Waddlemarsh - somewhere southwest of London sometime before today

[Gwiwer]

Here is the mess I have got myself into.

 

First is the actual track plan with the position (as of today) where I have power inputs and IRJs.  Clearly there is something not right because while individually most parts of the layout will work under power there remain dead sections through several points and both double-slips, plus there are numerous shorts which I don't understand enough about to rectify.  

 

The second and third are the wiring diagrams supplied with the custom-built crossover track which is shown as "A" in the track plan.  You will notice that the diagram caters for a crossover with a plain diamond but the unit is actually a double slip not a plain diamond.  I therefore have no idea how to wire it correctly.  

 

The colours used on the wiring diagram are as fitted to the track piece and all those which exist are fitted exactly as shown.  However there are "doubled" or "piggy-backed" auxiliary switches (Peco PL-13 as per diagram) which is something I cannot get to work.  They simply will not piggy-back with each other.  The bar from the point motor is not long enough to go through two and where I have got them doubled up they jam the motor.  

 

All points are Peco code 75 electrofrog and all are fitted with PL-13 accessory switches except for the three-way which has nothing fitted, and neither do the points in the fiddle yard which lead to dead ends because frog switching here is not required.  

 

Good luck!

 

 

 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

Here is the mess I have got myself into.

 

First is the actual track plan with the position (as of today) where I have power inputs and IRJs.  Clearly there is something not right because while individually most parts of the layout will work under power there remain dead sections through several points and both double-slips, plus there are numerous shorts which I don't understand enough about to rectify.  

 

The second and third are the wiring diagrams supplied with the custom-built crossover track which is shown as "A" in the track plan.  You will notice that the diagram caters for a crossover with a plain diamond but the unit is actually a double slip not a plain diamond.  I therefore have no idea how to wire it correctly.  

 

The colours used on the wiring diagram are as fitted to the track piece and all those which exist are fitted exactly as shown.  However there are "doubled" or "piggy-backed" auxiliary switches (Peco PL-13 as per diagram) which is something I cannot get to work.  They simply will not piggy-back with each other.  The bar from the point motor is not long enough to go through two and where I have got them doubled up they jam the motor.  

 

All points are Peco code 75 electrofrog and all are fitted with PL-13 accessory switches except for the three-way which has nothing fitted, and neither do the points in the fiddle yard which lead to dead ends because frog switching here is not required.  

 

Good luck!

 

 

 

 

 

Rick, I'll try to use some of my hotel thinking time in Melbourne next week to have a look at this for you. My first impression is that you haven't got enough insulating rail joiners but in the meantime, I've a few questions that will help:

 

- please just confirm that all the points, including the slips, diamonds and three-ways, are electrofrog and in the case of the custom formation live frog throughout.

- please confirm whether you have modified the Peco electrofrogs in order to use the auxiliary switches or have you used them straight from the box?

- please confirm whether there are any rail breaks in the custom formation.

- please confirm that all the control inputs come from the same power unit - are they switched?

- please confirm where the "dead" sections are (also, if possible, where and when the shorts appear although I realise that this might not be so easy).
 

Thanks.

[Gwiwer]

9 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Rick, I'll try to use some of my hotel thinking time in Melbourne next week to have a look at this for you. My first impression is that you haven't got enough insulating rail joiners but in the meantime, I've a few questions that will help:

 

- please just confirm that all the points, including the slips, diamonds and three-ways, are electrofrog and in the case of the custom formation live frog throughout.

- please confirm whether you have modified the Peco electrofrogs in order to use the auxiliary switches or have you used them straight from the box?

- please confirm whether there are any rail breaks in the custom formation.

- please confirm that all the control inputs come from the same power unit - are they switched?

- please confirm where the "dead" sections are (also, if possible, where and when the shorts appear although I realise that this might not be so easy).
 

Thanks.

1.  Confirmed - everything is live frog.

2.  Confirmed - all straight from the box.  However it is possible that they are of different eras with some requiring the wires to be clipped for frog switching.  AFAIK all such wires have been clipped.

3.  All breaks and cuts are electrically bonded other than those on the crossover which have the tiny plastic lugs to prevent shorts in the same way that modern points have them in the blade rails.

