RR&Co, my control panel & the basics of automation

[Guest Digital]

You cannot go to all the trouble of full automation using RR&Co and not have operating signals

 

Its just not right.

 

Just got back from Amsterdam and have wait another week before I get home to play.

 

I have to agree working signals adds a whole new dimension.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FuNBOaYX18

[peach james]

Gee thanks guys..............thats all I need when I thought I had dreamed up a satisfactory excuse for static signals

 

I am just about to post on my layout thread asking how to signal the branch......(statically!) Its probably very tricky to get under the baseboards but I am beginning to think I had better plan to do at least some when I start on the terminus in the New Year.

 

Seriously thanks for the suggestions....I probably need a bit of subtle pressure

 

Kind Regards

 

I find that as I get older (Ha!...born in '76), that working from underneeth is a pain in the back. It's not to bad when I am working sitting down on the concrete, but when I am working truely upside down, it is a right pain. That's part of why I am trying to make more of this layout accessable via turning over, if the need is there. I could put the Torti in rightside up, by taking the layout apart & flipping the benchwork, but I generally haven't found that is required for me yet. The trick is to make up a operating unit that is simple to adjust, and easy to install from one side or the other, and then put it in, rather than try and construct in place.

 

The other serious trick is to make the layout in sections. (semi-modular). Make it so that you can turn it over, or move it from your house if you have to. Not that the scenery has to be cut like a exibition layout, but that when you are laying track & wiring, you can pull the bits apart and work on them upside up. When I was wiring the staging yard

 

(Can't get to the image from here...have to work)

 

 

I had the sections up on their sides to make the wiring much easier. Given that most of the boards have a DS-168 on them, and the others have a oodle of point motors, it made wiring them much easier.

 

The Ratio signals are easiest done from above, but the ones on Long Marton proper are done from underneeth. (3x3" or so is needed with a Torti though...rather less if you use a peco motor, I would think. The 3x3 is driven mostly by the length of the Torti, the cutout I use is probably closer to 1 1/2" by 3"...if you want, I can measure exactly how big the cut out is, as I can get at least one of the signals out easy enough.)

 

 

I have two signals so far installed on Long Marton proper...a third one is sticking about 6" above its final location right now...resting on the plastic tubing to run through the foam board. I've got another 3 on order from John @ Britannia, and 2 more put together in my large box of stuff, but haven't had time to try installing them yet. (another function of going to sea and having a 4 year old...hopefully, tomorrow, since I should be home for the day...)

[two tone green]

Nice one John but the edge of the world is a bit close.

[john dew]

You guys are sure keeping up the pressure I guess I will have to put at least one in on the new section to learn the technique.

 

I always wire upside down when building but I am the worlds biggest optimist and assume once its tested all will be well in perpetuity.......I know dont tell me

 

My boards are pretty high but it is a pain working under them and believ me James you are an absolute youngster compared with me

 

Regards from Vancouver.....where it is still snowing

[two tone green]

Well stop talking about it and get on with it. B)

[G.M.R.]

Well stop talking about it and get on with it. B)

 

Talking of getting on with it, it was in October 2006 that you sent me some emails about how to get started with RR&Co and I have just downloaded the demo software. John prompted that with some useful tips on another forum, which made me come and have a look here. Your thread is extremely informative and I am busy copying it all off into a Word document.

 

I have just begun to get my track diagrams into the software. I think I will need 5 to keep each simple enough. Here is one of them:-

 

 

It looks clumsy at the moment. I must try to get the horizontals and verticals sorted. I have been trying to reflect the shape of the layout, and from reading some of your thread, I think that may be misguided. I also need to get those blocks shown differently.

 

I am still using ZTC. It has only just started to let me down, as I received a couple of sound locos for Xmas! I will use the addition of RR&Co to move me away by starting with a parallel control station to support the block detection. I don't have any block detectors yet - but the layout is ready to take them - Any up to date suggestions on what ones to use, and for that matter, what control station to move to? Lenz has always been talked about a lot in the past, but I wonder about ESU?

 

Right now, I would like to just try some of the RR&Co controls on the layout, but I never got around to purchasing a ZTC640 interface. I think this will handle the basics, just to get me going. Any ideas on where I could find one that no one wants? I have been in touch with Neil at ZTC Controls and he says that he does intend making these again, but has none at the moment. I think there must be someone out there who has bought one, but no longer wants it.

 

I think I have very much caught the Railcom bug now, so will want to move on with it swiftly.

