You guys are a fantastic resource! Thanks to all. I guess by your answers this is a common challenge. And as desirable as it seems to upgrade the fleet's decoders to the very same exact model, the reality is that in a few years they will be "old" compared to the offerings available. So to upgrade, and try to stay at the leading edge of technology, seems like a very expensive proposition. I hadn't considered setting all momentum to zero and shall try that but this too has its limitations as the newer more robust features in the TCS decoder probably won't be able to be used to their fullest extent (BEMF). So, it doesn't appear there is a clear path for perfection except to further tap into my children's inheritance and keep the decoder fleet current and/or consistent from loco to loco.

I really appreciate everyone taking time to share your collective wisdom!!!

Thanks
Paul

As a follow up to Mick's comment, standardizing on one brand/model of decoder
would also go a long way to keeping your hair where you would normally expect to
find it.

John

On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 05:17 AM, Klaus Killinger wrote:

If I understand this right, you want to be able to start/stop the engine by a throttle function key, e.g. F8. You can do this in config.xml:
<trigger name="ENGINE_STARTSTOP" type="THROTTLE">
<event-name>F8</event-name>
<target-name>ENGINE</target-name>
<action>NOTHING</action>
</trigger>
This must be declared in the tag sound-event name="ENGINE".

Klaus, thanks for this snippet-it works.? I have no idea how the program links this to the Start/Stop action though, and if there is any way to preclude the action if the speed is not zero.

However, the gain parameter is not doing what I think it should do.? I sampled some other sounds to get a better bell, and cannot lower the relative volume without changing the level in the sound file (which in frustration, I finally did).? In my Config file, I have this snippet (notice the 0.1 gain that I thought would make it very soft):
??? <sound name="BELL" type="configurable">
????? <start-file>sounds/Common/Bell-Start.wav</start-file>
????? <mid-file>sounds/Common/Bell-Middle.wav</mid-file>
????? <end-file>sounds/Common/Bell-End.wav</end-file>
????? <start-sound-duration>136</start-sound-duration>
????? <gain>0.1</gain>
??? </sound>
I had wondered: Can there be a negative gain?? Maybe that is my problem: could the gain be 0.0 for no change, positive for louder, and negative for quieter?? As a test, I tried a gain of -2.0, but no change, so I tried -6.0, no change.? So I must be doing something wrong in my code.

Klaus, thanks for your help and Conrad, thanks for your thoughts.

Phil in gorgeous Young Harris, Georgia, USA

开云体育

Marc

Dan,

Inverting turnouts or sensors just takes which event you use as the
active/thrown and inactive/closed. So it is just swap the two event ids
making the system name. This is intentional to keep clear the state of what
is what. Remember the events don't know what they are, it is how we view
them.

As Dave said, your other choice is to invert the turnout at the node. I
strongly suggest you make sure the concepts of what is what matches with the
feedback. I've seen Digitrax layouts where invert was used and the turnout
could get into a loop somehow.

-Ken Cameron, Member JMRI Dev Team
www.jmri.org
www.fingerlakeslivesteamers.org
www.cnymod.org
www.syracusemodelrr.org

Hello:
Not sure if this is a JMRI question or an LCC question...
Have a small number of turnouts that where we need to change the closed and thrown positions. Of course we could change the wires connecting pin #1 and #8 on the tortoise .? To avoid climbing under the layout, we decided to use the inverted option in the turnout table.? That option is grayed is grayed out.? The documentation states that turnouts that cannot be inverted will be grayed out.? These turnouts use tortoises wired to an RR-Cirkits BOD4-CP installed on a Signal LCC card. The turnouts were created using the Create turnout feature in the OpenLCB CDI menu item.? There is also a sensor defined to monitor turnout position. What would cause the inverted selection in the turnout table to be grayed out?

Dan Kubarych
ARHS

Also of note.. TCS has several momentum related CV's.? Grand total of 15 CV's.? So make sure they are all set = 00
Then there is Motor delay, CV 182.

Marc

Yes, the whole issue of manual brake is another issue that some decoders can
do it and some can't. It is just another issue of which decoders can be
matched to other decoders. Locos with matching speeds with matching momentum
is another example of some will match and others will not match. But last
thing to keep in mind, the physical locos may have issues that make matching
difficult. Some models may never really match each other.

-Ken Cameron, Member JMRI Dev Team
www.jmri.org
www.fingerlakeslivesteamers.org
www.cnymod.org
www.syracusemodelrr.org

Paul

The previous messages are correct. The reason for the difference - the default for cv3 is 32 and the default for CV4 is 96 - you are meant to use the brake to stop the loco. As said the NCE is primitive non sound decoder.

Gerry

--
Gerry Hopkins MMR #177 FNMRA
Great Northern Downunder




NMRA Australasian Region
Contest & AP Chairman
Web Administrator

What is peculiar here is the fact the programming is carried out and does effect the decoder: IE: changes done are reflected in decoder operation.

The only issue is a recurring? 308 error during programming in Service mode (program track). ?

TSU-PNP decoders do not require the Program Track Booster (PTB-100) or other. And do not require a resistor.

If? you have other than Soundraxx decoders available, try it.? If same result suspect your DCC++ setup.? Other than Soundtraxx TSU2 or ECO you should see a distinct knudge forward. My program track runs off a 15Volt power, and the engine being program almost leaps forward, you can not miss it..

If the the decoder programming is succefull, engine nudges forward but still encounter? 308 error, further suspect the program track (clean it), clean the wheels. If still 308 error some is bad with your DCC++ setup.

There are many a thread in various forums re DCC++ and 308 error: here are but a few I found.







This certainly not a JMRI ussue as he is looking and posting what result is returned by the DCC++.? and your seems to be erratic,

Marc

Yes, speed match first. Then keep in mind that, regardless of the standard,
some vendors don't use the same formulas for momentum.

-Ken Cameron, Member JMRI Dev Team
www.jmri.org
www.fingerlakeslivesteamers.org
www.cnymod.org
www.syracusemodelrr.org

Set momentum to 0 then speed match. Once speed is matched then match momentum.

--
Peter Ulvestad

JMRI Users Group Moderator - ( )
Tam Valley Group Moderator - ( )
Sprog-DCC Group Moderator - ( )
Edmonton Model Railroad Association -

I’ve been chasing my tail on speed matching an NCE D13SRF Rev D decoder with a WOW Diesel 101 SS3. Both are in Athearn Tunnel Motors. It seems the WOW decoder has so much momentum in it (that is proving to be hard to control) and NCE seems super basic (and probably really old) and has very few features comparatively.

How would you guys go about speed matching them because what I’m doing ain’t working....

Thanks
Paul

Russ,

I've found it needed to keep the following types of programming connections
available:

1. Right from the command station (important for Tsunami 2, no booster)
2. Via a booster like the PTB-100
3. With a 1K across the programming outputs
4. With a 10K across the programming outputs

I try each of these until something works. If I'm seeing the loco twitch,
but feedback fails, I figure I have to write blind to that decoder.

-Ken Cameron, Member JMRI Dev Team
www.jmri.org
www.fingerlakeslivesteamers.org
www.cnymod.org
www.syracusemodelrr.org

Marc,? I checked trainboard.com, but it looks to be more for the hobby in general.? No 308 issues similar to mine.? When I first saw the failure of the Read full sheet, I had the motor disconnected, but subsequently reconnected when you mentioned the possibility of a current related issue.? I reconnected the motor and still get the same behavior.? Do you think that resistor across the connection might would be useful?? I don't know what value to try, but it would increase the current load.

If you have any suggestions for any other sites or boards I can post on for assistance, that would be great.

Thanks,
Russ