Can 2 EZ command units be hooked up to the same track so that 2 engineers can play at the same time? One operator per engine for example.
Only one E-Z Command Control Center can be connected to same track.
Quote from: mrmel0 on March 10, 2018, 03:40:54 PM
Can 2 EZ command units be hooked up to the same track so that 2 engineers can play at the same time? One operator per engine for example.
You can only use the walk around companion. Two E-Z Command DCC systems hooked up simultaneously will cause serious problems to say the least. Do not attempt it. You can use 2 systems if you have two loops of track that are electrically isolated and not connected at any point.
Quote from: ACY on March 10, 2018, 07:24:08 PM
Quote from: mrmel0 on March 10, 2018, 03:40:54 PM
Can 2 EZ command units be hooked up to the same track so that 2 engineers can play at the same time? One operator per engine for example.
You can only use the walk around companion. Two E-Z Command DCC systems hooked up simultaneously will cause serious problems to say the least. Do not attempt it. You can use 2 systems if you have two loops of track that are electrically isolated and not connected at any point.
So a "block" then, right? Could you use one per block? Could they both be set to the same functions? (Example: Locomotive A assigned to command 1 on both modules, Locomotive B to command 2 on both modules - and now both modules can run the same train alternatively.)
No, you cannot E-Z Command Control Center or any DCC command station as you describe.
Help me out if you can, Hunt.
Imagine connecting inner/outer ovals, with them being blocked from each other. How do I get power to both blocks with only one EZ command?
Explain it to me like I'm a 6-year old. If my EZ command is wired to the outer oval, and blocked from the inner oval, how do I get power to the inner oval?
E-Z Command Control Center === outer loop terminal rerailer === inter loop terminal rerailer
Quote from: Hunt on March 15, 2018, 04:17:55 PM
E-Z Command Control Center === outer loop terminal rerailer === inter loop terminal rerailer
So, one EZ command === outer loop terminal rerailer === inter loop terminal rerailer === spur terminal rerailer - can do?
Yes, you can do that. Be sure to maintain the polarity of the rails when you connect the power cables between the rerailers. Otherwise you will get a short and possibly damage your command center. If you understand how to use a muilimeter, you can use it to test the wiring BEFORE you power anything up.
Time to get more advanced DCC that allows multiple cabs. EZ command is the DCC equivalent of an old fashioned AC train set "transformer", really meant for only one train moving at a time. It's really good for what it is, but what it ain't, it ain't. I used one for a couple of years but moved on when I wanted more.
What you are asking seems to be a little different than what you really mean. So, let's be careful to be clear so that you don't make an expensive mistake.
Obviously two people could set up two entirely separate loops with two Easy Commands and run a train on each one totally independent of the other. That is true even if the two loops are set up with one totally inside the other.
But, it sounds like you really want the two loops to be connected somewhere, so that the train on one can go to the other loop. That is where you would cause trouble. One problem is that the electrical pickups on the locomotive wheels would be picking up power from both command stations at the same time as it crosses the gap from one loop to the other. A problem like a short at that point might be able to double the voltage through your loco because the two power systems are not bonded electrically. And, they might feed double the current through the short.
Another potential problem is that the control signals to the train would be coming from one command station, then both, then the other, as the locomotive changes loops. Unless the two command stations were sending the same signals to that loco's address, the loco may get "confused". I am not sure what the Bachmann DCC command station logic is like, but command stations that comply with NMRA standards will also "get confused" when two are connected together on the same rails, which is what the loco will do when changing loops if each loop is on a different command station.
You probably already realize that the Easy Command can run more than one train at a time, so that you could power both loops with one Easy Command and run two trains independently at the same time. Except that the Easy Command can only send signals to change speed, direction, lights, etc. to one loco address at a time. I did that for years under a Christmas tree - running two locos with one Easy Command. When I had only one loop, both locos were on the same loop, and I just kept switching the Easy Command between addresses to control the speeds so they became matched and neither train caught up to the other. That can be difficult, because there is a problem unless you keep track of where the speed dial is set for both trains and switch to a vacant address between switching to the other locomotive so that you can reset the speed dial to where you left it for the other train without affecting the one you are switching from.
And, of course, with 2 loops, it does not matter if the trains are running at different speeds or the same speed, so you could even use the same loco address for both with one Easy Command, so that they would both start and stop, etc. together.
