I think the OPs desire is to work on a new method of sensing train positions with a view to writing a thesis, presumably towards a Masters or PhD (he says diploma, but this seems higher level than that). He seems to want to test out whatever methods he is investigating using models, possibly before attempting to apply it to full size trains which I imagine would be running fully automated. At least that is my reading of his original post.
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 at 21:02, whmvd via <vandoornw=[email protected]> wrote:
Why assume stationary uncouplers? On-board DCC ones provide much more freedom (yes, at much more expense, but we don't know the size and scale of the layout envisioned, nor the budget, nor the number of wagons (that would all have to be fitted with them, and with a function decoder)).
I am using a scaled down version, where rakes of passenger cars are pretty much fixed, but locos can decouple via DCC and run around for recoupling at the other end.
Also, the desire stated in the OP was to build on JMRI, not just use what is there as that would not be an acceptable result.
Wouter
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, 20:37 Ken Heywood via , <kheywood=[email protected]> wrote:
If you are running automation, you might try the JMRI dispatcher.
Let's say your train approaches an uncoupling position.
As soon as the train enters the detected section (current sense), it will slow down.
To precisely stop that train, a photocell or IR detector will stop the train on a designated spot.
("stopping sensor")
Now, that's only the head end.
Make sure that the coupler is correctly positioned to separate that 40', 50', or X' car.
You may end up with an IR detector at the coupler, count the cars, and stop with logicNG or script.
--
Ken NYNH&H, Old Colony Division, Cape Cod Branch (1949-1959) Loconet * JMRI 5.9.2 * OSX,Win10,Ubuntu