4.  Confirmed with one exception.  Power inputs 1-4 are from a Morley Vortrak with each of 1-4 independent of each other at source.  Input 5 only controls the kick-back siding (shed road) and is from a Gaugemaster hand-held unit.  This is only powered up when the point to the siding is set normal insulating it from the rest of the layout.  The two points here co-act so that when that at (5) is set normal its neighbour near the IRJ is reversed and vice versa.  

5.  Dead sections appear to be on the double-slips when any slip route is set and on the three turnouts forming part of Piece A all of which are equipped with the plastic lugs in the blade rails.  Shorts is, as you say, not so easy but one persistent one arises when controller 2 is used for any move with the turnout top-left (marked (1)) is set to the inner route (second track from top in the diagram) AND either or both of the points at Piece A are not set normal.  In other words no short if I set the route through A from the fifth siding down from the top to either of those on the left-hand side of the diagram, or diverging at the turnout numbered (2) towards the single IRJ.  But a short exists if the same is applied from any of the top four sidings.  

 

[St Enodoc]

10 minutes ago, Gwiwer said:

1.  Confirmed - everything is live frog.

2.  Confirmed - all straight from the box.  However it is possible that they are of different eras with some requiring the wires to be clipped for frog switching.  AFAIK all such wires have been clipped.

3.  All breaks and cuts are electrically bonded other than those on the crossover which have the tiny plastic lugs to prevent shorts in the same way that modern points have them in the blade rails.

4.  Confirmed with one exception.  Power inputs 1-4 are from a Morley Vortrak with each of 1-4 independent of each other at source.  Input 5 only controls the kick-back siding (shed road) and is from a Gaugemaster hand-held unit.  This is only powered up when the point to the siding is set normal insulating it from the rest of the layout.  The two points here co-act so that when that at (5) is set normal its neighbour near the IRJ is reversed and vice versa.  

5.  Dead sections appear to be on the double-slips when any slip route is set and on the three turnouts forming part of Piece A all of which are equipped with the plastic lugs in the blade rails.  Shorts is, as you say, not so easy but one persistent one arises when controller 2 is used for any move with the turnout top-left (marked (1)) is set to the inner route (second track from top in the diagram) AND either or both of the points at Piece A are not set normal.  In other words no short if I set the route through A from the fifth siding down from the top to either of those on the left-hand side of the diagram, or diverging at the turnout numbered (2) towards the single IRJ.  But a short exists if the same is applied from any of the top four sidings.  

 

Thanks Rick. I'll see what I can do.

[AndyID]

Rick,

 

I think this schematic represents the left end of your layout. If you can print the attached PDF, mark the location of every IRJ and post a pic we might be able to sort out the problems quite quickly. I'll produce a schematic for the right-hand end if this is useful.

 

 

Andy.

 

 

 

WaddleL1.pdf

[5BarVT]

Hi Rick,

May I ask how you use the layout with your 4 way controller?  I think it may shed some light on possible problems!

 

Running from 1 to 1, I assume you will use controller 1.  Likewise 3 to 3 will use 3!  How do you run from 2 to 1 or 2 to 3?  Do you use the same controller throughout or do you transfer from 2 to 1 or 3 (as appropriate) where the tracks ‘ join’?

 

Also, do your crossovers operate together, or do you switch each end individually?

 

Paul.

[St Enodoc]

OK Rick, first some good news. All the feeds and breaks that you have at the moment seem to be in the right place, although personally I'd replace all the single rail breaks with double rail breaks. I don't like single rail breaks as they can give you a false sense of security. Take the one on the connecting line on the left, between feeds 2 and 3, for example. If the point at feed 3 is straight the right hand rail will be fed at one polarity from feed 2 and at the other polarity from feed 3 - hence a short.

 

However, I don't think you've got enough feeds or breaks. You should have a double rail break every two points that are back to back and also between each feed point on the same track. You also need enough feed points so that they don't leave any piece of track unfed.

 

I have to admit that I don't understand the wiring diagrams for your custom-built piece A as they don't seem to show any rail breaks at all.

 

I've worked out some sketches of what I would do to fix the problem and I'll post these at the weekend when I get home and can scan them.

