Junctionmad

I’m all in favour of people creating projects. what I don’t like is then creating ridiculous comparisons and running down a clearly successful method simply to self justify their own effort. it’s simply a form of confirmation bias many of us hear have 30 years or more in DC and DCC and can see what is meaningful and what is not. Equally making stupid claims about speed steps and AC -> DC waveforms just heaps nonsense on ridiculous. ( not to mention processor speed comments ) justify it on its own merits thanks, dont be a shrill

Your knowledge of signalling and absolute block is very limited. There are many cases where two trains can be in a block shunt ahead being one etc warning arrangement permissive block ( goods etc ) it’s much more complicated then u present dc control blocks are not the same as signalling blocks either. Very few model railways have proper signalling blocks. but in order to allow individual dc control they do have far more dc sections and its dc sections that I was referring to.

There are several Bluetooth and WiFi systems with loco based electronics https://www.wifimodelrailroad.com http://www.wifitrax.com http://bluerailtrains.com http://monocacytrains.com And several more making your own will be expensive and the SMD will mean it will have to machine assembled in practices , not accessible to home builders etc.

There are several Bluetooth and WiFi systems with loco based electronics https://www.wifimodelrailroad.com http://www.wifitrax.com http://bluerailtrains.com http://monocacytrains.com

.

No links as they are not public , you have to join merg. But there are currently Arduino based distributed dc solutions , pic based and STM32 solutions in merg at present, plus hand held throttles , smartphone servers etc , all that can control DC in various centralized and distributed formats. Critiquing your design is not to be conflated with being afraid of it. If anything you seem overly eager to self justify , ( a form of confirmation bias )

What you do and how you justify it for yourself is fine , just don’t try and suggest you have a serous competitor to dcc that’s all. Im not afraid of it , why would i , as i have said , it’s not unique , and it doesn’t address current issues on DC layouts nor address the typical DC modeller, that’s all its you , with nonsense 128 versus 1024 speed steps stuff that should be afraid , afraid of speaking nonsense

As a person who has written 802.11 stacks , what you says is largely nonsense for 2.4ghz solutions

This is a bizare statement for a railway modeller to make of course you have often two locos or more in a block , calling on being a classic case , or station pilot engine operation , leaving aside banking and multiple engine heading secondly if you are using the L298 driver , you need to synchronise the PWM waveforms in adjacent blocks otherwise you’ll short the H bridge of one controller repeatedly as the wheels bridge the gap. This was an issue in Mergs CANDC distributed CANbus DC controller and needed a sync line fed to the controllers. How do you address this with DDC The whole project will be a solution looking for a problem, (a)unless you fit loco based decoders , you don’t get any benefit over conventional DC , whether or not you deploy 10 bit speed steps. (B) if you fit loco decoders , you might as well fit DCC decoders and get all the benefits of a developed eco system (c) track side control overs no benefits over conventional DC which can implement the same thing with a few section switches (D) the technical complexity is such DC users will avoid it and DCC users get cab control “out of the box “ (e) right now there’s few throttle options , like a proper button based throttle (/wired or wireless ) (f) you still have to distribute 12 v track power and switch frogs etc , that’s means bus systems and drivers and frog switchers , still have interbaseboard wiring etc. (g) there are no general purpose IO for layout control , multiplexed mimic panels leds etc. (h) WiFi’s comms issues are very hard for the non technical user to debug and issues like IP resolution , routing etc are not well understood by the average railway modeller i wish you well , but it’s intended “ market “ has not been thought through , to run down DCC , whose installed base is literly huge and worldwide in an attempt to justify your project is really pathetic and ridiculous. your attempts to paint DCC communications , given the many 1000 s of layouts using it daily as somehow less then adequate are just rubbish and utter contrived ( like the 128 versus 1024 step non issue and the nonsense comments over AC->DC conversion comparisons ) justfy your project by comparison with normal dc layouts dc layouts (a) technically simple ( #1 reason people stay with it) (b) uses simple components (c) no software or computers needed (d) cheap (f) easy to debug and repair disadvantages (a) does not provide cab control (b) sound is difficult ddc track side control (a) technically complex ( b) no advantage in operations over conventional dc (c) ability to control multiple sections requires lots of track side modules = expensive (d) isolating locos in sidings requires conventional isolating switches & wiring , no savings (e) requires a knowledge of software and electronics hardware (f) needs computer h) not easily user repaired Sorry but but if you think this will convince any numbers of DC or DCC modellers to switch , you’re very misguided

The issue is an exhibitions there are large numbers of disparate and separate WiFi systems, ( I used the term domain ) these consume channels , you have no way of controlling tyrs3 under 802.11 as they are not connected together and hence not subject to management its not conflicting access points , it’s the swamping of all the available WiFi channels and the in ability to control them where they are all unmanaged ( as is the case) Yiu are confusing managed wifi, say at a big conference, like web summit . The facts are that are large MR exhibitions this issue has been experienced and there is a serious question mark over the suitability of WiFi for control

Nope the problem is every layout is a separate Wi-Fi domain and the lack of channel space means there is poor connectivity this means that Wi-Fi can’t get a clear Chanel because there’s isn’t an enterprise wide system in place rather large numbers of individual access points it has already caused significant issues at large exhibitions , it’s not an issue of enterprise Wi-Fi.

