Keyboard Shortcuts
Likes
- Jmriusers
- Messages
Search
|
Locked
Re: 2 way working on single track - signals
Thanks Steve, that's much clearer about how it works.
I deleted all the auto generated Sections and manually created them as you suggest and yes the routine works as expected but still without resetting the signals on the direction of travel side.? This means that for a following train, the "signalman" has to set them after the first train has passed through.? Is this by design?? I can understand if it is although it would be good to have the signals reset so that a following train (or the same train on a loop) can continue until a Reverse despatch is initiated. Peter? |
|
Locked
Re: Inconsistent behaviour with the dispatcher
Hi
A couple of things.? 2018-07-29 17:59:26,896 loconet.LnThrottleManager???????????? WARN? - slot 1 address 4715 is already in-use. [AWT-EventQueue-0] If more than one throttle is controlling the slot you will have extremely erratic behaviour as the speed will be set by which ever throttle did the last refresh. Most of the warnings will cause a fast stop, not using the profile. For smooth operation of two trains following one another you need at least 6 blocks and even then when the faster one catches up it will start bucking, doing start followed by fast stop.? The speed will be set by the signal aspect, so the warrant preferences have to configured correctly, especially scale. Steve G. |
|
Locked
Re: Turnouts on panel only operate in closed direction
Dave,
That did the trick. ?I do remember reading that in the help a couple weeks ago, but I failed to put 2 and 2 together. Thanks again for the help, Rummy |
|
Locked
Re: decoder pro. with paragon decoders
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýTonyIn the programmer it's under tab "sound", set "CV write sound feedback" to disabled. That will set bit 6 of CV 245. Steve G. On July 29, 2018 11:52:13 PM EDT, AD <bklyns_baseball_club@...> wrote: What should cv 246 be set to ?get best results -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. |
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
DC engines on DCC
are not address 3. ?Address 3 is the default address for all decoders.
Those DCC systems that run analog locos do it on address 0 (zero), and
remember too that many/most DCC systems do not support this method of operation,
bearing in minds too that it is not particularly good for the DC loco.
I also agree with Bruce and others. ?Just don't mix DC and DCC at all. ?Go for DCC: the $20 decoder vs $$$$ DCC system argument from Tom Cain is very apt. Mick ______________________________________________________________________ Mick Moignard Specialising in DCC Sound p: +44 7774 652504 e: mick@... skype: mickmoignard IBM Notes and Domino: still has what it takes as an App Dev and Collaboration platform. |
|
Locked
Re: decoder pro. with paragon decoders
Soundtraxx PTB:
Mick ______________________________________________________________________ Mick Moignard Specialising in DCC Sound p: +44 7774 652504 e: mick@... skype: mickmoignard IBM Notes and Domino: still has what it takes as an App Dev and Collaboration platform. |
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýYour two systems do. Many do not. My understanding is that Lenz and Digitrax still do. NCE does not, EasyDCC has removed the functionality "since its uses significantly decreases system performance, SPROG does not, current MRC systems do not... Others can add to either list. This link has an outdated list: <> That has lots of other DCC information and is trustworthy. <> Most systems that did support it used an unusable loco address (short address 0) as the option for a ?zero-bit stretched loco. I don't know why any DCC system would choose short address 3 for DC, since that is the default address for any decoder bought unfitted to a loco (it does not have to apply to a manufacturer-fitted loco, see NMRA S9.2.2). It would be an unwise choice. Some DC power packs or add-ons allow control of one DCC locomotive by generating a DCC signal from the power pack output. The packets are addressed to short address 3. This is the opposite situation to running a non-decoder loco on DCC track. --? Dave in Australia The New England Convention 2018 On 30 Jul 2018, at 4:29 PM, Michael Piazza via Groups.Io <mpiazza2007@...> wrote:
|
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýIn addition, if you are running block systems for DC you are only running one locomotive per DCC control system. Simple. I¡¯ve done that as well as most of my locomotives have not yet been converted. ? Mike Piazza ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave Heap
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2018 11:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [jmriusers] Detecting DC vs DCC track power ? Most modern DCC systems cannot run a no-decoder DC locomotive. ? The NMRA standards provided for the optional possibility of running a single DC locomotive on DCC track, using a technique known as asymmetric zero-pulse stretching. ? Some manufacturers incorporated this capability into their command stations but almost all later removed the functionality (either in new models or via software update) due to a number of difficulties in practice, some adversely affecting performance of DCC locomotives. I believe one system may still have this feature. ? On the other hand, most DCC-fitted locos can be made to run on DC track, albeit with performance penalties. But some DC power packs do not play well with decoder-fitted locos due to having heavily pulsed output. Furthermore, having the option of DC mode enabled in the decoder increases the risk of loco runaway on a DC layout (a bad DCC signal can be misinterpreted as full-power DC) so most DCC users disable this in all loco decoders. --? Dave in Australia ? The New England Convention 2018
|
