Jump to content

eldavo

Members
  • Content Count

    1,145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

eldavo last won the day on September 26 2010

eldavo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,111 Excellent

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://eldavos.co.uk/Cramdin_yard

Profile Information

  • Location
    Winchester

Recent Profile Visitors

1,302 profile views
  1. It's just over a year since I properly got started on this project. I was slightly hampered in the first lockdown as I couldn't get hold of the materials for the baseboards but by this time last year I had some of the boards put together... For the last few months I've been working on the public viewing side of the layout and it has effectively been assembled back to front in my workshop. For most of this time it has also been buried under materials and tools so it was time for a clear up. Then it was time to turn the layout round so that I c
  2. I'm not quite sure why you would need a switch statement to deal with each lever separately but I think you can do what you want without too much difficulty. Something like... switch (lever) { case 1: case 3: case 6: do stuff for cases 1,3 and 6; break; case 2: do stuff for case 2; break; case 4: case 5: do stuff for cases 4 and 5; break; } If you omit the "break" statement the execution drops through into the next case by default. I would probably be looking at either a structure as suggested ear
  3. My preferred style would be something like the example below. Notice the termination clause in the "for" statement should use a less than (<) if you are running forward through the array. #define NUMBER_OF_SWITCHES 4 int switches[NUMBER_OF_SWITCHES] = {3, 7,10, 25}; void setup() { for (int i = 0; i < NUMBER_OF_SWITCHES; i++) { pinMode(switches[i], INPUT_PULLUP); } } void loop() { } If you have a lot of switches to check you may run into performance problems if you use the simple digitalRead function as each one uses around 1000 processor instruction
  4. Still fiddling with track painting and ballasting. Almost all the track so far built is done, just one length of platform to do. A delivery of 1000 C&L chairs has arrived so I'm set to build some more track. Having installed a bunch of point rodding my thoughts have turned to the signalbox. Some while ago I bought an LCUT Creative kit advertised as an MR box. I built it and it went together ok but... ...it's pretty crude and the more I look at it the less it looks like a Midland box. It ain't like any Midland box I can find pictures of!
  5. I may be missing something but if you are simply connecting the switches and servos to digital ports on the Arduino all you need to know is the port number. That assumes you are using the high level access methods such as digitalRead() etc. You can keep the port numbers in an array of "int"s or some other numerical type or, if they are wired sequentially, you could just define the lowest port number and the max number of switches/servos. There are obviously wrinkles if you are using the Arduino native PWM capabilities as the ports are not sequential so you might use the array appro
  6. That photograph could be turned into a kit of printed parts, much like a Scalescenes kit, it you are not hide bound to having a physical texture on your model. Needs a bit of perspective tweaking but nothing that can't be done in the Gimp or similar software. Cheers Dave
  7. Very nice. Can't beat a bit of Midland! Cheers Dave
  8. More messing about with point rodding has been occurring. I'm largely done apart from a few bits that will need to be accessed from the other side of the baseboards on bits of track I haven't yet built. This is an MSE etch compensator, one of two you get on each sheet. Here is one of my 3D printed examples in the raw. As the resin is nearly transparent you can't see any detail! You can see my rodding installation is pretty crude. It took about an hour with my favourite CAD package to knock something up and 10 minutes to print a whole bunch o
  9. On the basis that the track plan is not quite Buxton and if you don't quite get to Buxton on the Midland line you would be in Ashwood Dale, that's the current name for the layout (until I change my mind!). Still working on fiddly bits... I've run out of compensators on the MSE etches I have so I'll just have to 3D print some so I can finish this bloomin rodding. Cheers Dave
  10. Sorry to hear of your losses Ian. I take your point and to be honest I've not been happy about the name for a while. I'll come up with something better. Cheers Dave
  11. I've been having a few sessions working on items I've been putting off. One of these is adding more point rodding. Of course I've switched from working where I started to the opposite end of the layout! The rods for the crossover and the entry to the loop/engine shed area are largely completed. These are mostly fairly long runs of single rodding so not too difficult but they also allow me to move on with ballasting. This will all need to be weathered to tone down some of the colours if nothing else. In fact I've had the dirty brush out and started work on the appr
  12. Keep kicking at the traces big G. We're waiting to play trains (even if they are funny Eastern things!). Cheers Dave
  13. The loco shed has progressed and now has a basic roof with a clerestory ventilator. The louvres for the ventilator are yet another 3D printed component. Whatever did I do before 3D printing? I've started to tile the roof but it's a tedious job that will take ages so obviously I've switched to do something else. Much more fun to faff around with a paintbrush and weather some of the ballasting. It's dirtier and darker around the ash pit but probably generally too clean. Strangely I rather like the slow job of painting all the rail sides and b
  14. You might try a PM to Jeff Geary, https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/profile/25527-jeff-geary/, who is the author. I have Trax 3 and that does work on 64 bit Windows. Cheers Dave
  15. Thanks all for your posts. Some interesting stuff and pictures. Here is an updated track diagram that shows a bit more clearly what I am up to. The top 3 lines on the left of the diagram are platforms and I have indicated with yellow circles where I think the 6 FPLs should be. What appears to be a symmetrical 3-way in the diagram has actually been built as a tandem and is the only way I can fit in what's needed. I'm still left with a bit of a question, on a double slip would there be an FPL locking all 4 switches at each end of the complex i.e. just two locks for t
×
×
  • Create New...