Note also ultimately putting a Wi-Fi decoder in the loco is .... reinventing DCC because the technology doesn’t deliver any real advantages 10 bit speed is useless on most model railways, the typical model motor can hardly resolve 128 steps ( a real GM engine has actually only 8 speed notched ! ) wifi brings higher data transfer , for what exactly dcc is a widespread cheap system , you can get $10 decoders and MERGs DCC system is about £60 Railcom provides two way transmission DC users typically stay away from “ tech “ they won’t adopt this system either Wi-Fi brings issues in exhibitions , including IP handling and channel contention the esp32 is a single source proprietary Wi-Fi controller what happens if it’s unavailable using http is very inefficient and what security have to to prevent unauthorised access today for layout control there are several layout busses schemes including openlcb , Merg CBUS , loconet. Adding another is hardly Innovative

As a person that develops for esp32 there’s a lot of hyperbole around the big advantage of dcc is the ability to drive trains wherever you like without section switching as for conversion from AC to dc to ac for dcc , so what esp32 is a dual core processor , many sound decoders in dcc are now high performance 4 core dcc does sound dc doesn’t without lots of additional kit note of you deploy lots of pwm bassed dc controllers along adjacent track sections , you better have synchronised pwm or you’ll short the H bridge . It will be amusing to see how that’s done over Wi-Fi lastly as a builder of a layout with 70 CBUS modules all Can bus nodes I run two wires and power between each board and you clearly have zero idea about the uses for a bi directional layout control bus lastly Merg members have already designed a superior system to yours. Open source for Merg members, why invent the wheel by all means talk up your scheme , but it’s not new , and it will not displace conventional Dc or DCC oh and be aware that experiences in large model railway exhibition means that Wi-Fi is not reliable to the point of near un-usability Ps ESPNOW round trip time to ACK packet is truly awful , it’s a very slow protocol

We first tried to go down the laser cut route , but we wanted to be able to position the crossbraces to avoid the point work above , ie to ensure under board point motors had space. So that meant we got the sheets and bracing cut by computer cnc saw, but assembled based on the track plan

Is it not the case , that there was never “ fade “ but that the next aspect lit slightly ahead of the aspect extinguishing to ensure there never was a blank aspect , even briefly , displayed

wire is very heavy for 00

what do you exactly want to simulate , ie whats the sequence , is it fade out or fade in

you're not alone here Andy

Sure I’m intrigued cause the whole proposal is rather unusual I know exactly how shunt regulators work. What I don’t understand is how you command them remotely without building a whole signal transmission system

Presumably because he’s realized the UK ( effectively ) remains in the single market till end of 2020

It’s a gedanken

From bitter experience hardboard is a disaster and Sundela is good for notice boards and not much else chipboard is useless and MDF isn’t much better unless massively supported and ends up heavier then the forth bridge . woe betide you if any moisture gets in over time. also the mdf in most hardware stores is often very dubious quality. buy your panels from a serious trade sheet materials supplier, after all the baseboard will be used for years and you rely on it intrinsically, spend less on your models and divert more to your baseboards I put a sample of my construction using 6mm birch ply into my steel tool shed for two winters. It’s still completely usable and didn’t warp. Mine unlike the clubs are taped with fibreglass resin whereas the clubs are tape and PVA i also put a piece outside for the same duration it went grey and yucky but it still usable and still shows no obvious delamination . The MdF pieces can’t even be burnt at this stage

How can that be used to adjust the shunt regulator

If you put a shunt regulator across a motor , you will get a constant voltage across the motor , but you can’t vary speed, as you have no means of changing the regulation the simplest shunt regulator would be a zenner in parallel. As the load changes the voltage across the motor would remain constant ( once within the parameters of the shunt regulator ) etc. to measure track resistance you need a known voltage and a known current , the current is known and in theory the voltage drop across the motor is fixed , and as the controller supply voltage is fixed , in theory you have a known track voltage. ( ie controller output voltage -shunt voltage ) However , you have several real world issues * you have an unknown voltage drop in the supply to the loco * a shunt regulator is imperfect , and due to its output resistance it will have a voltage range. This will vary with I2R heat, ambient etc. and the basic response curve will not be precisely linear across the current range * given the very low resistance numbers and the inevitable variability of the track resistance and the factors mentioned above, not to mention the typical noise floor due to the all too common spikes and surges on a typical dc track , means the actual methodology simply wouldn’t be feasible in real applications

2x1 and ply is in my view , rubbish , the materials are different, expansion and contraction are different and half the time the ply ends up supporting the deal. Brace ply with ply, ours is 6mm ply top braced with a matrix of 120mm deep 6mm pieces all CNC cut. Fixing is using tape and glue, no screws , end cheeks are 15mm ply Easy to build heavy and strong , easy to build light and weak , the trick is light and strong Don’t use MDF for any horizontal surfaces , it always dips after a while , keep it for kitchen cabinets . MDF weighs a ton too use good quality Scandiavian or Russian birch ply, interior moisture resistant grade is more then sufficent. WBP is way over the top and often ply marked as ” marine “ is far eastern junk and full of voids , certified marine ply is very expensive Use metal alignment dowels , ( pattern maker dowels ) and a adjustable toggle catch to hold the boards together , toggle catches can be engaged with one hand , which is useful when assembling baseboards we’ve built a 20 baseboard O gauge exhibition layout on this basis. No issue so far after 6 outings and numerous assembly and disassembly actions ( we can only typically erect part of it in our clubhouse ) we used 6mm cork, and yes PVA , might have well not bothered. next extension will use two layers of 3mm closed cell foam , so that the ballast and hence the PVA never come in contact with the ply. , ie one layer forms the shoulder and the other insulates the ballest from the ply. To ensure smooth cuts to ply , try and get the sheets cut in a scoring saw , preferably CNC , that’s what’s we did.