[AndyID]

15 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

OK Rick, first some good news. All the feeds and breaks that you have at the moment seem to be in the right place, although personally I'd replace all the single rail breaks with double rail breaks. I don't like single rail breaks as they can give you a false sense of security. Take the one on the connecting line on the left, between feeds 2 and 3, for example. If the point at feed 3 is straight the right hand rail will be fed at one polarity from feed 2 and at the other polarity from feed 3 - hence a short.

 

However, I don't think you've got enough feeds or breaks. You should have a double rail break every two points that are back to back and also between each feed point on the same track. You also need enough feed points so that they don't leave any piece of track unfed.

 

I have to admit that I don't understand the wiring diagrams for your custom-built piece A as they don't seem to show any rail breaks at all.

 

I've worked out some sketches of what I would do to fix the problem and I'll post these at the weekend when I get home and can scan them.

 

For what it's worth this is where all the breaks are on the custom formation. Most of them are visible in the photo's Rick posted on the first page of the thread. There are seven crossings (frogs) that need to be switched. I've colored them to correspond with the wires attached to the formation. It should not be necessary make any other rail breaks.

 

The frogs at the double slip are switched just as they would have to be if it were a simple diamond crossing. Obviously the slip roads have to be controlled by point motors and the constructor has taken that into account.

 

EDIT: One thing to watch is the positioning of the two motors that control the points on the double-slip. The motor that controls the polarity of the "green" frog will be physically positioned at the left-hand end of the double slip and the "orange" motor will be at the right-hand end. The constructor's diagram might lead you think it's the other way round.

 

 

Scissor2.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 6, 2019 by AndyID
more info

[St Enodoc]

25 minutes ago, AndyID said:

 

For what it's worth this is where all the breaks are on the custom formation. Most of them are visible in the photo's Rick posted on the first page of the thread. There are seven crossings (frogs) that need to be switched. I've colored them to correspond with the wires attached to the formation. It should not be necessary make any other rail breaks.

 

The frogs at the double slip are switched just as they would have to be if it were a simple diamond crossing. Obviously the slip roads have to be controlled by point motors and the constructor has taken that into account.

 

EDIT: One thing to watch is the positioning of the two motors that control the points on the double-slip. The motor that controls the polarity of the "green" frog will be physically positioned at the left-hand end of the double slip and the "orange" motor will be at the right-hand end. The constructor's diagram might lead you think it's the other way round.

 

 

 

Scissor1.pdf 1.75 kB · 0 downloads

 

That's good Andy, you've saved me some time. Personally, I'd put a break in the uppermost and lowermost rails in the middle of the formation too, because I always do, but in this particular case I agree that they would be superfluous.

[lezz01]

It's very good and has also saved me a good deal of time and frustration too.

Regards Lez.Z.

[AndyID]

5 hours ago, lezz01 said:

It's very good and has also saved me a good deal of time and frustration too.

Regards Lez.Z.

 

There is a simpler way to do it but it depends on the specifics of your layout.

 

 

This only has five crossings that need to be switched (four if you don't have the double-slip).

 

The trick is that all four points are changed simultaneously. They are all either set to crossover or not. If you are using servos or some other motors they can be controlled from a single two-position switch. It also needs another switch to set the frogs in the diamonds to the correct polarities depending on the selected route.

 

It could be a bit more reliable as it only needs two switches controlled by point motors. A snag with this could be that a vehicle parked within the confines of the crossovers might foul a point.

 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

On 05/12/2019 at 23:13, St Enodoc said:

OK Rick, first some good news. All the feeds and breaks that you have at the moment seem to be in the right place, although personally I'd replace all the single rail breaks with double rail breaks. I don't like single rail breaks as they can give you a false sense of security. Take the one on the connecting line on the left, between feeds 2 and 3, for example. If the point at feed 3 is straight the right hand rail will be fed at one polarity from feed 2 and at the other polarity from feed 3 - hence a short.

 

However, I don't think you've got enough feeds or breaks. You should have a double rail break every two points that are back to back and also between each feed point on the same track. You also need enough feed points so that they don't leave any piece of track unfed.

 

I have to admit that I don't understand the wiring diagrams for your custom-built piece A as they don't seem to show any rail breaks at all.

 

I've worked out some sketches of what I would do to fix the problem and I'll post these at the weekend when I get home and can scan them.