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýYes they can. Mine does fine both Lenz and Roco Z21. ? Mike Piazza ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave Heap
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2018 11:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [jmriusers] Detecting DC vs DCC track power ? Most modern DCC systems cannot run a no-decoder DC locomotive. ? The NMRA standards provided for the optional possibility of running a single DC locomotive on DCC track, using a technique known as asymmetric zero-pulse stretching. ? Some manufacturers incorporated this capability into their command stations but almost all later removed the functionality (either in new models or via software update) due to a number of difficulties in practice, some adversely affecting performance of DCC locomotives. I believe one system may still have this feature. ? On the other hand, most DCC-fitted locos can be made to run on DC track, albeit with performance penalties. But some DC power packs do not play well with decoder-fitted locos due to having heavily pulsed output. Furthermore, having the option of DC mode enabled in the decoder increases the risk of loco runaway on a DC layout (a bad DCC signal can be misinterpreted as full-power DC) so most DCC users disable this in all loco decoders. --? Dave in Australia ? The New England Convention 2018
|
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýMost modern DCC systems cannot run a no-decoder DC locomotive. The NMRA standards provided for the optional possibility of running a single DC locomotive on DCC track, using a technique known as asymmetric zero-pulse stretching. Some manufacturers incorporated this capability into their command stations but almost all later removed the functionality (either in new models or via software update) due to a number of difficulties in practice, some adversely affecting performance of DCC locomotives. I believe one system may still have this feature. On the other hand, most DCC-fitted locos can be made to run on DC track, albeit with performance penalties. But some DC power packs do not play well with decoder-fitted locos due to having heavily pulsed output. Furthermore, having the option of DC mode enabled in the decoder increases the risk of loco runaway on a DC layout (a bad DCC signal can be misinterpreted as full-power DC) so most DCC users disable this in all loco decoders. --? Dave in Australia The New England Convention 2018 On 30 Jul 2018, at 2:40 PM, Michael Piazza via Groups.Io <mpiazza2007@...> wrote:
I understand that but what Im saying is that since you can run DC locomotives on a DCC system you would no longer need to have your layout in DC mode anymore so you wouldnt have to worry about crossing points from DC to DCC because you would always only be using DCC.? If it works for everyone you then disable the DC to DCC switches with no additional hardware or complexity to deal with. |
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýThis is what I¡¯m saying.? Most DC locomotives will run on the latest DCC systems with NO modifications. ?All the DC engines are running as address 3 so your block control is still required but you don¡¯t need to futz around with any esoteric circuitry because you are only running in one mode: DCC. ?As such there would be NO REASON to run DC anymore.? Some people don¡¯t like the way the DCC pulses drive their DC motors but it is still doable. ? Mike Piazza ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tom Cain
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2018 10:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [jmriusers] Detecting DC vs DCC track power ? I also agree with Bruce, trying to run DC and DCC together is just asking for trouble. ? I think that model railroaders are sometimes a very cost conscience group and I count my self in that description. ?I have some great looking older locomotives from the DC era that I would like to run on my layout, but now I just have them in my display case. ?I¡¯ll likely never convert them to DCC especially now that I have some 20 other DCC locomotives on my layout. ?So I find it a faulty logic to avoid the time and $20 to convert a loco to DCC when the unfortunate consequence of an accident could be the cause of damaging a DCC control system worth hundreds of dollars. ?? ? Thomas Cain
? |
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýI also agree with Bruce, trying to run DC and DCC together is just asking for trouble. ? I think that model railroaders are sometimes a very cost conscience group and I count my self in that description. ?I have some great looking older locomotives from the DC era that I would like to run on my layout, but now I just have them in my display case. ?I¡¯ll likely never convert them to DCC especially now that I have some 20 other DCC locomotives on my layout. ?So I find it a faulty logic to avoid the time and $20 to convert a loco to DCC when the unfortunate consequence of an accident could be the cause of damaging a DCC control system worth hundreds of dollars. ??Thomas Cain
Indianapolis, IN atsf93@... Modeling the Eastern?Illinois Santa Fe from the?Prototype See my website and layout?at: ?www.atsf93.com
|
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
You mentioned Arduino :-) A DCC decoder sketch connected to a track segment via an opto-isolator can detect valid DCC packets - the sketch's "got a valid packet" callback can function as a simple watchdog flip flop that can tell you to [DCC / not DCC]... You could even combine it with a suitably isolated averaging/low pass filtered voltage measurement on an analog pin to give you a sense of the analog DC level on the track. Just remember that these days, "analog DC" means pulse power and HF keep alive, and not just plain old filtered stable DC; the old "transformer coupled detectors only work with DCC" mantra isn't really true any more. This should allow you to detect?
