Blair,

? OK, now that we have that sorted out ... the only other way I see a problem is
if you have two different reversing sections -and- have them on both sides of
the cross-over section.? Your cross-over section is very short (compared to the
length of even a short train.? IF you have both 'sides' of the cross-over section
being a reversing section - then you can have them fighting each other (it's
more of a timing thing) because the wheels will close the gaps on both sides of
the cross-over section and connect?everything up as one long piece of track.
If you have two reversing sections connected to each other (even if they are
only connected by the train) - sooner or later?(and usually sooner) they will
end up both trying to "correct the short".? The?-best- result when that
happens is that the train will stutter its way thru until?the double reversing
clears - this could even mean you'd see the train?hesitate for every car in the
train as it hits one or the other or both of those cross-over gaps.
? Keep alives will keep the train moving forward and eventually it will clear
and run smoothly - but it's pretty ugly to watch happening.? Testing with
just an engine or any train short enough to fit entirely in the cross-over
section will not demonstrate this undesirable phenomenon.
? You -may- be able to deal with this problem by setting up the two
reversers to trip at a different timing (one longer than the other) but
even then it may not be the final solution.? Sometimes, what we
think needs to be a reversing section - actually doesn't need to be.
? In your case, you may be able to use a normal (non-reversing)
breaker for the "right side of the cross-overs" and a reversing one
for the left side (including the cross-overs?).? I haven't gone thru?
your track plan and worked out if this will work or not ... I'll let you
do that.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? - Jim

P.S. Yes, I've seen this happen on a large layout where the "non-clearing"
train was longer than the reversing section.? The trains stuttering their
way thru this situation were in hidden staging and so the layout owner
didn't realize why the stutter was happening.

P.P.S. I strongly recommend the use of PSX breakers and reversers and
? ? ? ? ? would not do any layout with any other brand.? Amongst other
? ? ? ? ? things they provide is the ability to set both the trip current and the
? ? ? ? ? trip sensitivity (aka timing) with jumpers on the board.

Yes Jim, I did.? But even more disturbing, I posted an incorrect drawing, then kept defending it as correct.? The gaps, of course, should have been on the staging side of the crossing, because there's no need to reverse the crossing.? What I am reversing are the two sidings, the build tracks, the staging yard ladders, and the staging yard, no more no less.? Electrically, the sidings and all non-staging track will be one sub-booster district, and the 12 staging tracks a second sub-booster district.

Note to self - when what others are saying doesn't make sense, make sure you've given them the right working info.? Sheesh!

Mea Culpa.? Apologies to you, Al, Steve, Don V, Wouter, and Don W. 'Nuff said.

Blair

Hello All,

I now have the AR10 working with those two blocks.? It was miss wired.? Once I had the correct wiring setup it works great.

My only question about the WYE frog I think I have that figured out too.? ?I believe I only need to solder one side or the other of the frog? ?I will test that once I get my Tortoise installed tomorrow.

Thanks


--
Tom Grassi
trgrassijr@...

Blair,

? You missed my point "whenever any train is crossing over".? Said
another way - set it up so that whenever the turnouts are set to
cross-over then another train "can't enter the cross-over section".
Obviously the intended cross over route has to be powered - I'm
saying that the 'other' route should have enough track that is dead
(when the cross over is set) that another train can't attempt to
enter the cross over section from either of the other two approaches.
And that it is going to need to be a considerable length of track in
order to cover the situation of an ABBA set of your longest locos.
I would use "3 or even 4 feet" of dead track to protect that short.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?- Jim

Hello All,

I have added to my layout a Helix and upper level,? ?Still working on both of those.? But on my lower level to the helix is all new also.
For the original layout I have an oval? on the oval I added two new turnouts? one is for going to the Helix and the other is coming back from the helix.
They both connect to a Atlas code 83 WYE Turnout 560.? All my track is Atlas code 83.? After I added feeders to my helix and to the lower level all polarity was fine.??
Then I got to the WYE for the return leg and that was the opposite polarity? . Both turnouts and the WYE make like a triangle. So now I have a reversing Loop problem.

