Heathcote Electronics' uncoupler for tension lock couplings

[Tony Teague]

Has anyone installed one of these? http://www.heathcote-electronics.co.uk/uncoupler_oo_gauge.html

I'd be interested to understand their experience of it in use.#

In a recent discussion on Graham Muspratt's 'Canute Road' thread, he has explained his own solution to the uncoupling problem, based upon Dingham Uncoupler electromagnets, see: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/114980-canute-road-quay/

I have a dreadful misture of all types of coupling on my layout and I need to standardise, especially for those wagons that I intend to shunt, so I am keen to identify the optimum solution.

All help welcomed!

 

Tony

[philsandy]

Tony,

 

Have no experience of the Heathcote uncoupler, but it looks very effective.

 

Have you considered using Brian Kirby's method.

It uses Bachmann tension lock couplings, with a slight modification and magnets concealed under the track. Very cheap to install

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=35605

[dave parker]

Has anyone installed one of these? http://www.heathcote-electronics.co.uk/uncoupler_oo_gauge.html

I'd be interested to understand their experience of it in use.#

In a recent discussion on Graham Muspratt's 'Canute Road' thread, he has explained his own solution to the uncoupling problem, based upon Dingham Uncoupler electromagnets, see: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/114980-canute-road-quay/

I have a dreadful misture of all types of coupling on my layout and I need to standardise, especially for those wagons that I intend to shunt, so I am keen to identify the optimum solution.

All help welcomed!

hi Tony

I have purchased 3 of them but not yet got round to installing them ,however there is a demo on free BRM dvd aug 2015 if that is any help. I am working on the fiddle yard on my Buxton layout at the moment and fitting the uncouplers is next job cheers Dave

[Tony Teague]

Tony,

 

Have no experience of the Heathcote uncoupler, but it looks very effective.

 

Have you considered using Brian Kirby's method.

It uses Bachmann tension lock couplings, with a slight modification and magnets concealed under the track. Very cheap to install

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=35605

Thanks Philsandy, and no I had not seen Brian Kirby's post which looks very interesting.

The principles of it are very close to what Graham Muspratt has since implemented, excepting that Graham is using electromagnets.

One way or another I think I am going to have to settle on tension locks, and a single version (probably Bachman) at that.

I have quite a number of Kadees fitted but they just don't look right on wagons, and I have also found them unreliable if not very accurately adjusted, especially at changes in gradient.

I also have 3-links, and whilst these look good, they do not lend themselves to remote uncoupling.

Thanks for your help, all food for thought.

Tony

[Tony Teague]

hi Tony

I have purchased 3 of them but not yet got round to installing them ,however there is a demo on free BRM dvd aug 2015 if that is any help. I am working on the fiddle yard on my Buxton layout at the moment and fitting the uncouplers is next job cheers Dave

Thanks for this Dave; I don't have the BRM video as I don't keep them but the demo on the Heathcote site looks convincing.

I'll be interested to know how you get on with the installation.

Many thanks

Tony

[philsandy]

 

I have quite a number of Kadees fitted but they just don't look right on wagons, and I have also found them unreliable if not very accurately adjusted, especially at changes in gradient.

 

Tony

 

Using the Brian Kirby system, the Bachmann couplings also have to be very accurately set for them to work properly.

They all have to be exactly the same height. Not because they will not uncouple, but because they will  when you don't want them to.

Bachmann couplings do vary slightly in height, and usually a little bit of bending up or down usually does the trick to get them all the same.

 

I found on the majority of my stock the underside of the coupling draw bar was 5.5 mm from the rail tops.

A simple home made gauge ie. a small piece of wood or plastic 5.5 mm thick placed on the rail tops, then roll a wagon up to it and check that the coupling draw bar just clears the gauge.

[The Johnster]

I have recently 'reverted' to t/ls after years of using scale screw and instanters (my eyesight and steadiness of hand weren't up to it any more) and have had a delightful time re-discovering all those problems from days gone by...   The advice about all the couplers being the same height is important, but don't make the mistake of assuming, as I did, that this equates to the same depth beneath the solebar.  It doesn't.  I mix types fairly indiscriminately, and find them reliable as couplers, automatic coupling being achieved and I have yet to have a train part in service as long as the bar height is correct.  By correct I mean the same as all the others set to whatever height new Bachmann stock is; I've never bothered measuring it; the 5.5mm mentioned above sounds about right and I should probably make a wooden gauge to my height.

