 | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, David Koudys wrote: <snip> Regarding reverse loops and DCC I seem to recall that it's possible to automate them so you don't have to cut gaps that the motor has to coast across See this track diagram (URL) consider what (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Urp, in the below, when i posted it before, none of the urls are clickable! Sorry about that. And "snip" inside angle brackets IS clickable.... I'm confused. XFUT admin.nntp... (21 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —James Powell
|
| | | | | Yes, you can automate the reversing loops. In fact, using the RCX to do so should be fairly simple, except that it takes 2 of them to do it. (Just using 1 rail for now-) (rcx a)rail-gap-rail(rcx b) The two of them set the polarity the same, such (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Brian H. Nielsen
|
| | | | (...) loop divided into 2 power blocks, rather than one as in the above diagram. With 3 power blocks you can always switch the block the train is heading toward to be compatible with the block it is in so there is never a gap to cross. Once the (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) That diagram is divided into two blocks. One for the approaches, and one for the reverse loop itself. That's standard wiring, been done that way since I was a wee lad, there's no need to divide the reverse loop itself into two blocks. With (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Brian H. Nielsen
|
| | | | | | (...) Okay, yeah, my memory of what I too used to do years ago got cross-wired. Then I guess I don't understand the set-up that is causing his need for a gap to be crossed. Is it a DCC related issue or simply him not reversing the polarity of the (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) The latter I think... by having a truck long gap, the motor coasts across the gap but never shorts out from one wheel set to the other, once it hits the powered side again (even though the polarity is reversed) it just continues on. This is (...) (21 years ago, 3-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) Yep--Larry hit it on the head--the isolated section is so there isn't one set of wheels on one polarity, and the other set of wheels on the reverse polarity-- (see if this font is really courier ;) ) ###...### Track TTTTT O O ###...### Track (...) (21 years ago, 3-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, David Koudys wrote: <snip> (...) And here's 'more playing...' (URL) two pics, but fun ones... One of these pics shows how old my ccd in my digital camera is--all the 'blank' pixels. Eh, it still works and is now on (...) (21 years ago, 3-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Mario DeFacendis
|
| | | | | | (...) An easy solution to this is to have two locomotives in the train, each tuned to the same DCC channel. If one loco loses communication, the other will push it through the bad spots... That probably why real trains have two locos, right? :) (...) (21 years ago, 3-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) Going to try that tonite--I own only 4 loco motors, and 3 are now converted to DCC. Hopefully I'll get my hands on about 3-4 more motors and convert 'em. But tonight I'll run 2 motors on one engine on one DCC channel and test that. I think it (...) (21 years ago, 3-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Even more Wow!! for your buck!!! was Re: Woo Hoo!!!!! (part deux...) —Jeff Elliott
|
| | | | All these polarity-switching solutions presume only 1 train. If you've got 3 trains, and each of them is hitting a block boundary at the same time, you're going to have a short no matter what you do. Best solution for DCC is to get your insulated (...) (21 years ago, 3-Jun-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