But, what it sounds like you really want is two throttles that can drive two locos independently anywhere on the whole layout. To do that, you need a different DCC system that has a single command station that can use multiple throttles. You can only have one command station hooked to the layout, but command stations like those made by NCE and Digitrax (and others) can take inputs from multiple throttles and send them out to multiple locos in a coordinated manner at the same time.
If you are serious about the hobby, getting one of the main-stream command stations is a good next step. It would give you much more control of your locos, both in where they can run and how independently you can control them, plus, you would have better control of functions like sounds, lighting and grouping multiple locos to run together in single trains with one controller (called "consisting" or "MUing").
Got some EXCELLENT info in here. Thanks everyone.
Re: crossing the gap between sections powered by different EZ commands. As alluded to, this could cause a short. I'd like to amend that to it WILL cause a short. The DCC waveform is a form of AC. The "polarity" is constantly changing. Unless the waveforms of the two command stations are perfectly in phase, which is highly unlikely, they WILL short.
There is another way to run two trains that I haven't seen mentioned here. EZ App trains will run off the power supplied by the EZ command, but are controlled by Bluetooth. You could run one train with EZ command on DCC, and another on EZ App by your cell phone or tablet.
Quote from: jward on March 17, 2018, 08:17:39 AM
Re: crossing the gap between sections powered by different EZ commands. As alluded to, this could cause a short. I'd like to amend that to it WILL cause a short. The DCC waveform is a form of AC. The "polarity" is constantly changing. Unless the waveforms of the two command stations are perfectly in phase, which is highly unlikely, they WILL short.
There is another way to run two trains that I haven't seen mentioned here. EZ App trains will run off the power supplied by the EZ command, but are controlled by Bluetooth. You could run one train with EZ command on DCC, and another on EZ App by your cell phone or tablet.
This is a doable option. Thanks everyone.
(I don't have any of these and have no interest in getting any, so I am no expert - somebody should correct me if I am wrong on this.) I think the EZ App from Bachmann requires a "decoder" in each loco that is made to receive Bluetooth radio frequency signals through the air instead of DCC signals through the rails. That is different from other apps that require a Bluetooth receiver that connects to a command station, so that you can use your cell phone as a throttle to control any DCC equipped loco. So, your EZ App can only control the locos that Bachmann provides with these particular Bluetooth decoders, not other locos from other manufacturers or even other Bachmann locos that have regular DCC decoders.
Other manufacturers that make more sophisticated DCC command stations that have radio control (add-on) features are also now working on adding Bluetooth control add-ons that essentially mimic their regular radio control systems, except that you can use cell phones as throttles instead of having to buy radio-equipped throttles that are particular to the manufacturer's radio control system. Those are a lot more versatile than the Bachmann EZ App and the locos specific to it.
Maletrain is mostly right about EZ app. But the description of EZ App vs other "Bluetooth" control is a little confusing.
On DCC the command signals to the locomotives pass through the rails and are thus susceptable to dirty track. The "bluetooth" control these systems use merely passes a control signal from your cell phone to a command station which then puts that signal on the rails for your locomotive to read. Thus, it is not REALLY bluetooth control at all.
EZ App sends those control signals directly to the locomotive via bluetooth. The control signals do not pass through the rails and are thus less susceptable to corruption and degradation due to dirty track or loss of contact. An EZ APp locomotive will still draw its power from the rails, but since the control signal is not passed through the track it should be more tolerant of dirty track.
EZ App was developed in a partnership with Blue Rail Trains, who offer bluetooth boards that can be added to any locomotive that is DCC ready. They also sell conversion kits to run locomotives off battery power, which could have some really interesting applications.
Direct radio control of locomotives, whether by Bluetooth (which piggy-backs on the technological developments driven by cell phones) or stand-alone radio systems (which are more expensive), require electronics in each locomotive that are not common on the market, today.
While it is true that there are commercial sources for add-on electronic boards to make a regular locomotive work with direct Bluetooth control, that is not something that a beginner in the hobby is typically ready to tackle. It is similar to the more usual situation of a beginner with a DC locomotive that wants to make it a DCC locomotive by rewiring things and adding the necessary electronics. For large scale models like S, O, G and larger, there is plenty of room to add things inside, and the parts are large enough to be robust against ham-handed beginners' skills. With HO, there is usually enough room, but things are getting more fragile and easily broken. For N, there is often simply not enough room, and there is often breakage of both model details and mechanism unless the hobbyist is both knowledgeable and skilled.
