DCC starting out - I'm not a techy but so far its been worth it!

[Oldddudders]

8 minutes ago, TomJ said:

I’m not a techy person and certainly don’t know how to run my railway by computer. BUT I’m a total convert to DCC. There are so many systems and it doesn’t have to involve computers or automation. 
I use a NCE powercab. The layout is wired pretty much as I would for dc except no sections or isolated tracks. Imagine you were wiring it to run just one loco - but instead you can run several and park them anywhere etc. 
I control my points from the DCC controller. Again wiring pretty similar except the point wires lead to a decoder not a switch!

Good points (sorry) there. DCC is a very deep and wide ocean. You can just dip your toes in - as I do really, with locos under DCC control, and a few points, but other aspects of the layout controlled by local switches unconnected to DCC - or go for various degrees of immersion, with smartphone throttles and all sorts of bolt-ons controlled from your command station or a PC. In the extreme, I suspect people on here could tell you how to run your layout from the moon. But it's all optional. You decide how much and how far. Just locos is fine - gives you the freedom of operation Pete the Elaner described earlier. 

[ejstubbs]

19 hours ago, RobjUK said:

In principle, if your layout works as it is with a conventional controller, everything powered and no shorts, then connecting a DCC controller to the same wires and putting a DCC loco on the track should "just work"..

 

Not so much help for the OP, though, since - as he stated in this post - his previous layout has been dismantled due to a house move.  In his words: "the under baseboard wiring was a nightmare of spaghetti which I don't want to get involved in again if I can avoid it".  So I think in his case we can reasonably assume that he wants to start from scratch, and avoid having to do as much wiring as he did the first time around.

[RobjUK]

6 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

In his words: "the under baseboard wiring was a nightmare of spaghetti which I don't want to get involved in again if I can avoid it".

 

That's why I also said:

 

19 hours ago, RobjUK said:

It should need less isolation and section switching than with a conventional system running two or more locos, as with DCC they run on exactly the same power connections, rather than different sections & controllers as with DC / conventional power.

 

 

 

[halsey]

Hi all,

I'm getting the general picture (thanks) that there will be less wiring hand in hand with more functionality BUT if I then maximise the potential (signals turnouts etc) there will then be more 

KISS is my mantra 

Here's a different question if I go down the DCC route and don't like it say a year in will that involve me in a lot of rebuilding and VV if I start building an analogue layout and wish I had gone DCC will that also involve a lot of work

Put another way is the decision mutually exclusive and must be made before I start??

[Oldddudders]

The fact is that a proper wiring job on a DC layout is essentially the same as the same thing on a DCC layout - except that the DCC layout doesn't have to have lots of section switches, of course, and needs far fewer insulated rail-joiners. 

 

You can wire up a layout with just one pair of wires attached to the rails somewhere, and if you are lucky and the current reaches all parts of the layout then DCC will work, just as it will with DC. However, the slightest loss of continuity between rails and joiners anywhere and you will find dead sections you didn't ask for. It really isn't recommended to take the risk if you want your model railway to be fun. 

[ejstubbs]

54 minutes ago, RobjUK said:

That's why I also said:

 

It should need less isolation and section switching than with a conventional system running two or more locos, as with DCC they run on exactly the same power connections, rather than different sections & controllers as with DC / conventional power.

 

But that was not the part of your post that I was commenting on.  Which is why that wasn't the part of your post that I quoted.  And my comment was specifically in the context of the OP's situation; I wasn't saying that anything you said was wrong per se.

 

Trying to prove me wrong by misrepresenting what I was saying just makes you wrong.

[cravensdmufan]

On 21/10/2019 at 09:20, halsey said:

Is there an idiots guide to DCC - perhaps there is a good web reference??

I found the DCC Wiki very helpful. It guided me through from the very start - "Introduction to DCC".

 

https://dccwiki.com/

 

It's not heavy reading as you can just check out the bits you need.

 

Edit: Sorry folks just seen RobjUK has already mentioned the site.  I must learn to read threads more thoroughly before responding!

 

 

Edited October 23, 2019 by cravensdmufan
As above

[friscopete]

At the most basic my US  switching layout uses Peco insullfrog  and a Basic cheapo Bachmann DCC  .It all works fine as my locos are all biggish ,heavy ,and 8 wheelers .I do find however that even my little Peckett will run OK through the dead frogs but I dont recomend it. I have minimal wiring and do often use a Tech 6 DCC/DC black box as well.its all very simple ...just like me.

[boxbrownie]

I am in the process of collecting all the track etc for my new layout, I am now quite restricted due to health what exactly I can do regarding “engineering/modelling” on a layout, hence I have decided to use a ready ballasted track (Trix-C track) with every point having “within ballast” electronic DCC controlled motors and will have just two or three feeds to power the circuits, it seems to be the most simple way to electrify/DCC a layout, all the point motors will be controlled and powered from their track section and if required it can all be done with the main power feed wires routed on top of the baseboard surface and disguised after.

 

I can live with the compromise of ready ballasted track as once weathered it looks really very realistic, it’s the satisfaction of running trains I want nowadays as I have grown weary of trying and failing for the past few years of modelling as I used to.

 

 

[Dungrange]

11 hours ago, halsey said:

Here's a different question if I go down the DCC route and don't like it say a year in will that involve me in a lot of rebuilding and VV if I start building an analogue layout and wish I had gone DCC will that also involve a lot of work

Put another way is the decision mutually exclusive and must be made before I start??

 

That depends on the track plan and the nature of operation, but generally it will be easier to convert an analogue layout to DCC than convert a DCC layout to analogue operation.  That will be especially true if you have used wire capable of carrying DCC currents when building for DC.  However, if you build an analogue layout with small gauge wire (eg rated to carry just 1 Amp) and then choose to use a DCC controller with a high current output (eg 5 Amps) then you could be faced with a significant rewire.