Rick, here are two sketches to expand what I've said above.

 

The first shows the overall wiring diagram. I've straightened it out but I think that topologically it's the same as your original sketch.

 

I've shown the feeds in good old Railway Modeller conventional style. Every feed feeds both rails. All the rail breaks are in both rails. You can see that every point is fed only from the toe end and wherever two points are heel to heel, no matter how far apart, there is a rail break between them.

 

The second shows how I would deal with the custom piece A. Here I've shown every rail individually. This should be topologically equivalent to Andy's first sketch. Here I've shown both rails on each track so the rail breaks are only in the rail concerned.

 

I've shown five point motors (V to Z) and nine crossings (A to J) of which seven (A, B, C, D, F, H, J) are vee crossings or frogs, and two (E, G) are the obtuse or K crossings on the diamond.

 

Here's how to connect each crossing, with the upper rail on the diagram being Black and the lower being White.

 

Crossing A - switched by point V. V normal, A white. V reverse, A black.

Crossing B - switched by point X. X normal, B white. X reverse, B black.

Crossing C - switched by point W. W normal, C black. W reverse, C white.

Crossing D - switched by point X. X normal, D white. X reverse, D black.

Crossing E - permanently connected to black.

Crossing F - switched by point V. V normal, F white. V reverse, F black.

Crossing G - permanently connected to white.

Crossing H - switched by point Y. Y normal, H black. Y reverse, H white.

Crossing J - switched by point Z. Z normal, J black. Z reverse, J white.

 

Points V and X need two switches each, while the others only need one. Connect each crossing in turn and check before moving on to the next one and all should be well.

 

Note that this arrangement means that, as on the real thing, you can't have the scissors set for both crossover routes at the same time. Andy's second sketch works in this case and only needs one switch for each point motor. Either will work - it's up to you.

 

 

Edited December 7, 2019 by St Enodoc
De-garble last paragraph

[Gwiwer]

I have quite a bit to thank you gents for and to think on over the weeks ahead.  It is unlikely that too much will get done now before the new year but I can tinker here and there in a spare hour and maybe change the rail breaks as required.  

 

On the diagram above points V and Z fire together; they use separate motors wired to a single switch since both are required to be either normal or reversed, never one of each.  Points W, X and Y fire individually because all possible options are required.  

 

Based upon wisdom received I have purchased a pair of PL-15 accessory switches which I am told can be used to replace the double-stacked PL-13 units.  The latter system does not work.  I am unsure how to wire the PL-15s in this context at this stage.  

 

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

I have quite a bit to thank you gents for and to think on over the weeks ahead.  It is unlikely that too much will get done now before the new year but I can tinker here and there in a spare hour and maybe change the rail breaks as required.  

 

On the diagram above points V and Z fire together; they use separate motors wired to a single switch since both are required to be either normal or reversed, never one of each.  Points W, X and Y fire individually because all possible options are required.  

 

Based upon wisdom received I have purchased a pair of PL-15 accessory switches which I am told can be used to replace the double-stacked PL-13 units.  The latter system does not work.  I am unsure how to wire the PL-15s in this context at this stage.  

 

Let us know how you get on Rick.

 

Using the same reasoning as you have set out, points X and Y also need to fire together. Only point W is totally independent of the others.

 

I've no experience of PL-15s so I can't help you there, other than to suggest (gently) reading the instructions!

 

You might also want to think about a way to ensure that V/Z and X/Y aren't all reversed at the same time. This could be  something as simple as a bl00dy big notice on the control panel...

[AndyID]

10 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Let us know how you get on Rick.

 

Using the same reasoning as you have set out, points X and Y also need to fire together. Only point W is totally independent of the others.

 

I've no experience of PL-15s so I can't help you there, other than to suggest (gently) reading the instructions!

 

You might also want to think about a way to ensure that V/Z and X/Y aren't all reversed at the same time. This could be  something as simple as a bl00dy big notice on the control panel...

 

I believe Rick is correct in saying X, Y and Z need to be thrown independently. The double-slip has four routes - "slip-up", "slip-down", "diamond top left to bottom" and "diamond bottom left to top" (for want of any better names!)  For either of the slip routes the tiebars have to be set in the same direction (both "up" or both "down"). For the two diamond routes the tiebars have to be set in opposite directions.