 

Uncoupling is something else, and if anything fiddlier than scale couplings.  I have a home made shunting pole/uncoupler which attacks the problem from 2 angles; on one end is a stiff wire angled to be able to lift the hooks. and on the other a sort of stiff card spade arrangement which you insert between the vehicles at rail height and lift the droppers. Still fiddly, but not as bad as coupling up with scales.  As in 12 inch to the foot practice, an 'ease up' or 'slacken off' movement is sometimes required, demanding excellent communication between the driver (left hand = control knob) and the shunter (right hand = shunting pole).  Very satisfying but a bit fiddly on an exhibition layout or a large layout where the shunter (right hand = shunting pole) is at a bit of a stretch.  I can get away with it on my bedroom blt.  The shunting pole is due for modification with an led penlight.

 

I have been labouring (well, it wasn't really labouring in the sense of hard work) under the misapprehension that automatic uncoupling with t/ls demanded the unsightly ramps, and will have a look at the magnetic systems described, but I am not sure that I will go for them completely.  Any such system requires specific places on the layout at which uncoupling is to take place, and I require the freedom of movement to be able to uncouple anywhere within station limits.  A possibility is a magnetic uncoupler a specific location, such as for detaching locos from incoming trains before running around, and maybe one or two in sidings, and use the shunting pope hook/spade/stick for everything else...

 

But how do you prevent the magnet from uncoupling your stock when it is at a stand over it and you want it to remain coupled?  How does it work anyway; if it works by magnetically repelling the hooks, the hooks themselves must be magnetised which is going to play havoc with my pole uncoupling, especially if the wire becomes magnetised as well!

 

More research needed.

Edited January 4, 2017 by The Johnster

[The Johnster]

Okay, followed the link to the original thread about the Brian Kirby method, which has explained things.  It's a brilliantly simple and clever idea (I hope he's patented it, so some manufacturer doesn't rip it off), and it's deffo worth investigating, but I am a little worried about it's reliance on couplings with magnetically inert hooks, I.e. Bachmanns, not in principle so much as as applied to my layout and needs.  Not beyond the wit of man, even this ham fisted version, to install baccy couplers on all my stock, but I've just recently replaced the couplers on all my stock except for very recently acquired baccy with Hornby t/ls and ran into all sorts of faffy small scale fiddliness with those; enough for now, I've got a layout to finish!

[Tony Teague]

Thanks Philsandy and The Johnster for your further thoughts on this.

I can see that I am not alone in adressing this problem, but equally that there are several viable solutions.

I shall just have to take the plunge & try one of them out!

I'll post the results here or on my layout thread in due course.

 

Tony

[The Johnster]

I have recently 'reverted' to t/ls after years of using scale screw and instanters (my eyesight and steadiness of hand weren't up to it any more) and have had a delightful time re-discovering all those problems from days gone by...   The advice about all the couplers being the same height is important, but don't make the mistake of assuming, as I did, that this equates to the same depth beneath the solebar.  It doesn't.  I mix types fairly indiscriminately, and find them reliable as couplers, automatic coupling being achieved and I have yet to have a train part in service as long as the bar height is correct.  By correct I mean the same as all the others set to whatever height new Bachmann stock is; I've never bothered measuring it; the 5.5mm mentioned above sounds about right and I should probably make a wooden gauge to my height.

 

Uncoupling is something else, and if anything fiddlier than scale couplings.  I have a home made shunting pole/uncoupler which attacks the problem from 2 angles; on one end is a stiff wire angled to be able to lift the hooks. and on the other a sort of stiff card spade arrangement which you insert between the vehicles at rail height and lift the droppers. Still fiddly, but not as bad as coupling up with scales.  As in 12 inch to the foot practice, an 'ease up' or 'slacken off' movement is sometimes required, demanding excellent communication between the driver (left hand = control knob) and the shunter (right hand = shunting pole).  Very satisfying but a bit fiddly on an exhibition layout or a large layout where the shunter (right hand = shunting pole) is at a bit of a stretch.  I can get away with it on my bedroom blt.  The shunting pole is due for modification with an led penlight.

 

I have been labouring (well, it wasn't really labouring in the sense of hard work) under the misapprehension that automatic uncoupling with t/ls demanded the unsightly ramps, and will have a look at the magnetic systems described, but I am not sure that I will go for them completely.  Any such system requires specific places on the layout at which uncoupling is to take place, and I require the freedom of movement to be able to uncouple anywhere within station limits.  A possibility is a magnetic uncoupler a specific location, such as for detaching locos from incoming trains before running around, and maybe one or two in sidings, and use the shunting pope hook/spade/stick for everything else...