So, a beginner who wants to run his locomotives via Bluetooth control is limited to what is available with that technology already installed, which is not many at this time. And, many folks just don't like the interface that a cell phone screen provides for a locomotive throttle, compared to the regular DCC throttles that have real knobs and buttons. The cell phone interface seems to make the "engineer" spend more time looking at his cell phone than his train, because there is no tactile feedback and it is easy to click on the wrong pseudo-button if you are not looking at the screen. Some companies are starting to develop dedicated model railroad throttles that have knobs and buttons and use Bluetooth, but those are not cheap or fully developed at this point. Bluetooth may be the main-stream system in the future, but, for now, it is pretty limiting for a beginner, especially in small scales.
As for running a locomotive on battery power, that too is a technology that works in large scale models but not is small scales. In theory, it eliminates the whole job of wiring track for power and keeping wheels clean for electrical contacts. It would stop stalling due to loss of electric contact to the motor. On the other hand, it will require repeated recharging of the batteries, which may become a nuisance during realistic operating sessions. And, there is also the problem of Lithium-Ion batteries that can catch fire.
So, from a beginner's standpoint, the choice is really whether to buy just whatever locomotives are available with Bluetooth to run separately from the DCC loco's EZ Command system by using cell phones as throttles, or to buy a better DCC command station and additional throttles that connect to it.
Remember, the EZ Command DCC set-up can already run multiple trains at the same time, as I described before, BUT, it is inconvenient to do it that way because there is really only one throttle that is integral with the command station, and you must keep switching that between locomotives to control changes for one at a time while all are running. Using Bluetooth control does not change that if you are using only one cell phone for a throttle.
And things might get really complicated if that cell phone is also still your telephone and calendar, and, while running one or more trains, you get a telephone call, a calendar reminder, or even an OS upgrade. So, most folks use old, deactivated cell phones for their Bluetooth throttles if they are really into that part of the hobby. For just running any old train around a circle, none of that is much concern, but the OP of this thread seems to be thinking beyond that.
Thanks people.
Honestly, I'm making a simple layout that will probably fit in a 3 X 6 area - two connecting ovals, maybe 2 spurs, one turning into a rail yard.
Don't plan on more than 2 locomotives at a time running.
From what I've gathered so far, the EZ Command ought to be able to handle all of that. Having 2 separate throttles isn't a big deal, and should I decide to expand, I'll just spring for a system that can do that.
Thanks again.
Funny, I have been reading all of General Discussion pages of the general discussion and came across this old post, so I thought my design might help others who, ... like me, like the simple Bachmann controllers over the more sophisticated power controllers.
Don't mean to beat a possible dead horse on this post, but this design of a crossover can support two EZ command controllers and not interact with each other. It works for me.
There are two diagrams (that I wanted to attach). The first diagram shows EZ command controller no 1 powers the crossover. The 6 pole double throw switch in the diagram shows the wiring for this crossover. The EZ command controller no 2 shown in the second diagram shows the wiring from the 6 pole double throw switch that it energizes the crossover from the no 2 controller.
The EZ controller no 1 energizes the crossover and the train can move into the crossover. The engine will come a stop at the far end in between the spacers if not manually brought to a stop before it reaches the second spacer for controller no 2. (third spacer if you're counting spacers).
This probably is the most important, the track in between the spacers must be long enough to stop a train engine at full speed before it reaches the second spacer*. That second spacer (third if your counting) is deenergized at the opposite end and the engine looses power from the EZ command power no 1.
The track section in the middle can be short to support only the train engine or can be long enough to support the entire train length. But again the track in between the spacers must be long enough to stop the train before it crosses the second spacer section.
This works in reverse, that is the EZ controller no 2 energizes the crossover and the train can move into the crossover. The engine will come a stop at the far end when it passes that first spacer due to no power in between the spacers section of track.
I used a five pole switch trying to establish a common between the two controllers but kept getting intermittent or stalling of the train engines. I couldn't figure out why, after many variations of the wiring, and I gave up and decided to separate and isolate both feeds from both controllers. This worked.
I tried to upload the schematic but obtained this response from the web site:
"The upload folder is full. Please try a smaller file and/or contact an administrator." The file I tried to upload is only 75KB. The max is 128KB
So since I can't seem to be able share my design schematic, I can and want to share it with those who have 2 EZ controllers where one train can access another controller without the expected shorts, shutdowns etc. Just note that the best way to keep the trains from you losing them, both controllers will need to have the same address for the trains. That is, if your BNSF engine is number 4 on Controller no. 1 then it should have the same number 4 on Controller no. 2. They can have different assignments but it will become confusing.