 

It is possible to use diodes to simultaneously set all the points in this formation to correspond with any of the desired routes but it might be best to stick with the more labor intensive method initially to get all the wiring sorted out and get some trains running ASAP.

[St Enodoc]

9 minutes ago, AndyID said:

 

I believe Rick is correct in saying X, Y and Z need to be thrown independently. The double-slip has four routes - "slip-up", "slip-down", "diamond top left to bottom" and "diamond bottom left to top" (for want of any better names!)  For either of the slip routes the tiebars have to be set in the same direction (both "up" or both "down"). For the two diamond routes the tiebars have to be set in opposite directions.

 

It is possible to use diodes to simultaneously set all the points in this formation to correspond with any of the desired routes but it might be best to stick with the more labor intensive method initially to get all the wiring sorted out and get some trains running ASAP.

Not sure about that Andy.

 

Adapting your terminology slightly, the routes through the slip are:

 

1. West - North East

2. West - East

3. South West - North East

4. South West - East.

 

Only West and South West form part of the scissors and these are selected by motor X. This must, therefore, always work in conjunction with its counterpart Y.

 

East and North East are independent of the scissors so motor W is entirely independent of the others.

 

Possibly easier to visualise if you imagine that the slip is just a point (X) and that W doesn't exist. Then add W afterwards.

 

I agree with your last paragraph. Get the thing working first then look at different ways to control it.

[AndyID]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

East and North East are independent of the scissors so motor W is entirely independent of the others.

 

 

Yes, they are. But you still have to set W to cross the double-slip.

 

For example, if the route is NE to West, X is set to slip (tiebar pulled towards us) but you won't get far unless the tiebar controlled by W is also pulled towards us

[AndyID]

Rick,

 

Do you have a meter of some sort? If not it would be a good investment. You can get a DVM for about ten quid. If you have one you can check your connections using the continuity mode (ohms) very quickly. Some of them have a beeper to indicate a connection.

 

The only snag is that you'll have to disconnect your controller(s) from the track and remove anything from the layout (locomotives, coaches with lights, etc) that might draw current from the track. Once you do that it's very simple to find out what is connected to what, or not.

 

Also, it may seem like a pain, but I'd strongly encourage you to to draw a circuit diagram that shows both rails and I really don't think you need to start making all the extra cuts that St E is suggesting. Many of them are quite unnecessary and I'm pretty sure you have no desire to start lifting bits of track that are already in place.

 

I can knock up a CAD schematic for you and it's no trouble. I'm recovering from lurgi and I've run out of jigsaws

 

Andy

[Gwiwer]

A few moments playing with the double-slip crossover proves that W, X and Y must all be able to move independently of each other.  

 

I have a basic meter which I can play around with once I get the chance.  Disconnecting stuff isn't a problem at this stage and neither is relocation of the stock stored on the layout.  

[St Enodoc]

4 hours ago, AndyID said:

 

Yes, they are. But you still have to set W to cross the double-slip.

 

For example, if the route is NE to West, X is set to slip (tiebar pulled towards us) but you won't get far unless the tiebar controlled by W is also pulled towards us

 

That's right Andy. W controls which way you enter or leave the right hand side of the double slip, NE or E. But X controls which way you enter or leave the scissors, W or SW, via the left hand side of the double slip.

 

If you were to redraw the layout so that there was no double slip but two points toe to toe, X would be the one on the left forming part of the scissors and W would be the one on the right controlling the two uppermost right hand tracks. All the double slip does is to superimpose those two points on top of each other.

 

4 hours ago, AndyID said:

Rick,

 

Do you have a meter of some sort? If not it would be a good investment. You can get a DVM for about ten quid. If you have one you can check your connections using the continuity mode (ohms) very quickly. Some of them have a beeper to indicate a connection.

 

The only snag is that you'll have to disconnect your controller(s) from the track and remove anything from the layout (locomotives, coaches with lights, etc) that might draw current from the track. Once you do that it's very simple to find out what is connected to what, or not.

 

Also, it may seem like a pain, but I'd strongly encourage you to to draw a circuit diagram that shows both rails and I really don't think you need to start making all the extra cuts that St E is suggesting. Many of them are quite unnecessary and I'm pretty sure you have no desire to start lifting bits of track that are already in place.

