Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
- W4dccqa
- Messages
Search
Re: 1156 Bulb Short Protection and Powercab
I'm still suggesting a 1157 instead of 1156. I think the extra voltage helps keep it cooler? i.e. If the short is simple, like a metal wheel flange catching a frog wrong, the 1157 don't seem to get as hot. Assuming you grab the car quickly. Obviously, if you let it sit and heat up, that bulb will get very hot. But I've found that if I catch the short quickly, the bulb just gets warm, not overly hot. And far less dangerous. After all, that's the complaint against the 1156. That it can get too hot too fast if you don't remedy the short quick enough.
And as has been mentioned many times. This is only if you don't need a real circuit breaker, or can't afford one. Morgan Bilbo, DCC since 8/18. Model PRR 1952. |
Re: 1156 Bulb Short Protection and Powercab
Hi,
? I have all track protected by PSX breakers.? And also have run a Cat5 pair from them to a central display (labelled) with LEDs that show which district(s) are shorted.? I personally don't like the buzzers (irritating) so my LEDs are soldered to those outputs on the PSX boards and, with the appropriate resistor are powered directly from those outputs. ? This method works quite well.? If you have a situation where you want to have more than one LED light up to indicate a short (such as when you need to be able to see it from multiple locations) you can easily add more LEDs. ? You can also not use a central display and instead locate the LEDs 'near where the short is located' ... depending upon your needs - and also upon how your layout is configured. ? I find the above methods equal/better than the 1156 bulb type of short protection - but that is my preference and YMMV. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? - Jim in the PNW P.S. Just noticed that this thread is about the PowerCab.? I have a PowerPro system.? Most of ? ? ? ?the above is different because using a PSX with a PowerCab is difficult due to its low ? ? ? ?power rating (amps).? Yes, I would use the 1156 with a PowerCab.? I have a PowerCab ? ? ? ?and use it for my programming track.? It is also capable of being used as a wireless ? ? ? ?ProCab (wireless board installed) for a PowerPro system. |
Re: 1156 Bulb Short Protection and Powercab
John,
I am currently using an enhanced DCC overcurrent protection solution using a #2057 taillight lamp and a 0.9A 'PTC Fuse'. This combination works to limit DCC short circuit current to a lower value than using the 1156/1157 lamp by itself. Reference and instructions:? The component cost is still far less than electronic circuit breakers. |
Re: 1156 Bulb Short Protection and Powercab
Howdy. I have used it.? I had a Keller OnBoard system orginally, and used the 1156 bulbs for protection of each block. When I converted to DCC, I added PSX circuit breakers but (mostly) left the 1156 bulbs in place.? The DCC breakers function as expected 95% of the time, and in certain situations the 1156 bulbs will illuminate - showing me exactly which block is causing the problem.? I've found that useful sometimes. But, due to that 5% where there seems to be some 'competition' between the 1156 bulbs and the DCC breakers, and also due to a minor voltage pull from the bulbs, I plan on removing them soon. As to whether the 1156 bulbs would be enough on their own for a DCC system, without something like the PSX breakers - I don't know. On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 8:08?PM john <john.p.dunn@...> wrote: I have used automotive brake lamps for circuit protection for years. Simple, the current of the lamps controls the current of the circuit. Achieve max current draw, the lamp lights, resistance becomes infinite, trains stop safely until the load is dropped. Has anyone used this system to protect DCC blocks. I have seen commercial power protection that had lamps involved.? |
Re: DCC system shorts out
¿ªÔÆÌåÓý
Thank you so much guys for all the great feedback. I will follow your suggestion to try and solve my dilemma.?
Thanks again,
Mike Ballou
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Puckdropper via groups.io <puckdropper@...>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 10:22 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [w4dccqa] DCC system shorts out ?
Take a look at your switches. They direct power in different ways. You may need to add insulated joiners on the diverging end.
When wiring, I often do one rail at a time. I'll drop all the back rail feeders to the bus then do all the front rail feeders. Puckdropper |
Re: DCC system shorts out
¿ªÔÆÌåÓýSounds like you¡¯re crossing bus lines and creating the short through the wiring itself.Make a test buzzer, ?how to on wiringfordcc.com. ?Use the buzzer when doing your wiring. ?It will buzz if you create a short while wiring¡? , plz pardon the spelling! Jim Zarnick On Jul 27, 2023, at 2:33 PM, mjbuffy@... wrote:
|
DCC system shorts out
Good day everyone, I have a question. I have an N-scale layout. I am using Peco code 80 flex track with Peco Insu-frog switches. I started running feeder wires the other day and I found that is If install more than one feeder my MRC system shorts out. Sometimes it occurs when I through a switch and sometimes the system shorts out the system with more than one feeder. Any ideas out there?
thank you, Mike Ballou mjbuffy@... |
Re: Block detection for turnouts
Thank you Allan! On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 1:56 PM, Allan AE2V <bigboy@...> wrote:
That's right, Rob. |
Block detection for turnouts
Hi - I¡¯m doing block detection for the first time and I¡¯m gapping one rail per the BDL168 instructions. If a turnout will be its own block, then I¡¯m assuming it needs a total of 3 gaps? One gap leading into the turnout on the throat side, one gap exiting the turnout on the main and one gap exiting on the diverging. Is that correct?
Thanks, Rob |
Re: Walthers code 83 ho single crossovers
Interesting product.? I could have used a couple of them!
Other than mechanically linking a couple of turnouts, I suspect that Walthers probably insulated the two turnouts from each other.? This would give the modeler maximum flexibility to wire them however they needed to, to suit their particular railroad.? If this is the case, just wire them up as you would if you had used two turnouts with insulated joiners connecting the diverging routes. Allan |
Re: Walthers code 83 ho single crossovers
Does your track scheme call for the ¡°straight through ¡° paths to have the same polarity? ie- no isolating gaps on the crossover path. Simply isolate the entire crossover section (8 rail gaps) and power the whole section through a track current detector.
If your polarity scheme requires isolating gaps between the straight through paths, you probably need to cut rails to provide them. Then provide two track current detectors for occupancy signaling DonV |
Re: Added album Malport, CN Weston Sub
#photo-notice
Sorry, I tried to provide a plan but was unable to sort out how to enter a photo. On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 5:00?PM Group Notification <[email protected]> wrote:
|
Added album Malport, CN Weston Sub
#photo-notice
Group Notification
William Waithe <wwsd40@...> added the album Malport, CN Weston Sub : AR Reversing section. the green area is the reversing sector. |
to navigate to use esc to dismiss