Bear with me... I'm still trying to figure out how to provide the schematics (drawings) to those interested. The drawings are self explanatory. But below a "typed diagram" of the crossover and 6 pole double throw switch. Plus I'd love any feedback anyone may have.
EZ power controller no 1
---------------------------\---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Track 1---
>Train direction> \
x \ x Track spacer (or air gap) 1
\
\ (This section must be long)*
\
x \ x spacer 2
\
\
\
\ This track section can be any length
\ (i.e track between all spacers)
\
\
\
x \ x Spacer 2
\
\ (This section must be long)*
\
x \ x spacer 1
\
----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------\--------------------------Track 2-------
EZ power controller no 2 Frog
~~~~1~~~~ To Rail 2 (Controller no 1)
Rail 2 between spacers ~~3~~~~~|
Cntrl 1 ~~~~15~~~
~~~~5~~~~ To Rail 1 (Controller no 1)
Rail 1 between spacers ~~7~~~~~|
Cntrl 1 ~~~~17~~~
~~~~9~~~~ To Rail 2 (Controller no 1)
Track between all spacers ~13~~~~|
(Rail 2) ~~~~10~~~
~~~~11~~~To Rail 1 (Controller no 1)
Track between all spacers ~14~~~~|
(Rail 1) ~~~~12~~~ To Rail 1 (Controller no 2)
~~~~18~~~
Rail 1 between spacers ~~~4~~~~|
Cntrl 2 ~~~~2~~~~ To Rail 1 (Controller no 2)
~~~~16~~~
Rail 2 between spacers ~~~8~~~~|
Cntrl 2 ~~~~6~~~~ To Rail 2 (Controller no 2)
contacts 15, 17, 18 and 16 are open contacts
The above are the pinouts for the 6 pole double throw switch.
End of data
Ralph - You have to have a separate website to upload your photos, then copy them from there and paste them here using the the image tags [ img ] [ /img ]. (I put the extra spaces in there). You could also just use the address where you uploaded your pics with the website address tags [ url ] [ /url ].
I'm a little confused here. Are you trying to devise an elaborate and complicated system of transferring control of a train from one command station to another, in order to keep using the "simple" EZ Command interface? Wouldn't it be cheaper, easier, and far less complicated to just go with a system where additional throttles are readily available. and avoid this unnecessary complication? I've used at least three different DCC systems other than EZ Command while running friends layouts, and none of them are harder to run than EZ Command. Either that or endlessly pester Bachmann until they bring back the walkaround companion. Or run DC with block switches and not worry about burning out controllers.
To Mr T:
I don't have a website, and haven't ventured unto U-tube or other places where I can let others know how to upload/download images. Actually, that will be my third faze in building my model railroad. But that's way off in the future.... Hope that helps.
To Mr. W:
If you can remember the old transformers where all you had was an on/off, forward/reverse switch and a throttle. Well, that's where I'm at. I like those simple controls. The new sophisticated versions, like the current ones you're thinking about don't provide that simpleness. I guess I'm kinda weird in that way, cause I want the simple to operate the complicated. Having to move from DC to DCC, to me was a good move, but I also want to keep that simple on/off - throttle setting simple. As I work on my layout , now that my wife allowed me to have a full figured room (i.e. bonus room) my dream of having a complicated layout but with the simplest of controls is what I'm striving for. When I visited some of the Railroad clubs, they have some of the most orderly, high stakes controls. I've been there (probably why I haven't joined a club) and although realistic operations, the controls are not so simple...in my book. Also, what keeps me really busy is how to get the layout to conform to the simpleness of the controls...that's the complicated part. For instance, check out my idea for a bascule bridge (separate topic). I like block switches being part of the layout, where it will work with separate DCC controllers again that's the complicated part that I like designing for. Hope this helps understand my ideas that'll keep me busy in retirement.
I run a Digitrax Zephyr and my setup is very similar to what you describe. Plus, I can add two DC power packs as additional controllers. Acquiring a locomotive is as simple as pushing the "loco" button, entering the actual number of the locomotive, and pressing the locomotive again. You can't get much simpler than that. The setup is designed to be as close to a DC controller as possible, in fact it bears a strong resemblance to a Kato DC controller, and running a train is as simple as any DC pack. In fact, it can do exactly what you're trying to do right out of the box without having to engineer a complex solution to a simple problem. And if Bachmann hadn't shot themselves in the foot by discontinuing the walkaround companion, it's something the EZ Command could have done as well.