care less what the other's say.
You are not that wrong! I do try very hard to word things in the most constructive and inoffensive mannor possible, and sometimes reading and rewrite it several times before posting it, and generally respond best when the same courtesy is returned. But, I also do admit that in spite of that, sometimes when a shot is fired across my bow, I unfortunately have a tendency to return broadsides!
Hey Hunt...I'll work on it if you will! :)
Quote from: jward on October 26, 2012, 08:27:26 PM
dcc is as simple or complicated as you make it.
Jeff-
Truer words were never spoken. And sometimes we make it complicated when it's really simple.
-- D
I think Len made a good point that is being overlooked here. Bachmann is offering a #6 crossover that is only suitable for DCC without modification.
I think Bachmann should acknowledge there are two wiring systems out there that can be incompatible with each other. A #6 crossover is something that could be used on many layouts, both DCC and DC.
If Bachmann is going to sell these wired in a way only compatible with DCC, they should either offer some wired for DC, or, at the very least, include instructions on how to modify it for DC operation.
I would not like to pay good money for one of these, only to find it had to be heavily modified in order to use. And how would that affect the warranty?
We also have the situation in N-scale where there are two series of remote-control turnouts, one series wired to be power-routing, the other wired to be non-power-routing. Both look the same and are not clearly marked which is which.
I personally like the power-routing feature, but can wire the track for either type. I think most people would like to clearly know what they are buying.
Les
I believe thay do make them both. The Bachmann Catelog has two different #6 crossovers, one is DCC and one is only remote (unless the remote version will only work on DCC systems with only remote control). The DCC version is #44137 left and 44138 right and the remote version is 44575 left and 44576 right. I have the remote version, and have run both DC and DCC on it as well without any issues.
is it preoperly gapped for independent dc control of 2 trains?
I tested with my multi-meter, and I do not think so, not without cutting a gap in the rails. There are gaps in the rails where the frogs are, because you can have powered as well as unpowered frogs, which would, from a visual inspection, indicate they were electrically isolated tracks. My frogs are currently unpowered. A multimeter reading between the frogs and any rail shows no continuity, but there is continuity between all of the same side rails on either side of the frogs and on both sides of the cross-over.
The frogs are definitely not powered or conducting, so that would indicate some consealed undertrack wiring to maintain continuity between all the rails.
I have not yet fastened down all my rails, and lifting up the tracks to where I can just see under the cross-overs, there are screw mounted covers which can be removed to gain access to this area, but I'm not going to disassemble the tracks to get to them.
So my belief is, they will work as they are, as either powered or unpowered frog turnouts in DCC or DC, as long as you only wish to use one DC controller for both track sections and, in DC, either only run one engine or run an engine on either or both sides with common speed and direction of both trains. It does not look like split operation between two trains in DC will work as they are.
I have DC equipment, but it is not connected to the tracks. I did a DCC test run with a diesel loco and found that, even with power applied to only the outside track, the engine ran fine on both the outside and inside sections of track.
So, apparently, the only difference between the two sets of turnouts is the way they are switched, either with a built-in DCC decoder or by standard push button remote control.
Quote from: rbryce1 on October 27, 2012, 08:50:29 AM
I believe thay do make them both. The Bachmann Catelog has two different #6 crossovers, one is DCC and one is only remote (unless the remote version will only work on DCC systems with only remote control). The DCC version is #44137 left and 44138 right and the remote version is 44575 left and 44576 right. I have the remote version, and have run both DC and DCC on it as well without any issues.
Both of types of #6 Crossovers are wired for DCC layouts. The difference is the later version has decoders built in to them to allow them to be operated by the DCC Controller. Both have to be modified in order to use them to connect two loops being controlled by two seperate DC power supplies.
At the LHS my repair shop is located in, the vast majority of people looking to use them are folks trying to add a second loop to the DC powered train set they recently purchased. So I spend a lot of time explaining to them why the would be better off using two back-to-back switches, even though the crossover "looks cool'. The return rate from people buying them "to see if it will work" in that enviroment is very high.
Len
i seem top recall another thread on here where somebody modified the crossover for dc operation. in addition to cutting gaps in the rails, they also had to modify the wiring under the crossover. as i recall, all tracks are wired together on the underside.
as was said before, using two individual 6s with insulating joiners between them is far easier than the surgery needed on the crossover.
Jeff,
Looking at my cross-over some more, I believe that cutting breaks into the rails will probably not result in the crossover working any better, as the rails are cut now at the frogs, and the underneath wiring still jumpers out the cuts. Even if more cuts are made in the rails, if they are not made in the correct positions, the underneath wiring will still jump across the cuts and provide power to the opposite side rails. I think the jumper wires are going to need to be fixed as well as the rails.
that was my impression as well. you'd have to vut the jumpers to fully isolate the tracks. i wish i could remember the thread that explained how to do this. it was posted here about a year or so ago, and should be in the archives...