Unifrog?

[Portpatrick]

Strikes me there is developing a need for a Peco point re-wiring service............. roll-up, roll-up, get your re-worked Peco self-isolating points here.........Ahem.

Now there is a good idea.  Will you handle N gauge as well as OO?!!

[Izzy]

Now there is a good idea.  Will you handle N gauge as well as OO?!!

I’m afraid it was said purely as jest. A thought that such a service might arise at some point (!) in time given the reaction to this change.

 

Izzy

[Portpatrick]

I do realise that Izzy. But what is it about true words spoken in jest!

[Fluo66]

First: I like the Unifrog concept. But I understand Portpatrick very well. I destroyed 2 points while soldering the connections. I am not very experienced in soldering but had to do this many times in the last 3 years. I avoid it wherever possible.

 

Just a thought: Why doesn‘t Peco pre-solder the connections between the stock rails and the blades? As modeller you have then to decide which ones to cut. Cutting is much easier than soldering and it doesn‘t need any special knowledge. The only disadvantage is that you can‘t use the points out of the box...

 

The alternative could be a hidden metal clip that you can put on from the underside. I do not mean clips like the Hornby ones.

 

Both solutions would not increase the cost of a point dramatically but would save many modellers a lot of time and work.

 

I wish a little more innovation from the manufacturers here.

[Suzie]

Attaching a bundle of seven wires, one to each rail segment, will make for maximum flexibility!

 

Just connect five together (all except the two connected to the stock rails) and you have what is currently an out of the box Electrofrog.

 

Just connect the switch rails to the rails beyond the frog (two pairs) and you have more or less what is currently an Insulfrog.

 

Just connect each switch rail to its stock rail and rail beyond the frog to have a 'DCC' dead frog point (without power routing). (is this the default wiring for Unifrog)

 

Add a frog switch to the 'DCC' dead frog point and you have a 'DCC friendly' point.

 

Add a second pole to the frog switch and you can power route the rails beyond the frog for DC live frog use.

 

 

All of the above can be achieved without a single insulated joiner on the point. It really can be the universal point for everyone with a little application as long as the plastic bits are kept to a minimum. I think that Peco have an eye on the future when choosing the default wiring - by the time they are widely available there will not be that many people wanting to revert back to old wiring methods that rely on the switch blades contacting the stock rails for power routing.

[ejstubbs]

Not only are the stock/running rails connected to the closure rail/blades, but the stock/running rail is also linked separately (for one of the routes) directly to the rail beyond the frog and for the other route by a link from the closure rail/blade to the rail beyond the frog (at least on the N gauge unipoint).

 

2.  To convert the point to 100% live frog operation giving the same effect as an electrofrog point it is also necessary to cut the links to the through rails at the heel end of the 'frog' as these come pre-linked to the relevant running rail

 

Is the diagram in the November 2017 RM wrong, then?  That clearly show the switch rails bonded to the stock rails, and the through rails bonded to the switch rails - not the stock rails.  Given that it's Peco's own publication, it would seem to be a fairly catastrophic mistake to publish incorrect information, especially since they don't seem to have put any useful guidance on their actual web site.  (Then again, the bullhead points themselves aren't even listed on their web site yet so it seems that seeking up-to-date information there is a bit of a waste of time.)

 

(Or - worse still - is the N gauge unifrog implementation different to the OO bullhead one?)

 

Why doesn‘t Peco pre-solder the connections between the stock rails and the blades?

 

My understanding - again based on the diagram of the wiring in the November 2017 edition of RM - is that this is precisly what they they do on the unifrog points.

 

I'd scan the diagram from RM and post it on here but I think I might get told off 'because copyright'.  Which is a shame, seeing as how it's useful information which doesn't seem to appear anywhere else.  (Not so useful if it's wrong, of course...)

 

On the other hand, if someone has a photo of the underside of a unifrog point which clearly shows the wiring, that would also do the job.

Edited July 13, 2018 by ejstubbs

[Chamby]

They don't suit my needs either.

 

Can someone suggest what alternatives would be suitable?

 

I've never really looked beyond Peco nor had the need to before.

The Peco insulfrog or electrofrog points are an excellent alternative. They are still widely available!

[grahame]

Is the diagram in the November 2017 RM wrong, then?  That clearly show the switch rails bonded to the stock rails, and the through rails bonded to the switch rails - not the stock rails. 

 

Presumably the diagram is for HO/OO track but I haven't seen it so I can't comment. There is often an assumption on this forum that OO/4mm is the same as N/2mm but in my experience that is often an unwise assumption. 