I purchased a NCE AR10? yes my layout runs all NCE equipment.??

I connected the feeders From Block 26 which is the return section of track and Block 28 which is the WYE?
As soo as the Engine front wheel hit the block 28 it trips the breaker and my entire Power Pro shuts down.
So I disconnected my track from the WYE back to the Helix and from the Main Layout so only Block 28 and Block 26 were active.? ?Still the same problem

did several tests I removed the NCE BD20's from the feeders made not difference.

I use a Black and Red feeder wire on my layout Red is the inside rail and the black in the outside which is the insulated rail for my block detection.

On the WYE all rails on all three side are insulated.? The section of track on Block 28 is insulated at the other end which is connected to a turnout on Block 9

Block 25 is the other side of the WYE also insulated at the other end which is connected to a turnout on Block 7

So all my track is insulated

So after speaking with NCE support today we came up with this test.? Install my Tortoise machine and power the frog which will set the correct polarity.

My question is on the Atlas WYE the FROG is metal and has to connectors one on each side of the frog.??
do I connect both side of the frog to the Tortoise???
Does one side of the frog go to one relay on the tortoise? and the other side of the frog go to the other relay on the tortoise?

I read and see where the reverse loop has to be longer than you longest train.? Well this is like a straight away.? It is not a circle.

I can post my JMRI layout on the forum if you need to see what I am trying to do.

My upper layout has two reversing loops that I have not started yet so this exercise will be handy.


Any other ideas,


Thank you

Tom

??





--
Tom Grassi
trgrassijr@...

I would use a 1 Ampere "Microswitch" or sometimes called a lever or roller switch.? Note that a magnetic reed switch is not a "Microswitch".?? This rating will only be exceeded under a rare condition where there is a short circuit and the lift gate switch activates at precisely the same moment as the short.? All DCC systems will remove power milliseconds after the short occurs.

If you use a higher rated switch the contact material will be silver or similar metal and constitutes what is called a wet contact.? The reliability of this contact depends on enough current being present to wet or partially melt the contact material on making the contact. ? Most of the time you will have little or no current flowing when the contact is made.? A high current contact will fail over time by oxidizing the surfaces.? There are exceptions but in general you want a gold or dry contact and gold contacts are rarely rated for more than 1 Ampere.? Exceptions are switches that are designed to rub off oxidization each time they are made, or combination contacts that are silver with a gold over plating.? Combination contacts will remain dry contacts? if the current is always low.? In a high current situation the gold layer of the combination contact is burnt by the current leaving a silver contact.

There are a lot of engineers out there that do not know this information.? It is rarely taught in school and in my case was learned in the field.

Best Regards,
Ken Harstine

34 AWG magnet wire is rated for 300mA and therefore should be usable for most applications in a locomotive.

I recently discovered TEMCO brand magnet wire.? They have an insulator that is designed to be removed by soldering.

34 AWG Copper Magnet Wire MW0085 - 2 oz Magnetic Coil Red Soderon 155

The price is reasonable, and shipping is free.

Best,
Ken Harstine
Holyoke, mA

I am about to leave for 2 days; I have become aware that postings are appearing here on groups.io that I am not seeing on email; not sure why, as since some are coming through, it shouldn't be a spam filter.? Since I cannot log onto groups.io for the next two days, I will cease responding until I return to this forum, in order to not add a layer of confusion by not responding to posts I'm actually not seeing.
Thanks, everyone, for hanging in with me as I work through this.
Blair

开云体育

See below

Blair,
? I understand more now (fully?).? Since you are committed to this track plan
here is what I suggest as a "solution that will make things possible/easy
enough that it works".
? Figure out a way that you isolate the 4 foot section with the double
cross-over so that - it is strictly "one train at a time" whenever any
train is crossing over.

How so?? When the four turnouts are aligned such that there are two
|| running tracks, there is no electrical problem whatsoever.? Agreed, when
the turnouts are set "X", two trains can't progress at the same time.? That's
just a physics thing; two objects cannot occupy the same space.

If you have a second train entering that 4' section
while another train is crossing over you are going to have a short that
will be unresolvable ... without dragging one or both trains forward or
backward by hand.