 

Thanks again for the time you have put into sharing your knowledge. Railcom's manual and help file are good, but reading how you and John (and others, like Dave) have used it yourselves, helps folk like me to get there much quicker.

[two tone green]

Hi Geoff,

 

Good to hear you have finally activated your digital interface and got your fingers doing some thing productive.

 

First off, have you considered not getting the ZTC interfaced as you will hit the limits of ZTC very very quickly when using RR&Co. ZTC has such big holes in its system you will have a long wait for them to get any where near having a system available capable of supporting RR&Co.

 

Also to buy a second system just to get block occupancy detection with a second interface seems a tad expensive way of doing it with additional problems looming in the future for you. I am a big believer in one system with all the bits for it and not mix systems. Yes things like Lenz and LDT go together as its Lenz based but to mix actual DCC systems to get what you want is asking for problems in the future as things naturally progress and upgrades become available.

 

You mention Lenz and ESU, both are excellent systems. I use Lenz myself but on a upgrade program to move over to an all ESU system.

 

As for Railcom, both ESU and Lenz will support this but ESU seems to have a more integrated approach to its system. Lenz has always had the policy of being 'backwards' compatible which unfortunately means lots of external units to the main control box. But it does seem to work and it is still a strong system.

 

As you move on and need help, do please ask as we are all here to help one another. Have fun.

 

P.S, where are you as I am reasonably mobile during the week and some weekends so able to visit if need be.

 

Regards

 

Andy Jack

[G.M.R.]

Thanks, Andy. I was only thinking of getting the ZTC interface as a temporary measure to see things happening. My thought about adding another system was to make the move over away from ZTC in a couple of steps. The thing about using something for 5 years is that it is hard to throw it away - despite its shortcomings. Will have to think seriously.

 

I have progressed to adding some block contact detectors, and tried to record "red" track presence, but although the recording goes okay. I cannot get the track to change colour when the detector changes colour - if I display the block, that does change colour. I have tried setting a beep on the detector, and that does work. All offline of course.

 

I notice that your diagrams do not show the blocks at all, only the detectors. I would like to do the same, but do need something to show a block occupied - like a red track - and not just the tiny dot of the detector. Any thoughts of what I am not doing?

 

I am in Southampton, by the way. Have already entertained some of the local lads, so if you were in the area, you would be welcome to pop in.

[two tone green]

Hi again,

 

Southampton, not a million miles from Bristol when I am stuck there over a weekend so I could easily pop down for some fun and a quick sail around the Solent. Will see later in January.

 

My track diagram only shows occupied blocks as for me every thing in view all the time makes the track plan look cluttered and makes an occupied block more obvious by only showing when it is occupied. Also at the moment because I am doing some work myself on my layout, the dots for the occupancy detectors are visible all the time as well. These can be made invisible as well as the blocks and only show when you want them too.

 

But having the dots show all the time makes setting things up easy in off line mode as you only have to click on them to put a block in occupied mode. If they are in visible this is a bit more difficult. You can set them to be invisible except in edit mode which is the way I normally have them. Also it makes doing my posts easier to show people how things work.

 

As for the blocks, have a look on your switch board with your track plan on and look across the top for the view command and go, view, switchboard, customise and then choose the tab for blocks and select the option you want in visibility. Still with me, good.

 

As for highlighting the track to show red with the block being occupied, obviously you are using the record button, yes ? Did you by chance over lap the tracks with another section of track to do with another block. If you happen to click on even one little bit of track that then appears in tow blocks, this can cancel out the track sections showing as occupied when the sensor trips.

 

As for beeps, you may get a bit bored with these after a while if you have a busy layout. So many blocks changing state means lots of beeps and the beeps suddenly become meaningless due to so many beeps all at once. And not only that they become annoying. Just me, you may like it.

 

For me, I would go straight for another system and bin the ZTC stuff without buying more of it. Why spend money on a system which will be redundant soon for you and will replace with a proper DCC system. The money from interface from ZTC if bought at full price would go towards the new system. Shame the new ESU colour unit is not out to beat the VAT rise !!!!.

 

Keep going, you seem to be doing well. Keep in touch.

 

AJ

[G.M.R.]

 

 

As for highlighting the track to show red with the block being occupied, obviously you are using the record button, yes ? Did you by chance over lap the tracks with another section of track to do with another block. If you happen to click on even one little bit of track that then appears in tow blocks, this can cancel out the track sections showing as occupied when the sensor trips.

 

Found it! Needed to set Customize Switchboard - Highlighting - Occupied Tracks - Mode - to CUSTOM. It was on Occupied Routes. Not sure if I my playing had achieved that or whether it was the default. Now have occupied track showing red, and block only showing in Edit or when occupied.