 

On the N gauge unifrog points, as I've already explained, is that, as well as the running/stock rails being directly linked to the closure rail/blades, there is a connection directly between the stock/running rails to the through rail beyond the frog (for one of the routes). Snipping wires in N/2mm is a lot more fiddly than in OO/4mm especially where they are run in recesses. And in N gauge, for the code 55 track the rail is actually code 80 tall with the bottom section buried in the plastic base and just the top code 55 portion showing, making access for soldering underneath additionally difficult. It's probably understandable why Portpatrick is concerned about the need for fiddly modifications and soldering under the points

 

 

G

[hayfield]

"Hayfield"

Please don't worry on my account.  No offence taken at all.  I guess there is one I could possibly ask for assistance though he is not one I would want to take advantage of, not least as I rely on him a lot for transport to and from shows, both as a visitor and exhibitor so my  wife still has the use of our own car..  And I guess I stilll expect to be able to build my own layouts myself, even if at times I am frustrated at how difficult some things have become over the years.  As I stated earlier I don't do as much kit building and stock "bashing" as I once did.  I am in two minds whether to attempt convert a Langley B1 body I obtained into a Scottish K2.  I have a spare poole based Black 5 chassis for adapting.   I like the idea of the challenge but am not sure I can make it meet even my "good enough representation" standards. 

 

 

Its a shame, I lived in Bushey until 2 years ago and would have been happy to assist. I was a member of Watford and District MRC who are a great bunch of lads but not into 2 mm scale, but love to chat a lot (they meet near Asda. Also there is the West Herts MRC who meet close to Bushey Hall Golf Club, who have a 2 mm (N) gauge group, again a great bunch of lads, sadly the latter you would need transport to get there. Either clubs would be if nothing else a good social place to go to if transport was available, and I am certain someone would be able to assist you

[hayfield]

Presumably the diagram is for HO/OO track but I haven't seen it so I can't comment. There is often an assumption on this forum that OO/4mm is the same as N/2mm but in my experience that is often an unwise assumption. 

 

On the N gauge unifrog points, as I've already explained, is that, as well as the running/stock rails being directly linked to the closure rail/blades, there is a connection directly between the stock/running rails to the through rail beyond the frog (for one of the routes). Snipping wires in N/2mm is a lot more fiddly than in OO/4mm especially where they are run in recesses. And in N gauge, for the code 55 track the rail is actually code 80 tall with the bottom section buried in the plastic base and just the top code 55 portion showing, making access for soldering underneath additionally difficult. It's probably understandable why Portpatrick is concerned about the need for fiddly modifications and soldering under the points

 

DSC_6198.JPG

 

G

 

 

The bonding wires between the stock and switch rails should be quite easy, by just removing the webbing between two timbers and soldering a wire across. Trick being having the correct shaped tip on your soldering iron (N gauge will require a smaller sized tip, decent solder (not relying on the resin within multi cored solder) and liquid flux. As for a dropper wire I do not remember what underneath the turnout looks like, but from memory in another thread it seemed straight forward.

 

I solder bonding wires to plastic kit built turnouts, simply tin both the rails and wires (using liquid flux), just in and out quickly. put the wire to be soldered on to the joint, re-flux again and solder together. Peco turnouts are far more robust than kit built ones, its more of having the correct tools and materials than a special skill, just practice on plain track off cuts first

[Portpatrick]

Hi hayfield

 

I have been a member of SW Herts MRS since 1982

[Harlequin]

This is the underside of a OO Streamline Bullhead Unifrog:

 

To convert to electrofrog (relying on the blades making electrical contact with the stock rails), cut at red marks, make new connection at green between blades and frog assembly:

 

The bonds with magenta marks can probably be left uncut but the point will then not switch power between the diverging tracks. If the bonds are cut at the magenta marks and the inner diverging rails are also wired to the frog then you should have full electrofrog functionality.

 

Disclaimer: I have not actually tried this modification!

Edited July 14, 2018 by Harlequin

[grahame]

The bonding wires between the stock and switch rails should be quite easy, by just removing the webbing between two timbers and soldering a wire across. Trick being having the correct shaped tip on your soldering iron (N gauge will require a smaller sized tip, decent solder (not relying on the resin within multi cored solder) and liquid flux. As for a dropper wire I do not remember what underneath the turnout looks like, but from memory in another thread it seemed straight forward.