Don't see your point; however, I did not indicate each and every electrical
gap on that drawing - I can do so, if you think it will change your concerns.
The passing siding and main are still powered, and
nothing prevents trains from running on them.? As for the turnouts and
crossing, I will assemble it again and power it, but I've checked this all
out electrically previously.

? My solution would be to make the approach tracks on the "other routes"
(other than the acitve cross-over route) completely DEAD for at least as
long a?distance as an ABBA set of your longest locomotive - even if you
don't?ever intend (now) to run such an ABBA set.? Don't forget that an

ABBA set,?with keep alives, can run all the way until the last locomotive
is in the?dead track before it stops.? I would wire it up/control it so that
the act of throwing either cross-over route kills the approaches on the
other route.

There are only two settings, as I've repeatedly set.? All turnouts set for X,
or all turnouts set for ||.? As such, in one setting, the depicted section
resembles a big 'O', and in the other setting it resembles a big '8'.

Perhaps I'm just thick, but I'm not seeing your concerns.? Please explain
the added complexity of the crossover that I'm not seeing.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? - Jim

To me, it's of little use to de-energize the bridge track itself, as if you actually drop the bridge when a train is on it, "you ain't paying much attention!".? YMMV, though, as perhaps your bridge is remotely operated, where the person causing the opening isn't standing at the bridge waiting to go through the opening?

Blair

Dave

That's up to you.? I'd rather use contacts in the bridge area to simply energize relay(s) that are placed where it is best to interrupt the DCC bus.? But, as usual, Rule number 1 applies - it's your railroad!

Blair

Blair,
? I understand more now (fully?).? Since you are committed to this track plan
here is what I suggest as a "solution that will make things possible/easy
enough that it works".
? Figure out a way that you isolate the 4 foot section with the double
cross-over so that - it is strictly "one train at a time" whenever any
train is crossing over.? If you have a second train entering that 4' section
while another train is crossing over you are going to have a short that
will be unresolvable ... without dragging one or both trains forward or
backward by hand.??
? My solution would be to make the approach tracks on the "other routes"
(other than the acitve cross-over route) completely DEAD for at least as
long a?distance as an ABBA set of your longest locomotive - even if you
don't?ever intend (now) to run such an ABBA set.? Don't forget that an
ABBA set,?with keep alives, can run all the way until the last locomotive
is in the?dead track before it stops.? I would wire it up/control it so that
the act of throwing either cross-over route kills the approaches on the
other route.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? - Jim

What I want is for both the track on the drop-gate itself and the leads in either direction to be controlled by the position of the drop-gate. (i.e. when the gate is down, the leads have no power.) To do that, it seems I will need two switches, one on either end, or use a contact switch (e.g. a ‘pogo peg’) that passes power across the closed gate’s gap.

dave

Swanny, it sounds like all you've done is depowered the track on the bridge - but I hope that's just a misreading.? What should be done is removing power from the approaches to the bridge, which can get very complicated in the case of multiple routes approaching the bridge.
Blair

I suspect over-currenting the alarm switch will only result in it's premature failure, not a fire or other calamity.? In a protective situation like this, switch failure is fail-safe.? Still, it might be better if the alarm switch simply dropped power to a SPST cutout relay.? Or, as the OP asked, use a switch capable of dropping the DCC bus by itself.
Part of this discussion should revolve around topology - you want to drop the DCC power for 'some distance' either side of the bridge, to prevent running into the abyss, but also to prevent backing into the abyss.? So it's not about dropping power to a 12" section of rail, but rather a significant length of power bus.? As such, it may be more convenient to locate relays on opposite sides of the bridge to drop their respective sections of bus.? IF that's the case, then use the alarm switch to drop the control voltage to those relays, thereby reducing it's current requirements as well as increasing your protection.
No one can tell you the right approach without more information than has been given.
??
By the way, I do this on my 'guillotine' wall gate, which has tracks on both sides, and rises 24" to make life easier when working, not running trains - if the gate is down in position, it powers a relay that allows DCC power to that whole section of the layout; if the gate is lifted, that whole section of the layout dies.? Since the gate never opens in regular operation, that works for me.? My lower level drops and liftouts (4 of them) will need to be more "subtle", as one or more may need to move during operation (as I get older and less limber), but for now, all-or-nothing is acceptable, as only the upper level is constructed and operable.
Blair

Steve

Interspersed comments below.