 

[two tone green]

Very smart. The learning curve is looking a little less bent

[peach james]

Can you not use the ZTC 511 as a slave throttle with Lenz? Perhaps take a look at the Lenz threads on the old forum (and the ZTC ones too...), and see what has been written about that. It was my understanding that the 511 and (505?) could both be used as throttles with Lenz, which would give you the best of both worlds. There MAY be a way using macros to slave sounds over to a ZTC throttle using RR&Co in that event. This would be to work around the limited # of Functions on ZTC throttles. (I'm playing with macros in 5.0, to get signal box bells to work- next step involves diodes though, since I just wiped the programming on 2 or 3 DS54's- its funny to see it go to pot because the bell rings...as well as being infuriating...)

 

My understanding is that Lenz, ESU, Digitrax, CVT/Ramtraxx/NCE are the standard bearers for feedback. (and each of them is different in the HOW of it !!!) There is also the S88 bus, which is what Marklin use(d?), C/MRI, and the option of MREG CAN/N Bus as well. Take a look at what RR&Co offers in the way of interface, as if you are going to use it to interface, it will allow the use of multi digital systems connected to one computer to provide feedback. That's what I think you are getting at- using the ZTC stuff to run the trains & a seperate system to sense position. I don't know how well that will work, it's not something I have tried.

 

James

[G.M.R.]

You are right, James, in your last para. That is what I was getting at, but as Andy points out, is it really worth it. I have both a 511 and a pair of 622s, so whatever system I move over to, I would like to try to have at least the handhelds interfaced. Andy and others showed me the necessary connector wiring several years ago, and I still have those files.

 

With Xmas just passed, I have to think hard about shelling out for Railcom AND a new system. May just have to play offline for a while longer.

[two tone green]

Geoff,

 

Don't dwell too much on Railcom as this will naturally fall into place when it become mainstream at a later date which hopefully will not be too far off.

 

But, and its a big but. Block occupancy and Railcom are interlinked and Railcom can offer the block occupancy you may want. But, yes another one, the price will rocket if you go for a fully Railcom fitted out layout. The DCC makers seem to think us users will only have Railcom fitted in certain blocks and not every block or section of track. I would prefer to have it in every block as almost all my blocks serve a primary function in routing and control.

 

So I would suggest to think hard about Railcom, what it does, how much it will cost and what the benefits are of having a fully fitted Railcom layout as opposed to a strategically fitted one.

 

As for James comments about using the 511 etc with Lenz, yes it can be done as you already know from the exchanges we had all those moons ago. Whilst the S88 bus and the high sped version of it is excellent, when interfaced with the current ZTC system you are still boxed into a DCC system that really does not met the needs of the software at the moment. And as for the future. Well it could be like waiting for income tax to be cancelled as it is no longer needed to support the Napoleonic wars. And don't forget. ZTC is loosely based on the Xpressnet system of the Lenz world. If you go for ESU then its not really worth using the ZTC stuff with it but could be via the sniffer port

[john dew]

You are right, James, in your last para. That is what I was getting at, but as Andy points out, is it really worth it. I have both a 511 and a pair of 622s, so whatever system I move over to, I would like to try to have at least the handhelds interfaced. Andy and others showed me the necessary connector wiring several years ago, and I still have those files.

 

With Xmas just passed, I have to think hard about shelling out for Railcom AND a new system. May just have to play offline for a while longer.

 

 

Hi Geoff

 

I hadnt realised you had posted here.....teach me to read and reply to emails in sequence . As always lots of sound advice here and now you have prompted me to look at my switchboard colours which are right out of the box!

 

I think you may be confusing RR&Co Train Controller (the software) with Railcom which is a new(?) feed back device which will enable trains to be individually identified ...............thats a very simplistic description..............and involves upgraded decoders and additional equpiment.

 

Regards

[two tone green]

Greetings John, hope the new year goes well for you over the other side of the pond.

[kbriffa]

Just jumping the gun a bit, this is what a block looks like in RR&Co V7 Gold. It has three block occupancy detectors in it and is in fact one big block made up of three blocks. The ones at each end are small blocks only slightly longer than the longest loco in my fleet with the middle block able to take the longest train I run. Why is it like this, it will take a bit of explain and best left until later when things have developed a bit.

