Subject:
|
Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 May 2002 15:29:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
412 times
|
| |
|
|
Pedro Silva wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been devising a layout for my train collection to be displayed
> in but suddenly I came across a number of problems:
Funny you should mention.
I just this month gave a 10 minute talk to my train club on the merits
of electrical block control. Perhaps I can help out.
> #1 - Multiple locos mean low speed for each of them (*Very low*);
True.
> #2 - One controller unit *alone* is really boring (same speed for all... yay...;
True.
> #3 - Long lines tend to be "slow" - how is this usually solved?
Additional feeder wires every 25-100 ft or so should reduce the
electrical friction that is causing the power loss. Experiment with what
works best.
> #4 - Modifing engines is a real hassle (and *expensive*, around here);
True.
> #5 - Remote controlling an entire layout from a single place seems really
> cool, but extremely difficult to do (is it really?)
It depends. If the entire layout is a single loop, then maybe not so
hard. If it's multiple, independent loops, also not such a big deal.
> So, now I'm after your personal experiences in the domain "low-tech, low
> cost solutions" for train controls. Ideally, I'm tring to control a maximum
> of 6 locos, in a *considerable* amount of track sections (each one tends to
> be small though, something like 16 straights in length).
A pic of your layout would be helpful here. If you have a single loop
with multiple, isolated track sections, then there may not be a simple
solution. Are you trying to operate trains like a DCC system, but
without the DCC?
> I know I'll need more than one controller unit, but *what is the minimum*?
Not sure I understand the question. Let's put it this way:
* If you want to control 6 trains on one loop, you only need one controller.
* If you want to control 6 trains on 6 loops, you'll need 6 controllers
(one for each train).
* If you want independent control of 6 trains on one loop, you'll need 6
controllers, plus a lot of semi-complicated wiring (called "electrical
block control").
> Is it possible to connect two or three in such a way that the same CU runs
> more than one section of track, but each section in a separate fashion?
If I understand you correctly, then no. The speed controller will send
the same number of volts to as many sections as it's connected to.
> How should I do insulations? Would a thin piece of scotch tape be enough?
Yes, but I wouldn't use tape, as it can leave a sticky residue. I've
found that a small piece of paper is quite effective. Put it between the
track connectors, clamp them together, then tear away the excess. The
isolation is virtually invisible.
> Where should I connect the points (and other accessories, why not)? Is it
> best to use a separate CU for these?
No need to use a separate Controller for the points, since they lose
power when switched away from the mainline. Accessories should have
their own power though. Also, you may want to isolate a switchyard and
power it separately.
I get a sense from your questions that you would like to control
multiple trains at different speeds on a single loop (like a DCC
system). This is not practical using standard LEGO wiring systems. If
this is what you want, and would like to delve into the complexities of
electrical block wiring systems (which are inexpensive compared to DCC),
let me know, and I'll relay what I've learned on the topic.
On the other hand, on a large layout, you could easily fake it, and it
would still be impressive. See how this sounds:
Imagine two loops, with half of one connected to Controller A, set to
speed 3; half of both connected to Controller B, set to speed 4; and
half of the second loop connected to Controller C, set to speed 5. When
the train in one loop hit the dividing point, it would slow down. The
other train would speed up in the same way. Now expand that idea into
more loops, add an electrically isolated switchyard or two, and by golly
you've got some real action going on.
Well, I don't know if all that will help or not. If not, post back, and
I'll try again. ;-)
Rick Clark
PNLTC
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
| (...) There's also a way to use only one controller to run at least two trains, but both are at the same speed. While probably not what Pedro's looking for, it leads into more complicated electrical block control. Here's a folder with an example: (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
| | | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
| (...) I will, thank you. BTW, is it possible to use a regular wire (non-LEGO) to make tests? Later I'd replace it with the real stuff, but in order to test faster I may need to use this procedure (if it is possible, what are the specifications of (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Low-tech & low cost controls
|
| Hi all, I have been devising a layout for my train collection to be displayed in, but suddenly I came across a number of problems: #1 - Multiple locos mean low speed for each of them (*Very low*); #2 - One controller unit *alone* is really boring (...) (22 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.loc.pt)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