 

I solder bonding wires to plastic kit built turnouts, simply tin both the rails and wires (using liquid flux), just in and out quickly. put the wire to be soldered on to the joint, re-flux again and solder together. Peco turnouts are far more robust than kit built ones, its more of having the correct tools and materials than a special skill, just practice on plain track off cuts first

 

I think you might be missing the point that Portpatrick has difficulties in doing what you describe due to suffering with ET. And in N gauge it is not easy to remove webbing between sleepers on code 55 track to solder wire to the underside of the rail as the plastic is moulded around the rail (not just beneath it) and has a complex cross section. However, there is no need to bond the stock/running rails to the closure/blades on N gauge unifrog points as that is already done.

 

G 

[grahame]

Unifrog underside.png

 

To convert to electrofrog (relying on the blades making electrical contact with the stock rails), cut at red marks, make new connection at green between blades and frog assembly:

Unifrog underside elctrofrog mods.png

 

The bonds with magenta marks can probably be left uncut but the point will then not switch power between the diverging tracks. If the bonds are cut at the magenta marks and the inner diverging rails are also wired to the frog then you should have full electrofrog functionality.

 

Disclaimer: I have not actually tried this modification!

 

That is not an N gauge unifrog point - they are wired differently.

 

G

[The Stationmaster]

Is the diagram in the November 2017 RM wrong, then?  That clearly show the switch rails bonded to the stock rails, and the through rails bonded to the switch rails - not the stock rails.  Given that it's Peco's own publication, it would seem to be a fairly catastrophic mistake to publish incorrect information, especially since they don't seem to have put any useful guidance on their actual web site.  (Then again, the bullhead points themselves aren't even listed on their web site yet so it seems that seeking up-to-date information there is a bit of a waste of time.)

 

 

 

See the photos published by Phil ('Harlequin') - the switch/closure rails are bonded to the stock rails but the through rails are also bonded to the stock rails.  As Phil side to get the 100% 'Electrofrog' equivalent the through rails links to the stock rails need to be cut and the through rails instead bonded to the 'frog', or rather the 'flying lead' from the 'frog'.  Equally one could simply cut the existing bonds to the through rails and take the links to the 'frog' from the next section of track beyond the through rails.

 

Whichever way you do it you finish up with a 'live frog' point and the advantages it offers.

[Harlequin]

That is not an N gauge unifrog point.

 

G

This is true. Sorry, I somehow got the impression that Portpatrick was talking about OO.

 

Hopefully the info is still relevant to other readers.

[Portpatrick]

We have had some useful posts in the last 24 hours.

There are photos of the underside of the N gauge Code 55 uniforg on the N gauge Forum and facebook pages, with thanks to Paul Churchill.  So any N gauge followers here who have not linked up with us there, I strongly recommend you do!  While there do seem to be differences in detail my initial reaction is that in effect an principle they are similar.  I pressume the 5 joints Suzie refers to are the connections from stock rails to the wings of the frog (2*2=4) plus the floating 5th, attached to the nose of the frog.  Joining alll those up, and also cutting the connections between blades and stock rails (OK shock horror for some/many but not to me)  would deliver what seems to be like the current electrofrog.  In essence the blades of that are connected to what is electrically already a one piece frog.   However that makes assumptions about how practical it is in N gauge  to actually do that cutting some connections and linking others - for those of you who feel competent to try.  And of course having to do all that extra modification, or try to persuade someone else to attempt it for me, and/or add more switching is the rub.  Call me a touch obstinate if you like but if it is my railway, I want to be able to build it myself, while working within some  limitations.   Hence I see these points as a step in the wrong direction.  The sheer simplicity of Electrofrogs is their beauty - and those of you who then want to add blade/stock rail and any other connections and switching can continue to do so to your own spec.  Even after "Suzie's connections" I do also wonder whether the plastic insert in the blades could still cause problems for 08s 03/04s and Jinties etc..  And as Graeme states getting at the underside of Code 55 is not easy - code 80 would be less difficult, but in any future layouts I would prefer to carry on with code 55 unless I really  needed long sharper curves.

 

I have also noted warnings about short circuiting through the point.  On my new contemporary layout, which is the one using code 55 (and looking better for it) Everything is new and running on modern wheelsets.  On Portpatrick Town which was in any case built with code 80, again I have converted all rolling stock to high standard metal wheels.  and they run more freely as a result.  There are certainly a significant minority of locos on older  Farish chassis.  Not sure how Union Mills would fare.  I will experiment with a couple of them on Allanbrae when no expert is looking!

 

Meanwhile I am sure Harlequin's post will be helpful to OO modellers.