 

But how do you prevent the magnet from uncoupling your stock when it is at a stand over it and you want it to remain coupled?  How does it work anyway; if it works by magnetically repelling the hooks, the hooks themselves must be magnetised which is going to play havoc with my pole uncoupling, especially if the wire becomes magnetised as well!

 

More research needed.

 

Shunting Pole.  Athough the idea of a shunting pope, uncoupling wagons on the Vatican Railway with his crook is appealing...

[ejstubbs]

Okay, followed the link to the original thread about the Brian Kirby method, which has explained things.  It's a brilliantly simple and clever idea (I hope he's patented it, so some manufacturer doesn't rip it off), and it's deffo worth investigating, but I am a little worried about it's reliance on couplings with magnetically inert hooks, I.e. Bachmanns, not in principle so much as as applied to my layout and needs.  Not beyond the wit of man, even this ham fisted version, to install baccy couplers on all my stock, but I've just recently replaced the couplers on all my stock except for very recently acquired baccy with Hornby t/ls and ran into all sorts of faffy small scale fiddliness with those; enough for now, I've got a layout to finish!

 

As an alternative to replacing the complete coupling, you could look at the replacement hooks available from PH Designs: link.  These are etched in brass, so non-magnetic, and a Hornby-specific version is listed.  The idea is that you attach a piece of magnetic material using the wee holes at the end of the extended lower arm.  You can use the classic Brian Kirby bent staple, or some people suggest florist's wire - not a product whose specification I've ever managed to pin down to the point where I felt able to place an order, TBH.  As the hooks are brass you would probably want to blacken them eg using something like this.

 

FWIW, I did experiment briefly with the Bachmann version but I couldn't find a way to attach the bent staple reliably.  Also, the hook seemed too loose on its pivot which meant that it tipped over rather than flipping up when over the magnet, which in turn meant that it didn't actual uncouple.  This latter problem might have been due to using too powerful a magnet, though.  I did persist for a while with the classic Kirby method, which involved converting all my stock to Bachmann couplings (not too difficult an undertaking, I found) but since then I have switched to using Kadees.  (I still have most of the PH Designs Bachmann hook fret unused if anyone would like it?)

 

Googling should reveal a number of other discussion threads on RMWeb, and other railway modelling forums, about Brian Kirby's idea, its pros and cons, and variations upon it which people have experimented with (including using smaller and less obtrusive but more powerful - and more expensive - neodymium magnets instead of flat ferrite magnets shucked out of cheap magnetic cupboard door catches).

[philsandy]

 

Googling should reveal a number of other discussion threads on RMWeb, and other railway modelling forums, about Brian Kirby's idea, its pros and cons, and variations upon it which people have experimented with (including using smaller and less obtrusive but more powerful - and more expensive - neodymium magnets instead of flat ferrite magnets shucked out of cheap magnetic cupboard door catches).

 

I used these   http://www.first4magnets.com/circular-disc-rod-magnets-c34/15mm-dia-x-0-5mm-thick-n42-neodymium-magnet-0-28kg-pull-p2582#ps_1-872

 

15mm dia. and only 0,5mm thick, so very easy to conceal in the ballast. For this size they were the weakest magnet available from this supplier, but with enough magnetism to do the job.

Edited January 5, 2017 by philsandy

[Waverley47708]

Some food for thought here as I think about what mechanism I will use on the layout rebuild and extension.  Looks like the Brian Kirby system using the PH design hooks may be the way to go, however what attracted me to this topic originally was the question about the Heatchote system. I have used their multi aspect signal changer thingy before and found it to be very good, however would appreciate any views on their uncoupler as it is a contender on the revised layout.

[Tony Teague]

I used these   http://www.first4magnets.com/circular-disc-rod-magnets-c34/15mm-dia-x-0-5mm-thick-n42-neodymium-magnet-0-28kg-pull-p2582#ps_1-872

 

15mm dia. and only 0,5mm thick, so very easy to conceal in the ballast. For this size they were the weakest magnet available from this supplier, but with enough magnetism to do the job.

Thanks philsandy - very helpful

[Tony Teague]

Some food for thought here as I think about what mechanism I will use on the layout rebuild and extension.  Looks like the Brian Kirby system using the PH design hooks may be the way to go, however what attracted me to this topic originally was the question about the Heatchote system. I have used their multi aspect signal changer thingy before and found it to be very good, however would appreciate any views on their uncoupler as it is a contender on the revised layout.

