 | | Re: Reversing Loop without Insulated Tracks
|
|
(...) Eh, I'm more interested in the electrical puzzle than the trains running on it. Besides, I was considering the possibility that a motor might be set up with two input leads and two output leads that would cause skipped poles if only one pair (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Reversing Loop without Insulated Tracks
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek wrote: SNIP (...) Hi Folks, For what it's worth, this is the layout w/ reversing loop I was playing with. As always, I'm limited in size to something that fits on the big kitchen table I use for train layouts. I (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Reversing Loop without Insulated Tracks
|
|
(...) Well yes, but not because the short switched track segment is displaced - the electrical routing is not done through that, but via contacts hidden inside the switch, which don't get displaced. The short is caused by the electrical pickup in (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Reversing Loop without Insulated Tracks
|
|
(...) Neither. The electrical pickup on the train motor picks up power from both axles. So when one axle has traversed B to the short section of track, the power pickup will connect the outside rail right through the loop, shorting the controller. (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Reversing Loop without Insulated Tracks
|
|
(...) I suggest you read up on reversing loops for some background. There are plenty of references out there if you use Google to look. But, failing that, and also for the benefit of the rest of the readership... Consider an ordinary reversing loop (...) (20 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