[Suzie]

... I pressume the 5 joints Suzie refers to are the connections from stock rails to the wings of the frog (2*2=4) plus the floating 5th, attached to the nose of the frog.  Joining alll those up, and also cutting the connections between blades and stock rails (OK shock horror for some/many but not to me)  would deliver what seems to be like the current electrofrog.  In essence the blades of that are connected to what is electrically already a one piece frog.   However that makes assumptions about how practical it is in N gauge  to actually do that cutting some connections and linking others - for those of you who feel competent to try.  And of course having to do all that extra modification, or try to persuade someone else to attempt it for me, and/or add more switching is the rub.  Call me a touch obstinate if you like but if it is my railway, I want to be able to build it myself, while working within some  limitations.   Hence I see these points as a step in the wrong direction.  The sheer simplicity of Electrofrogs is their beauty - and those of you who then want to add blade/stock rail and any other connections and switching can continue to do so to your own spec.  Even after "Suzie's connections" I do also wonder whether the plastic insert in the blades could still cause problems for 08s 03/04s and Jinties etc..  And as Graeme states getting at the underside of Code 55 is not easy - code 80 would be less difficult, but in any future layouts I would prefer to carry on with code 55 unless I really  needed long sharper curves...

 

You have understood it well. I think that if you can get someone to cut the links and add the seven dropper wires you might be able to wire it yourself a bit easier, perhaps being able to put the five wires into a chok-blok screw terminal under the baseboard. Use a three-way chok-blok and you will be able to feed power to the stock rails at the point as well. You just need to find someone to prepare the points for you...

[Fluo66]

This is the underside of a OO streamline Unifrog:

Unifrog underside.png

 

To convert to electrofrog (relying on the blades making electrical contact with the stock rails), cut at red marks, make new connection at green between blades and frog assembly:

Unifrog underside elctrofrog mods.png

 

The bonds with magenta marks can probably be left uncut but the point will then not switch power between the diverging tracks. If the bonds are cut at the magenta marks and the inner diverging rails are also wired to the frog then you should have full electrofrog functionality.

 

Disclaimer: I have not actually tried this modification!

Thank you very much for the pictures. I see that I was wrong with the connections between the witch blades and stock rails. But it seems soldering is still required to convert it to a reliable point with a live frog.

 

On the other hand if you compare the second with a modified electrofrog point it seems that you have to cut the magenta marks and leave the red ones? A little clarification from Peco would be very helpful.

 

I think I‘ll buy a bullhead point to test it withou any modification and see how reliable it is (DCC).

[ejstubbs]

See the photos published by Phil ('Harlequin') - the switch/closure rails are bonded to the stock rails but the through rails are also bonded to the stock rails.

 

Which is indeed contrary to what is shown in the Nov '17 RM article - the diagram in that article clearly indicates that the through rails are bonded to the switch rails.

 

However, on reading the article again more carefully, I see that it implies that the digram is based on the HOn3 unifrog turnouts, not the bullhead OO ones.  This suggests that the bullhead OO and the HOn3 turnouts are actually wired differently.  This would seem to be supported by the description of the HOn3 turnouts on Peco's web site, which seems to match the diagram in the RM article:

 

The wiring of these new turnouts is a development of both the Insulfrog and Electrfrog [sic] designs. The stock-rails are wired to the centre-rails at the factory, which in turn are connected to the corresponding frog-rail. This means the turnout is completely live(except for the tip of the frog) with no extra wiring required. If the turnout is being used as a switch to isolate a section of track then it is simple job to remove the wire that joins the centre-rail and stock-rail and it will work like a current Insulfrog.  [Highlighting is mine.]

 

The highlighted sentences seem to make it pretty clear that the HOn3 turnouts are not wired in the same way as the OO bullhead turnouts, as evidenced by Phil's useful photo of same, which would clearly need something more then just cutting the stock-switch rail bonding to make them self isolating in the same way as insulfrogs.

 

The RM article doesn't claim to be specifically about the OO bullhead turnouts - it also mentions the HOn3 and O gauge Setrack turnouts, and the code 83 double slip - but it was pretty obviously timed to coincide with the OO turnouts becoming available.  The standfast says:

 

The brand new Peco code 75 bullhead points...are the first items equipped with Unifrog to join the manufacturer's OO gauge range.  Here Steve Flint and Craig Tiley explain the principles of Unifrog wiring and how the points can be used as either live or dead frog units on 12v dc [sic] analogue or DCC control systems.