Yes, my layout has numerous (>70) Heathcote IRDOT's installed, and I particularly use them for automatically moving trains up in my fiddle yard; aside from careful adjustment of sensitivity I have never had any problem with their products - so I am tempted to give the uncoupler a try.

 

Tony

[Broadway Clive]

I wonder if the Heathcote design might not lift wagons off the track if they stop under tension, and if it might be difficult to even accurately position wagons correctly over such a small inconspicuous paddle in certain locations. My ideal design would be for a small spring operated 'wooden plank' ramp held down on the sleepers until released for uncoupling. 

[Tony Teague]

I wonder if the Heathcote design might not lift wagons off the track if they stop under tension, and if it might be difficult to even accurately position wagons correctly over such a small inconspicuous paddle in certain locations. My ideal design would be for a small spring operated 'wooden plank' ramp held down on the sleepers until released for uncoupling. 

I probably share your concern but I am not sure that a spring operated ramp might not carry the same risks?

In the end I guess that the only way is to give one or other approach a try!

Tony

[ejstubbs]

 

I wonder if the Heathcote design might not lift wagons off the track if they stop under tension

 

I probably share your concern but I am not sure that a spring operated ramp might not carry the same risks?

 

The sprung ramps from Hornby and Peco are designed not to do this (that's not to say that they always operate faultlessly!)  A bit more weight in rtr wagons rarely hurts anyway...

 

Some people make uncoupling ramps out of strips of transparent plastic.  The idea is to install the strip between the rails with a slight upward curve, so that it should do the same job as a sprung ramp without being so visually intrusive.  Never tried it myself but I'd imagine it would be easy to get the tension in the ramp wrong and...ping!

 

My ideal design would be for a small spring operated 'wooden plank' ramp held down on the sleepers until released for uncoupling. 

 

You could probably knock something together using a Peco or Hornby sprung ramp with a piece of thread, attached to the underside and running through a hole in the baseboard, to pull it down when not needed for uncoupling.

 

As my Dad used to say, in his day the mantra was: "Only do it electrically if you can't do it mechanically"!

Edited January 6, 2017 by ejstubbs

[Waverley47708]

I used these   http://www.first4magnets.com/circular-disc-rod-magnets-c34/15mm-dia-x-0-5mm-thick-n42-neodymium-magnet-0-28kg-pull-p2582#ps_1-872

 

15mm dia. and only 0,5mm thick, so very easy to conceal in the ballast. For this size they were the weakest magnet available from this supplier, but with enough magnetism to do the job.

 

I see the thicker version has more pull, but from reading your post I wondered if that would be a disadvantage?  sorry if I have misunderstood.

 

15mm dia x 1mm thick N42 Neodymium Magnet - 1.1kg Pull

[Waverley47708]

As an alternative to replacing the complete coupling, you could look at the replacement hooks available from PH Designs: link.  These are etched in brass, so non-magnetic, and a Hornby-specific version is listed.  The idea is that you attach a piece of magnetic material using the wee holes at the end of the extended lower arm.  You can use the classic Brian Kirby bent staple, or some people suggest florist's wire - not a product whose specification I've ever managed to pin down to the point where I felt able to place an order, TBH.  As the hooks are brass you would probably want to blacken them eg using something like this.

 

 

 

Had a look at the PH Design one, I assumed the lower bit is attracted the magnet, but when I read you post I got the impression you need to add something, the comment about "attach a piece of magnetic material".  Is that correct or I am missing something.  What kind of thing can be added?

 

Thanks

[philsandy]

I see the thicker version has more pull, but from reading your post I wondered if that would be a disadvantage?  sorry if I have misunderstood.

 

15mm dia x 1mm thick N42 Neodymium Magnet - 1.1kg Pull

 

A more powerful magnet could cause problems eg. attracting the metal wheels/axles of passing stock.

So you want a magnet just powerful enough to activate the coupling hook, and nothing else, and the ones I used work very well.

The magnets are concealed in the ballast, so they are only millimetres from the activating device (ie. the bent staple attached to the coupling hook) when the stock passes over them.

Some people position magnets under the baseboard itself... in which case you will need a more powerful magnet for that.

 

The PH Design hook, you need to attach a piece of magnetic wire (staple, paper clip) in the holes provided, it is the same system, the BK  system, as invented by Brian Kirby.

[JeremyC]

Using the Brian Kirby system, the Bachmann couplings also have to be very accurately set for them to work properly.

They all have to be exactly the same height. Not because they will not uncouple, but because they will when you don't want them to.

Bachmann couplings do vary slightly in height, and usually a little bit of bending up or down usually does the trick to get them all the same.

