rockershovel Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 Moving on, I'm sure all my locos have existing addresses. I'm also sure that there will be a simple, generic method of finding what it is, on a NEC or Gaugemaster controller. Question is, what is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnb Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 On NCE, go to program mode (press 'esc' then '4') and when asked to set up address say 'yes' it will then indicate whether long or short address is set. Continuing as if to set up an address it will show the first the short and then the long, at that point record the address and then exit without changing anything. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibushe Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 With The Gaugemaster I think its this. Loco on program Track. Press PROG to select "rEAD Prog Track. Press Enter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted December 8, 2015 Author Share Posted December 8, 2015 How does a "programme track" differ from any other track? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigelcliffe Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 How does a "programme track" differ from any other track? On most DCC systems there are two outputs - "main line" and "programming track". The programming track can read values from a decoder, and limits the power to protect the decoder should a fault be present. On a programming track the loco cannot be run (*). On some systems (including NCE PowerCab), the maker cuts their manufacturing costs by combining the two outputs into one, and relies on the user selecting the required option. NCE do offer an additional cost automated switch which re-introduces the two distinct outputs. (* this is from the NMRA DCC specification of the service mode programming track. Several systems do allow the programming track to be flipped back into a running main line and thus the loco can be run when the mode is changed ). - Nigel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250BOB Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 I think from what I have seen with other DCC operators, the programming track is a piece of track, long enough for your biggest loco, not connected to the layout, and wired to the programming terminals of the DCC systems master control box. The loco must be removed from the layout and placed on this piece of track in order to read any cv value, inc the address. The address can only be read and altered on this piece of track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted December 9, 2015 Author Share Posted December 9, 2015 ...part of my aim here, is to write a simple "crib card" for club members bringing locos to the test track. Sounds as though this would work fine on the test track, given that there is only one controller, an NCE - it would just be a matter of selecting the appropriate settings and ensuring nothing else is on tne track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibushe Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Program Track. I do not have a separate program Track. The reason being, Continual placing & replacing a loco on it is in my opinion a waste of time. My program track is part of a running line, it has insulated joiners at both ends connected to the program output. Say for instance you are programming CV5 max speed, or any CVs for that matter, once you have set a variable you can directly run that loco out onto the main, if then you don't like that speed or setting, run it back onto the program section and reset it, and try again. Continual picking up and replacing can cause shorts if you forget to cut the track power, damage some of the fine detail that many of modern stock has, if your eyesight is not that good, lining up all those wheels, again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Program Track. I do not have a separate program Track. The reason being, Continual placing & replacing a loco on it is in my opinion a waste of time. My program track is part of a running line, it has insulated joiners at both ends connected to the program output. Say for instance you are programming CV5 max speed, or any CVs for that matter, once you have set a variable you can directly run that loco out onto the main, if then you don't like that speed or setting, run it back onto the program section and reset it, and try again. Continual picking up and replacing can cause shorts if you forget to cut the track power, damage some of the fine detail that many of modern stock has, if your eyesight is not that good, lining up all those wheels, again. For programming like you are describing you don't need a programming track. Just use Operations Mode programming (a.k.a. Programming on the Main). What you really need a programming track for is initial programming after a DCC install (limited current will prevent damage in case of a short), reading back values out of a decoder (if you don't have Railcom and if the DCC controller supports readback), and setting addresses of some decoders (some allow the address to be set using PoM). There are very good reasons for not having your programming track as part of the main layout. Accidentally having a metal wheelset bridging the gap (if, say, a loco moved further than expected during a readback) could result in reprogramming all the locos on the layout (or worse, depending on the controller and the layout configuration). Almost all DCC controllers will support PoM. The only one I have that doesn't is my ancient AtlasMaster (Lenz Compact). Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigelcliffe Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 There are very good reasons for not having your programming track as part of the main layout. Accidentally having a metal wheelset bridging the gap (if, say, a loco moved further than expected during a readback) could result in reprogramming all the locos on the layout (or worse, depending on the controller and the layout configuration). Well, that can happen. But, with some systems it gets worse, the mainline stays on during use of the programming track. If some wheels bridge the gap from mainline to programming, the result is mainline signal going into the programming track terminals of the system. "pffff" and your programming output is destroyed. I know people who've done this to their systems even when they had a nicely constructed programming siding, with a switch to swap from "program" to "mainline", and still they (plural, more than one) blew their system. An expensive way to run a model railway ! - Nigel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibushe Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Adrian & Nigel. I note what you are saying, maybe with some systems the layout stays live when programming. Not on mine it doesn't. So if I should bridge the gap Nowt will happen anyway, as this track is 2FT long I would spot it right away. As with all comments & advice on these pages some are personnel observations without recommendations. I am sure others reading mine & your post will take note on what's been said However I will continue to do it my way, I also know others who do without any problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil S Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 As a 'monitoring' suggestion which helps identify 'bridged gaps': I use, and recommend switched 'sub-district' / power district sections with an LED montoring each ON THE OUTPUT ie TRACK SIDE.... THEn, if a section IS switched OFF, and its LED lights, then you KNOW it is because an adjacent (powered) section is being bridged to it - eg by a coach / metal wheel across the gap. (There is, of course, a suitable series resistor to bring the indication current down to about 5mA, and a series protective diode to prevent reverse-voltage damage) AN IMPROVEMENT on my original (and still current) installation would be to use inverse-parallel-LEDs of different colours, so that, if, eg when testing continuity with a battery on the track, the polarity can be indicated, and with dcc present, the blended colour of each directions LED, eg red or green to produce yellow. I have my main programming track (standard gauge) as part of the main layout - but its source is selectable by switch: This makes it easier to programme long multiple unit trains. On our new exhibition layout, I am considering a 'totally sepate oval' which can be connnected to the Pgm Track feed, so that reprogramming can take place dueing a show without stopping or gettoing confused what is on the main. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium ColinK Posted December 9, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 9, 2015 I have a long siding on my layout which can be used as a normal part of the layout, or as my programming track. The siding is isolated by from the rest of the layout by isolating fishplates on each rail. A wire is connected from each rail to the output of a double pole, double throw changeover switch. One input to the switch is connected to the DCC bus, the other to the programming track output from my DCC controller. In normal operation, the switch is set so the siding is connected to the DCC bus. To programme a loco or dmu, it is driven onto the programme track, the switched changed to 'programme' and the handset changed to 'programme track', it can then be programmed as required. Once done, change switch back to normal, change handset back to normal, drive loco as normal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trip Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 I have a long siding on my layout which can be used as a normal part of the layout, or as my programming track. The siding is isolated by from the rest of the layout by isolating fishplates on each rail. A wire is connected from each rail to the output of a double pole, double throw changeover switch. One input to the switch is connected to the DCC bus, the other to the programming track output from my DCC controller. In normal operation, the switch is set so the siding is connected to the DCC bus. To programme a loco or dmu, it is driven onto the programme track, the switched changed to 'programme' and the handset changed to 'programme track', it can then be programmed as required. Once done, change switch back to normal, change handset back to normal, drive loco as normal. This sounds like a good idea but as Nigel pointed out if you drive a locomotive onto the programming track forgetting to connect it to the main track with the switch you might end up frying your controller. You might be confident you won't make that mistake but I would definitely end up with a dead DCS50. There might be a way to operate a relay to make the switch automatically when a loco passes a sensor. Until I work that out I think I'll put a 2 ft length of dead track between them so I can just push the loco along onto the programming track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
malcolmy Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 I use Peco Loco Lifts to store and move all my locos on and off my layout, and on and off my programming track My programming track is an entirely separate length of (test) track, with Bachrus(?) rolling road elements installed. Like many have said, I have a DPDT switch, but mine switches between a DC supply to this track/test facility, and DCC for programming. I have a NCE PowerCab and Booster, so I installed an additional DCC socket on this track, so I can swap my PowerCab between the layout and my test/programming track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 The third down method show on my web site here http://www.brian-lambert.co.uk/DCC.html#Programming allows for an isolated section of track in between the Main line and the Programming track. So when Programming is underway there is a dead (isolated) section of track keeping the two areas apart. A 4PDT switch controls the lot and a LED indication fed from the DCC supply illuminates to show that Programming is selected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trip Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Oh, that is a great idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davepallant Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 My 'programming track' is an oval on a 2' by 4' sheet of MDF. I can connect a Bachmann DC train set controller to run the loco in and then unplug and plug in my NCE Powercab controller to set up the addresses etc. I can still adjust settings on the main but never set addresses on the main layout. The oval also lets me time speeds and adjust speed curves quite easily. The board props up against the wall when not in use. A bit bulky but very useful even when the main layout is not in use. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasatcopthorne Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Moving on, I'm sure all my locos have existing addresses. I'm also sure that there will be a simple, generic method of finding what it is, on a NEC or Gaugemaster controller. Question is, what is it? Dear RS. (why not give us a real name?) Going right back to your first post, Both your questions are answered in the NCE manual. If you don't have one, then it is downloadable from their website. Have you tried this? Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted December 12, 2015 Author Share Posted December 12, 2015 Dear RS. (why not give us a real name?) Going right back to your first post, Both your questions are answered in the NCE manual. If you don't have one, then it is downloadable from their website. Have you tried this? Dave Since you ask, someone sent me a link to the NCE manual, which I found to be one of those baffling documents which was fine if you already knew how the thing worked and had a working knowledge of the subject. Procedures and manuals written by engineers are often like this, that's why we have technical writers and editors I suppose. As a general comment, my introduction to DCC has been confusing and contradictory, and I am a Chartered Engineer with considerable experience of survey systems and related software. My first introduction was at a group who appeared to be divided amongst themselves, which didn't help. The most useful advice offered was by Digitrains, who sold me a Gaugemaster on the basis that it was the most intuitive system generally available, with all components from the same supplier, and I would find it easiest to use. Having now seen the NCE, and tried the Gaugemaster on a length of track on my workbench, I would say that was a fair comment. So, I can now show people how to put their loco on the track, operate the DCC through some basic functions and hear the sound. I haven't yet been brought a DCC-only loco, although the conversion to DCC and sound on my own Bachmann 2-8-0 (#420) is so fitted (I bought it without being aware of this, my converted Bachmann mogul (with DCC but no sound) runs on DCC or analogue). So, my conclusion is that DCC contains a number of quite important pitfalls, that it is very difficult or impossible to get an overall view of the pros and cons from any one source, and the chances of making an important mistake are quite high. The following conclusions are (1) the best system for you, is the one used by the group or club you are a member of (2) if you don't understand the subject, Gaugemaster are the simplest system to understand (3) most of the variables are best left alone until you have a sufficient understanding, and probably then as well DCC seems to me, to be a developing field, and I strongly suspect that five years from now it will be much more standardised. So as not to end on a negative note, I can see the improved control it provides - my Bachmann definitely needs to be driven in a way it doesn't on analog. I do think it was worth starting and will be worth pursuing. Ben Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 DCC seems to me , to be a developing field, and I strongly suspect that five years from now it will be much more standardised. So as not to end on a negative note, I can see the improved control it provides - my Bachmann definitely needs to be driven in a way it doesn't on analog. I do think it was worth starting and will be worth pursuing. Unfortunately the opposite is the case , the standards are now quite old , little updating is going on, railcom extensions to standards have been confused and if anything the whole development has stalled Some work is going on on layout busses. , but that's a whole other can of worms Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted December 13, 2015 Author Share Posted December 13, 2015 Unfortunately the opposite is the case , the standards are now quite old , little updating is going on, railcom extensions to standards have been confused and if anything the whole development has stalled Some work is going on on layout busses. , but that's a whole other can of worms Dave In which case, points (1) to (3) apply. I do note on the Digitrains website that they describe the Gaugemaster as a repackaging of an existing system. Also, from what I have gathered from various sources, it would seem that the Gaugemaster software is a quite different thing from the Decoder Pro. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigelcliffe Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 In which case, points (1) to (3) apply. I do note on the Digitrains website that they describe the Gaugemaster as a repackaging of an existing system. Also, from what I have gathered from various sources, it would seem that the Gaugemaster software is a quite different thing from the Decoder Pro. Gaugemaster is a re-badged for UK market of an Model Rectifier Corporation (MRC) product. MRC is a US maker. MRC produced their own software some years ago. It is very basic. For a long time, MRC refused to allow any interconnect to their system, and stubbornly refused to release details of their computer interface protocols to software developers. A couple of years ago, they changed their mind and gave technical details of the computer interface protocols to the JMRI development team. And thus MRC (and Gaugemaster) was added to the long list of systems supported by JMRI. DecoderPro is one component of JMRI. What JMRI can control within a system depends on the capability of the DCC system interface, with some systems the control options are massive and varied, with others it is limited. JMRI is not the only software package around, there are many others, some free, some paid. But, few, if any, others support MRC hardware because of MRC's policy on not releasing software protocol details. Gaugemaster's UK support of their MRC system is good, they carry out repairs quickly, and frequently for no cost even when outside warranty periods. - Nigel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted December 13, 2015 Author Share Posted December 13, 2015 According to Digitrains, in a reply to an emailed question, "....there is a computer interface for the Gaugemaster Prodigy Advance 2 but as far as I know it will only work with their own software. 3rd party programmes such as Decoder Pro cannot be used with Gaugemaster controllers" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigelcliffe Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Armed with the information I gave earlier, you could update Digitrains. JMRI support for MRC and Gaugemaster hardware was added in July 2014. http://www.jmri.org/help/en/html/hardware/mrc/index.shtml - Nigel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.