 

That they then use a diagram of an HOn3 turnout to illustrate the article without mentioning that the OO turnout wiring is different seems very poor to me.

 

On the N gauge unifrog points...as well as the running/stock rails being directly linked to the closure rail/blades, there is a connection directly between the stock/running rails to the through rail beyond the frog (for one of the routes).  [My emphasis]

 

So it seems that the N gauge turnouts with unifrog are different again, with what looks like a confusing hybrid of the OO and HOn3 wiring.  (I am left wondering how the through rail for the other route is powered - maybe the wiring is buried in the plastic track base?)

 

Given that Peco seem to be wiring different models of unifrog turnouts in different ways, it's hardly surprising that people get confused about what modifications might need to be made to get the different functionalities that people might want from them.  IMO this is only compounded by the paucity and poor quality of the information that Peco are making available online and in their paper publications.  It is to be hoped that the documentation shortcomings will be addressed over time.  For now, though, it seems that we have to get along by knowing the fundamentals of how unifrog is supposed to work, but only being able to work out exactly what we modifications we might need to make to a particular turnout when we have one available for physical inspection.

 

[Footnote: I have no idea how the O gauge Setrack turnouts with unifrog are wired.  They're not even listed on the Peco web site yet.  Another example of their unsatisfactory approach to product documentation IMO.  Basic rule of managing change: if you're going to do something which is going to require people to do things differently, it really does help to explain it to them first, rather than leave it to them to waste time working it out for themselves after it's happened.]

Edited July 13, 2018 by ejstubbs

[Harlequin]

Thank you very much for the pictures. I see that I was wrong with the connections between the witch blades and stock rails. But it seems soldering is still required to convert it to a reliable point with a live frog.

 

On the other hand if you compare the second with a modified electrofrog point it seems that you have to cut the magenta marks and leave the red ones? A little clarification from Peco would be very helpful.

 

I think I‘ll buy a bullhead point to test it withou any modification and see how reliable it is (DCC).

Personally, I will not be making any modifications to my points. I will use them the way they were designed to be used: feed power to the frog through the dropper wire and a separate electrical switch.

[caradoc]

This is the underside of a OO Streamline Bullhead Unifrog:

Unifrog underside.png

 

To convert to electrofrog (relying on the blades making electrical contact with the stock rails), cut at red marks, make new connection at green between blades and frog assembly:

Unifrog underside elctrofrog mods.png

 

The bonds with magenta marks can probably be left uncut but the point will then not switch power between the diverging tracks. If the bonds are cut at the magenta marks and the inner diverging rails are also wired to the frog then you should have full electrofrog functionality.

 

Disclaimer: I have not actually tried this modification!

 

The third wire from the left, soldered to the frog, is NOT (on my OO bullhead points anyway !) connected to any other rail, and does not therefore need to be cut. If it is left alone the point operates as non-self isolating insulfrog, for those that want electrofrog the wire can be used to connect to the blades as per the diagram, or to a switch.

[mikeharvey22]

I do not have an N gauge Unifrog point but I have purloined and relabelled these images from the French N Forum where similar discussions have been taking place, though with much greater support for the DCC-friendly nature of the new set up. As Grahame showed above the curved route through rail is wired directly to the straight route stock rail, and the straight route through rail is wired to the curved route stock rail via the switch rail/stock rail bond.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dunsignalling]

Personally, I will not be making any modifications to my points. I will use them the way they were designed to be used: feed power to the frog through the dropper wire and a separate electrical switch.

And I will be doing the same thing on analogue but adding an insulated rail joiner to the siding frog rail and a connection beyond it, fed from the same switch, which will effectively make the point self-isolating. 

 

Trying to make the thing behave exactly like an out-of-the-box Electrofrog point (i.e. without adding frog switching) looks like choosing to do things the hard way to me.

 

John

 

 

Note: I have corrected the slight error in my earlier post [#87] - describing something without having one on the desk to look at leads to brain fade at times. 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Harlequin]

The third wire from the left, soldered to the frog, is NOT (on my OO bullhead points anyway !) connected to any other rail, and does not therefore need to be cut. If it is left alone the point operates as non-self isolating insulfrog, for those that want electrofrog the wire can be used to connect to the blades as per the diagram, or to a switch.

You are right. When I did the drawing I imagined using a new wire, possibly insulated, to make the green connection and so I suggested snipping the frog dropper wire purely for neatness.

 

But the frog dropper wire is long enough and doesn't need to be insulated so it makes sense to use it to make the green connection rather than cutting it.

Edited July 14, 2018 by Harlequin