Telling JMRI is easy - the 'duino can be programmed to use CMRI, Loconet, etc, or you could wire it up directly to an existing sensor feedback device. ? -John On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 8:48 PM, dick bronson <dick@...> wrote: Hi, |
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
I understand that but what Im saying is that since you can run DC locomotives on a DCC system you would no longer need to have your layout in DC mode anymore so you wouldnt have to worry about crossing points from DC to DCC because you would always only be using DCC.? If it works for everyone you then disable the DC to DCC switches with no additional hardware or complexity to deal with. Mike Piazza On Sun, Jul 29, 2018, 19:05 doug.mertens <mertensdoug@...> wrote:
|
|
Locked
Re: decoder pro. with paragon decoders
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jul 29, 2018, at 8:31 PM, Steve_G <RailRodder@...> wrote:
|
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
Hi,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
In theory this should work. The devil is in the details. Many DC power supplies actually put out a pulsed or even PWM waveform that is sufficient to trigger a transformer coupled detector. I know this because we have customers for our CT coil based detectors that use them for both DC and DCC detection. One example is a museum layout that operates with DCC when the club is present and DC when only a docent is present. Probably the simplest solution is to detect the DC power output and not allow the crossovers to operate when present. A bit more 'exotic' would be to detect both DC and DCC outputs with relays and if both relays are activated remove power from the crossovers. It is not fool proof because it is not fail safe, but probably DC operation has its days numbered. (based on the experience of many clubs that once had dual operation) Dick :) On 07/29/2018 10:38 PM, eclipserd via Groups.Io wrote:
|
|
Locked
Test version 4.13.1 of JMRI/DecoderPro is available for download.
This is the next in a series of test releases that will culminate in a production release, hopefully in Summer 2018.
If you are currently using JMRI 4.9.6 or earlier, we strongly recommend that you first update to JMRI 4.12 and make sure that's running OK before updating to this test release. There have been a number of changes in serial port support, panel file format and configuration options since those earlier releases, and moving to the stable JMRI 4.12 release is a good way to work through any possible problems. <> If you use JMRI on Linux or Mac and are updating from JMRI 4.7.3 or earlier, there¡¯s a necessary migration step. (Not needed on Windows) Please see the JMRI 4.12 release note for details: <> For more information on the issues, new features and bug fixes in 4.13.1 please see the release note: <> Note that JMRI is made available under the GNU General Public License. For more information, please see our copyright and licensing page. <> The download links, along with lots of other information which we hope you'll read, can be found on the release note page: <> -- Bob Jacobsen rgj1927@... |
|
Locked
Re: Decoder pro,,,how to delete entry of locomotive sold
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýYou have to do it from All Entries. If you right-click while in a group, the only removal option will be "Remove From Group" --? Dave in Australia The New England Convention 2018 On 30 Jul 2018, at 11:53 AM, John Griffin <johng.sst@...> wrote:
You can also right-click on the roster entry and select 'Delete from Roster'. |
|
Locked
Re: Detecting DC vs DCC track power
What you want is there to be no voltage across the gaps when you get there. Bad cases include:
*) Both sides DC, but set to opposite polarity *) Both sides DCC, but wired opposite or running off different command stations *) One side DC and one side DCC I suggest you put a pair of oppositely-wired opto-isolators on each gap, a pair on each side. Pick limit resistors that¡¯ll let them survive 30V, and still work down to about 3V. Have those feed whatever indicator you want. If any of the four are conducting, there¡¯s voltage across the gap: don¡¯t go there. Which ones are conducting, and whether they¡¯re on all the time or rapidly going on and off, will tell you which problem you have. Bob On Jul 29, 2018, at 6:32 PM, doug.mertens <mertensdoug@...> wrote:-- Bob Jacobsen rgj1927@... |
Bob Jacobsen