Regards

Blair

On 2021-08-18 23:14, Steve Haas wrote:

"In the photos area, under my name, as we now can't load JPG files to the files area."

Blair,

I've downloaded and reviewed your JPG.

In my opinion you're making this more complex than it needs to be.

Believe me, I wish it were so.? Read on.

I'll get to that, but first answer a couple of questions:

1) These are the only paths that a train uses to reverse - Yes/No?

Yes, as far as trains on this portion of the layout.

2) How much of this trackage has already been built?

Almost all, the area around the crossover will go in last, probably at the end of the month.

3) How much of this trackage that has been built has already been wired?

In progress; yard wired, sidings mostly so

Back to the track plan:

1) If you remove (for discussion purposes) the double crossover at "Y", all you have are three loops around the layout, never needing to reverse electrical phasing:
A) Loop "C',
B) Loop "C-B-A-B-C", and
C) Loop "C-B-A-D-C".

Wire "Rail A" to the outer rail & "Rail "B" to the inner rail (or vice versa) and you are done with this stage of electrical design - no reversing sections, just straight DCS> Booster>PSX and PSX-AR in parallel (not series) as you have currently noted in the Jpg.

Sure, I get all that, but not where I'm going.

2) Now let's reintroduce that double cross-over - this creates the possibility to reverse trains:

A) Is this track already laid? If not, there's no physical rework needed - just rethinking and re-drawing the wiring specs . . .

Already committed, not laid, see notes below near end.

B) What is the wiring architecture of the crossover? Are the two paths totally isolated electrically from each other? If they are it eliminates a potentially thorny problem. If not, might need a Tam Valley Frog Juicer to manage the four points in the diamond.

Aware of the issues I may face here, but thanks.? The crossover is 4 turnouts and a diamond, all in PECO Insulfrog C100.? As such, I have near-total flexibility for the wiring presuming I put in enough insulated joiners.? As Insulfrog, I don't have any frogs to worry about, per se.

C) Now let's address where to place the reversing sections themselves: Knowing only what you've shared with us and the fact that this a logical and not necessarily a scale drawing of the layout, I'd suggest the following:
i) Two reversing sections:
` a) the first is in the upper right quadrant of loop "A", starting one train length before the upper left turnout in the crossover, and extending to the gaps in all four rails to the right of that turnout,
b) the second is in the lower right quadrant of loop "A", starting one train length before the lower left turnout in the crossover, and extending to the gaps in all four rails to the right of _that_ turnout.

No, that won't work.? Loop A does more than just a pass around the layout.? It interchanges with another RR (the ACR, the real focus of this monster).? If I made your (a) section reversing, I would be making a mainline-and-passing track-and division point yard(location called White River) all reversing; trains could be entering the passing track at one end while another enters the mainline track at the other, which violates Rule 1.? Similarly with (b), the main and siding at Franz may be entered and exited simultaneously.

ii) One reversing section:
a) If you are not wedded to the double crossover, and the straight section in the middle of the diagram is physically long enough, consider replacing the double crossover with two single crossovers at least a train length apart. There are folks involved in layout design that suggest this increases operating flexibility - I'm not in a position to comment on that, perhaps others will chime in. If you're interested in this approach, let me know and I can help with location of the single reversing section needed to do things that way.

Yes, that would work, but is not physically possible in this design.? I have about 4' where those two tracks are parallel and together; it's either the crossover depicted, or nothing.

Note that all variations of what I've suggested eliminates the need to have reversers of any type be in series with PSX units. This is important, because as others have said, A PSX-AR is just another PSX with an AR unit added in - they are not designed to be used in sequence.