 

I can knock up a CAD schematic for you and it's no trouble. I'm recovering from lurgi and I've run out of jigsaws

 

Andy

 

Yes, you could change some of the breaks from double to single or possibly take some out altogether. You could also reduce the number of feed points. But doing so could easily lead to mystery shorts or dead sections, which is where we came in.

 

4 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

A few moments playing with the double-slip crossover proves that W, X and Y must all be able to move independently of each other.  

 

I have a basic meter which I can play around with once I get the chance.  Disconnecting stuff isn't a problem at this stage and neither is relocation of the stock stored on the layout.  

 

That should be the case for all the points as far as the electrics are concerned, RIck, but from the viewpoint of physically moving trains across the diamond in the scissors V and Z must work together and X and Y must work together.

[AndyID]

20 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

If you were to redraw the layout so that there was no double slip but two points toe to toe, .

 

I know what you mean but unfortunately it will not work that way. Both tiebars have to be coordinated according to the desired route. This PECO double-slip link might help.

 

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1541/1303/t/4/assets/Turnout_Plan_SL90-1535030595846.pdf?14981673971676068479

 

I suspect Rick does not care to add any more rail-breaks than are absolutely necessary. There are no such things as "mystery shorts". Short circuits can only be the result of a bad schematic or faults/wiring that does not match the schematic. Trial and error is not the best way to go about this.

 

I'm sorry if I seem a bit jaded.

[St Enodoc]

49 minutes ago, AndyID said:

 

I know what you mean but unfortunately it will not work that way. Both tiebars have to be coordinated according to the desired route. This PECO double-slip link might help.

 

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1541/1303/t/4/assets/Turnout_Plan_SL90-1535030595846.pdf?14981673971676068479

 

I suspect Rick does not care to add any more rail-breaks than are absolutely necessary. There are no such things as "mystery shorts". Short circuits can only be the result of a bad schematic or faults/wiring that does not match the schematic. Trial and error is not the best way to go about this.

 

I'm sorry if I seem a bit jaded.

Andy, we're going to have to agree to disagree I'm afraid. To me, "mystery shorts" are ones that you can't find and/or get rid of, which is part of Rick's problem. I've never suggested trial and error as a means of fixing that.

 

I'm going to leave it to Rick now to mull over and not post further unless he asks a specific question, as I think that the issue is in danger of getting confused.

[AndyID]

9 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Andy, we're going to have to agree to disagree I'm afraid. To me, "mystery shorts" are ones that you can't find and/or get rid of, which is part of Rick's problem. I've never suggested trial and error as a means of fixing that.

 

I'm going to leave it to Rick now to mull over and not post further unless he asks a specific question, as I think that the issue is in danger of getting confused.

 

Again, there are no such things as "mystery shorts". That is not Rick's problem. There are only short circuits where none were intended. Wiring a layout can be quite complicated but there is nothing "mysterious" about any of it. It's simply a case of creating a valid electrical schematic and sticking to it.

 

Anyone can post anything (within certain limits) on this thread. If they think I'm a blithering idiot I'm happy to argue the point (although MrsID might well agree with them.) My main objective is to get Rick's layout (despite the fact that all his stuff is GREEN) up and running ASAP. I have no interest in scoring academic points and I certainly do not want to ram anything down Rick's throat. I'm pretty sure Rick will let me know if he has any objections.

 

BTW, is there anything wrong with,

 

"Both tiebars have to be coordinated according to the desired route."?

[Gwiwer]

Today being the first day for several weeks, owing to one medical issue piggy-backing another, when I have felt able to take a look at things.  I shall be investigating Andy's version for now at least.  There is often more than one way to achieve a desired outcome and this seems to offer the least amount of change and disruption to the status quo.  I'll get back to you when I have made a few changes and tested the electrickery which results.  

[Gwiwer]

On 08/12/2019 at 07:41, AndyID said:

all his stuff is GREEN)

 

Not all

 

Stock currently parked on the layout includes blue, choc / cream, blood / custard, maroon, bauxite, grey and black.  And some green but not an overwhelming amount.  Although that could be arranged