 

I found on the majority of my stock the underside of the coupling draw bar was 5.5 mm from the rail tops.

A simple home made gauge ie. a small piece of wood or plastic 5.5 mm thick placed on the rail tops, then roll a wagon up to it and check that the coupling draw bar just clears the gauge.

The coupling standards sheet on the Double O Gauge Society http://www.doubleogauge.com/standards/couplings.htm

which refers to NEM362 shows the height for a tension lock coupling should be 8.5mm to the top of the bar.

Edited January 17, 2017 by JeremyC

[RJS1977]

For some time I've used a fairly basic method of uncoupling - a length of dowel running down through the baseboard with a small piece of card glued on top to perform the uncoupling itself. Worked digitally by me pushing the other end of the dowel underneath the baseboard with my finger!

 

Shortly before Heathcote brought out their kit, I designed something similar (for places where pushing the dowel with my finger wasn't practical), using the MERG Servo Tester kit (£1.86 to MERG members) and an SG90 servo pushing up on a brass rod with card or acetate glued on the end. Coincidentally I was installing one on 'Wallingford' yesterday. Some time I will experiment with other types of servo driver but one of the good things about the MERG Servo Tester is that the servo position is controlled by a variable resistor so it is possible to raise the uncoupler different amounts for different items of rolling stock if necessary.

[vitalspark]

We have decided on Spratt & Winkle but the 3mm frets not the 4mm ones which are over scale and look horrendous also don't attach a lump of wire across the buffers but use the mounting plate with a wire loop and attach to the underside of the wagon below the draw hook.

A simple jig made up to check heights and shim if necessary with plasticard.

Dont use hooks on both ends but a hook plus loop on one end and a loop only on the other.

This aids their operation as with the conventional way of hooks both ends one is drawn to the magnet but the other is invariably not meaning a lot of to and fro to uncouple.

 

Its not necessary just dispense with the hook on one end and apart from near perfect operation it looks neater too..plus a fret goes twice as far!

 

If the height is uniform they are very reliable and won't uncouple even when abused by a sudden stop/start.

As they propel on the lower area of the 'delay' hook they also can be confidently worked this way and we can propel 20 or more Bachmann minerals over reverse crossings without problems.

They don't uncouple unless you pause over the magnet and ease back on the tension but of course you can then buffer up and continue to shunt and it wont recouple which is the whole point of the delay action.

 

Dinghams were mentioned and I have purchased a fret of these and really like the look of them and of course the fact that they can be uncoupled on the move at the press of an electromagnet button is perfect but haven't built any so can't comment.

 

We are often asked about building S&W couplings (simple) and fitting (same) so in recent past years on our demo stand at the Modelrail Scotland show in Glasgow we showed the procedure from start to finish..about 5 minutes.. along with a test track and there was a lot of interest so we are repeating this at this years show in Glasgow in February.

 

If you are visiting the show please visit the Scottish Region Study group demo stand and I will happily build one for you to take home!

 

We have also just finished installing 14 Heathcote IRDOT3 boards for train detection on our new project and looking good but will update later when fully tested.

 

Couple of pics attached.

 

Couplings made up and blackened but still await the three link chains.

 

 

Comparison to tension lock. When blackened and the chain is fitted it looks very convincing.

 

 

 

The S&W couplings are a lot neater than tension lock and when using the hook/bar with a hook at one end only there is one 3 link chain hanging down which looks very effective.

They are also very cheap if you buy the frets and assemble them yourself.

This is very straightforward and a little time making up a simple jig to hold the mounting plates and wire in place to solder up will reap dividends after which you should find the total time to produce one will be about 5 minutes.

It takes me longer to fit the chain but thats probably more to do with my eyesight!

 

The chain of course is vital as the last link is ferrous metal which is what attracts the coupling to the magnet but that adds to the pleasing appearance.

 

As said though for scale appearance you must use 3mm not 4mm and wire loops on the wagons not strung across the buffers.

 

Don't listen to rubbish about 3mm not negotiating tighter curves in yards because if fitted hook one end bar the other apart from auto uncoupling easier they run over shorter radius points in yards without issue.

 

Hope this is of help.

 

Dave. 

 

[vitalspark]

Found a couple of pics showing Conflat fitted with hook one end only and showing the 3 link chain realistically hanging down.

 

 

 

Not great pics but it gives you the idea and shows the imo..neater appearance.

They also work which is the important thing.

 

Demo bench at previous show..be there again at Modelrail Glasgow in Feb.

 

 

Dave.