N.B. This design originated with the following assumptions.? 1) the reversing of the whole yard would be done with a 10A DPDT relay driven synchronously with the Tortoises of the crossover. 2) the yard, approaches, and X trackage would be handled by four sections of a PM42 downstream of the reversing relay.? As I saw it, then and now, the design will work.? At this point, I'm only trying to accommodate the needs of an increasing number of sound units, both in terms of increased current draw, and in terms of 'loss of fidelity' when something happens(momentary shorts, and of course the act of reversing) and the locos all reset.? The latter is partly addressed by turning off tracks that are not routed to - at a maximum, only two tracks in the yard need to be powered at any one time.? Also, if a passing track is isolated by the turnouts at both ends being set against the train, there is no need for that track to be powered.? But I would prefer electronic protection and reversing, if I can accomplish it.? Track D, by the way, allows me to also use this staging yard as a temporary end point for the ACR, as we slowly build out the double deck 600' mainline.? Without it, I'd need another portable yard to allow me to run trains while the lower half of the layout gets built. Similarly, track D on the second staging level allows temporary termination of the north end of the ACR.? Both of these options are very important at this time, but will likely be removed in the final version of the layout.

Discussion of physical reality.? Loop D runs around the walls of a 10x28 room.? The tracks from N to L runs CCW around the room, rising at 2%; similarly, the track from S to Q runs CW around the room, rising at 2%; point Y actually exists 8" 'above' the Letter D, if we were to try to relate this diagram to reality.? I guess I'll upload an actual track diagram sometime this AM, though it's likely to drag the conversation away from the focus - reversing.

Blair

Give a holler if you would like to discuss further!

Best regards,

Steve

Steve Haas
Snoqualmie, WA

"In the photos area, under my name, as we now can't load JPG files to the files area."

Blair,

I've downloaded and reviewed your JPG.

In my opinion you're making this more complex than it needs to be.

I'll get to that, but first answer a couple of questions:

1) These are the only paths that a train uses to reverse - Yes/No?
2) How much of this trackage has already been built?
3) How much of this trackage that has been built has already been wired?

Back to the track plan:

1) If you remove (for discussion purposes) the double crossover at "Y", all you have are three loops around the layout, never needing to reverse electrical phasing:
A) Loop "C',
B) Loop "C-B-A-B-C", and
C) Loop "C-B-A-D-C".

Wire "Rail A" to the outer rail & "Rail "B" to the inner rail (or vice versa) and you are done with this stage of electrical design - no reversing sections, just straight DCS> Booster>PSX and PSX-AR in parallel (not series) as you have currently noted in the Jpg.

2) Now let's reintroduce that double cross-over - this creates the possibility to reverse trains:

A) Is this track already laid? If not, there's no physical rework needed - just rethinking and re-drawing the wiring specs . . .
B) What is the wiring architecture of the crossover? Are the two paths totally isolated electrically from each other? If they are it eliminates a potentially thorny problem. If not, might need a Tam Valley Frog Juicer to manage the four points in the diamond.
C) Now let's address where to place the reversing sections themselves: Knowing only what you've shared with us and the fact that this a logical and not necessarily a scale drawing of the layout, I'd suggest the following:
i) Two reversing sections:
` a) the first is in the upper right quadrant of loop "A", starting one train length before the upper left turnout in the crossover, and extending to the gaps in all four rails to the right of that turnout,
b) the second is in the lower right quadrant of loop "A", starting one train length before the lower left turnout in the crossover, and extending to the gaps in all four rails to the right of _that_ turnout.
ii) One reversing section:
a) If you are not wedded to the double crossover, and the straight section in the middle of the diagram is physically long enough, consider replacing the double crossover with two single crossovers at least a train length apart. There are folks involved in layout design that suggest this increases operating flexibility - I'm not in a position to comment on that, perhaps others will chime in. If you're interested in this approach, let me know and I can help with location of the single reversing section needed to do things that way.

Note that all variations of what I've suggested eliminates the need to have reversers of any type be in series with PSX units. This is important, because as others have said, A PSX-AR is just another PSX with an AR unit added in - they are not designed to be used in sequence.

Give a holler if you would like to discuss further!

Best regards,

Steve

Steve Haas
Snoqualmie, WA