 

 

Can you tell us why the lengths of the blocks are the way they are? The thing I haven't understood about block detection is that when a loco moves on to the next block, the block it has just left will show unoccupied even though the rest of the train is still in that block. My fear is that the next following train will enter this block and collide with the rear of the train becuase the operator/system was marking that block unoccupied when it actually wasn't. I hope I explained myself.......

 

BTW, wonderful thread!

 

Thanks

Kenneth

 

PS Happy New Year!

[peach james]

There are 3 ways to ensure that the rear of the proceeding train is protected:

 

1. Resistive Wheelsets (Assuming current detection rather than optical)

2. Timer (just like the real thing C 1850- it means it can get messy!)

3. In/Out count (Car Axle/ect) using optical tech. Has all the fun of the real thing too...

 

The "best" that I have found is a combination of 1 and 2. Set timers for a little longer than you want the block to be held over in normal conditions, and use resistive axles to try to prevent the last waggon being bopped when it falls off the back of the train. It worked OK last night, when I had a seperation of one of my HHA's, the following train stopped 2 blocks away and held.

 

Once you get to a more complicated schedule (TTG...) then there is a serious problem of being able to stop the program to fix the problem then restart it. At present, I can get 3 trains running at the same time- which is kind of spectacular. I haven't yet had a good pile up, but I can feel one coming on.

 

James

[john dew]

Greetings John, hope the new year goes well for you over the other side of the pond.

 

Thanks TTG and a Happy New Year to you

 

 

Can you tell us why the lengths of the blocks are the way they are? The thing I haven't understood about block detection is that when a loco moves on to the next block, the block it has just left will show unoccupied even though the rest of the train is still in that block. My fear is that the next following train will enter this block and collide with the rear of the train becuase the operator/system was marking that block unoccupied when it actually wasn't. I hope I explained myself.......

 

BTW, wonderful thread!

 

Thanks

Kenneth

 

PS Happy New Year!

 

 

To add to James's comments

 

 

 

[1] Block Length : It is sometimes argued that Blocks should always be the length of your longest train. I have found this is both unrealistic and sometimes impractical.......if you are planning to change locos etc or do shunting manouvres it makes sense to have strategically placed short stub blocks.

 

What version are you using Kenneth?

Resistive wheel sets is perhaps the most common solution but so far I have resisted (sorry couldnt resist the pun ) installing any, preferring to rely on fine tuning RR&Co. It is much easier to do this with 7.0 Gold

 

[2] Releasing Blocks : The following train cannot enter the unoccupied block until it is released by the first train. The default is for the preceding block to be released when the the engine reaches the stop marker of the next block. There are a number of options in schedule rules relating to block release which can modify this. For example by specifying Max Train length in Block Properties and adjusting schedule rules you can avoid an over long train from stopping in certain blocks.

 

I havent tried this yet but I think you can also use Flagmen to also control block release

 

 

Hope this helps

 

Kind Regards

[kbriffa]

I have still to download RR&Co and play around with it but one thing is certain - from what I have been reading it sure is a flexible and useful program which lets you customise according to your layout.

 

From replies I have had from this thread and others I will very probably be going down the resistor wheelsets path.

 

With regards to the length of blocks, this seems to be still be a grey area with some advocating length of block as long as your longest train and other not. I read in a post by TTG a couple of years back that it would be better to divide the 'block' into sub-blocks so that RR&Co would be better able to handle braking and stopping of trains (he gave the example of the Platform block being divided into the the Platform west, middle and east sub-blocks).

 

I think what I will do for my layout is to have blocks (where no junctions are present) as much as possible as long as my longest train and have each main block bordered on either side by smaller start/stop blocks as long as my longest loco and use this to control entry into the main blocks as suggested by John above.

 

What do you modellers think about this system of blocks? Will it work? Any immediate flaws you can think of?

 

Thanks again

Kenneth

[john dew]

I have still to download RR&Co and play around with it but one thing is certain - from what I have been reading it sure is a flexible and useful program which lets you customise according to your layout.

 

From replies I have had from this thread and others I will very probably be going down the resistor wheelsets path.

 

With regards to the length of blocks, this seems to be still be a grey area with some advocating length of block as long as your longest train and other not. I read in a post by TTG a couple of years back that it would be better to divide the 'block' into sub-blocks so that RR&Co would be better able to handle braking and stopping of trains (he gave the example of the Platform block being divided into the the Platform west, middle and east sub-blocks).

 

I think what I will do for my layout is to have blocks (where no junctions are present) as much as possible as long as my longest train and have each main block bordered on either side by smaller start/stop blocks as long as my longest loco and use this to control entry into the main blocks as suggested by John above.

 

What do you modellers think about this system of blocks? Will it work? Any immediate flaws you can think of?

 

Thanks again

Kenneth

 

Hi Kenneth

 

You are dead right about the flexibilty there are usually 2 or 3 different ways of solving a problem......sometimes it takes a while finding even one solution .......as you have read the learning curve can be steep.

 

You will be amazed when you start playing around with the demo version. As I said earlier Version 7 (particularly Gold) represents a significant upgrade on previous versions. TTGs sub block concept to handle braking and stopping related I think to 5.8. With 7.0 Gold you can have any number of "shifted" brake and stop markers in one block.

 

I think James is still using version 5.0 so his solutions (ie wheel sets) are valid for that version.....I am less convinced they are needed for 7.0

 

The small sub blocks are still needed in stations and storage yards to handle situations like the loco uncoupling and running around the train because any schedule must consist of more than one block. To demonstrate the flexibilty of Gold..... a Train can move into a single block in a terminus and stop, uncouple and move forward a few inches and stop.....a second loco can move from a loco spur (the short second block) into the occupied block and stop at the rear of the train and couple ready to move out .....awesome

 

I may have mislead you with my comments about short blocks.....they are need as described above I dont think you need to top and tail every long block on your running lines.....you just use the various rules and properties to protect the block

 

When you have downloaded let us know how you get on

 

Kind Regards

[peach james]

John, you are right, I am using 5.0

 

The choice of the length of the detection section is not the same as the choice of the block length- it's far easier to put 2 detection sections into a block in RR&Co vs putting in another detection section. (once or twice, I have been bitten...)

 

If I was starting at 0, I would put detection sections planned to be 1 ft apart except in the staging yard. It would mean more detection blocks, but then that is one of the costs of doing business. The cost per block is around $8, and given the cost of the associated trackwork it doesn't seem too bad of an investment.

 

(that would mean well more than doubling the number of blocks on Long Marton- but it is easy enough to put multi sections into one, as I have done on the connecting trackwork, where there are 6 detection sections feeding into a single block)

 

Generally, you can come up with some ideas as to how far apart the blocks need to be- densest in areas like stations, and less dense on running lines.

 

James

[two tone green]

Hi All,

 

I can very little to what has already been said about Kenneth has been asking about.

 

As for Kenneth mentioning my posts a few years ago, this does cover the old days with versions before V7 and in particular V7 Gold.

 

V7 Gold with all the flexibility built into it have largely made blocks with multiple occupancy detectors redundant with one block occupancy detector and brake and stop markers to meet the requirements of the user more the norm now.

 

But, there are times when the old way with three detectors in a block is useful for security and safety. I don't think I will change my fiddle yard over to single occupancy detectors just so I know which end a loco is at as the short block at the end of the main storage road contains details of the loco occupying it. That way as well a single loco can occupy a long block but leave a space behind for a whole train as well.

 

As for resistive wheel sets, for me a must. Don't forget that as more and more stock now becomes available fitted with lights, then this meets the requirements of having resistive wheel sets and an item of stock fitted with lights shows up in a section of track fitted with current sensing block occupancy detectors.

 

There are so many different ways of doing things in RR&Co that end up with the same ending it is difficult to describe the ultimate best way of doing things and as you have not down loaded the software yet, I like John above would suggest downloading the software and play. Its free to play and when the bug has bitten and implanted itself in you then you will find it easy to part with your pennies for V7 Gold.

[two tone green]

Just to add to the above, don't forget you will need a long block with three block occupancy detectors or three blocks with out any 'breaks' in between them, all with block occupancy detectors for engine calibration using the software.

 

Unless you use a rolling road that is supported by RR&Co, this by far the best way of calibrating your locos.

 

When it comes to the block occupancy detectors, the current sensing type is best.

[kbriffa]

Just to add to the above, don't forget you will need a long block with three block occupancy detectors or three blocks with out any 'breaks' in between them, all with block occupancy detectors for engine calibration using the software.

 

Unless you use a rolling road that is supported by RR&Co, this by far the best way of calibrating your locos.

 

When it comes to the block occupancy detectors, the current sensing type is best.

 

Thanks for all the help. This evening did my first foray into RRandCo with the demo/offline version while I had a quiet moment at work. Must say so far so good.

 

Another question which I apologize immediately for being off-topic but do you know if and how one can wire LEDs to the LDT RS-8? I would like to built an LED panel for the benefit of friends and visitors. BTW, where did you buy your LDT RS-8? Promise I will retire to the quiet corner after this......