 

A 'simple' DCC layout should always require less wire than the same layout wired for DC operation, but the reduction in the amount of wiring will depend on the specifics of the layout.  The saving in the amount of wiring by going DCC can be broken down into a number of distinct categories.

1. Isolating sections.  On a DC layout you will require on/off switches to isolate locomotives in specific locations.  This isn't required for DCC.  On a Motive Power Depot, you may have dozens of locations at which you want to isolate a locomotive.  On a continuous run mainline, you may have far fewer isolating sections.  You will therefore make a bigger saving in wiring by going DCC in the first case, but of course you would have much more work if you were to decide to convert a DCC MPD layout to analogue operation.
2. Section switches for Cab Control.  If you have a simple 'one engine in steam' type layout in DC with a single controller, then you obviously wouldn't have any reduction in wiring by going DCC.  However, if you were to have a larger layout with more than one controller and dozens of rotary or double pole switches to select the controller, then you could make a significant saving in wiring, as section switches are not required for DCC.  You'd be saving the length of wire between each section and your control panel.
3. Point Motor control.  With a DC layout, if you operate points by point motors, then you will have wires from each point motor back to the switch on your control panel.  For DCC, the wiring can be kept local with the polarity of the frog being determined locally and the point motor connected either to the track bus (the stock rails of your point) or a separate accessory bus.  If you were to wire point control for DCC and then wish to switch to analogue then you would effectively be starting this element of the wiring from scratch and wiring as you would have done if you'd decided to go DC at the outset.

As indicated above, the amount of wire that you will save by going DCC will depend on the number of point motors that you have, how many sections you would require if you stuck with DC and how many isolating sections you would need if you stick with DC.

 

Of course, many people elect to build more advanced or automated DCC layouts.  To automate a layout, you need to know where trains are and that means that you need 'feedback'.  The same is true if you want to create signal interlocking.  Current feedback sensors operate by detecting current draw from a section of track, which of course means breaking your DCC layout up into sections, so in effect you are adding in additional wiring in pretty much the same way as you would have done for Cab Control operation in DC.  For the purposes of fault finding, it would be useful to split the DCC layout into smaller sections, again reversing some of the savings in wiring that you have made by going DCC in the first place.  Then, if you are hoping to use DCC Sound, then you need to ensure that all sidings are permanently powered.  Where you can get away with using the self-isolating properties of points in DC (and you can get away with this in DCC if you don't want sound or lights when parked) you can't adopt this approach with DCC if you want the full benefits of going DCC.  It's all of these things that tend to lead to arguments as to how much wire you save (and conversely how much additional work you will have trying to convert at DCC layout to analogue).

 

Good luck with whatever you decide.

[Philou]

@halsey

 

For what it's worth, I too have decided to dip a toe in DCC - locos with sound - that's my cuppa. I haven't really given much thought of the amount of automation I shall have as the layout starts next month (yippee) but I shall be having point motors and electrofrogs. If I choose an analogue method of controlling point motors, then there wouldn't be any saving in wiring in terms of DC/DCC, BUT I have already a DCC controller that will be able to control all the points I want if I so choose - if I recall up to 9999 different addresses so plenty of room. I have gone for the ECoS system by ESU of Germany. It's quite good and as a contributor mentioned previously, it does have the benefit of a quite large tactile screen and two control knobs so that two locos are always controlled independently at the same time (you can have more but it means sending them off on their own - say on a roundy circuit). Oh and it plays nicely with ESU, Zimo and Hornby TTS chips.

 

Points are also controllable too directly on screen (this I have yet to try). Consisting (double-heading) is a real doddle - done that for the Blue Pullman and a HST unit.

 

If and when I get more confident then I shall look at hooking up a small tablet into the system for greater flexibility.

 

Anyway, I'm sold.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

PS: If you can, as others mentioned, go to a model shop and look at what's on offer - most should have at least one out for testing DCC kit anyway.

Edited October 23, 2019 by Philou

[NIK]

14 hours ago, halsey said:

Hi all,

I'm getting the general picture (thanks) that there will be less wiring hand in hand with more functionality BUT if I then maximise the potential (signals turnouts etc) there will then be more 

KISS is my mantra 

Here's a different question if I go down the DCC route and don't like it say a year in will that involve me in a lot of rebuilding and VV if I start building an analogue layout and wish I had gone DCC will that also involve a lot of work

Put another way is the decision mutually exclusive and must be made before I start??

Hi,

 

With DCC as you add functions such as signals turnouts etc the number of wires increase (similar to DC) but the complexity doesn't increase as much as for DC and the wires can be shorter and can be restricted in length to one baseboard per function. The number of wires going across baseboards or passing around a layout doesn't have to increase.

 

An analogy could be computers and printers in a private home. Adding an extra computer or printer is limited to a standardised cable or wifi link to a router.

 

I don't know any technical solution available that gives extra electrical functionality without some extra wires.

 

Regards

 

Nick

[BR60103]

My recommendation is that you find a local club or some local modeller who has DCC and see what brand they use.  It's useful to have someone who might be able to troubleshoot for you.

The bits that need to be compatible are the controllers and power supplies -- I think there are several sets of incompatible systems. Once you get to the track (or bus wires) all the decoders should be compatible with any control system (but may not).

 

[boxbrownie]

11 hours ago, Philou said:

I have gone for the ECoS system by ESU of Germany. It's quite good and as a contributor mentioned previously, 

 

Points are also controllable too directly on screen (this I have yet to try). Consisting (double-heading) is a real doddle - done that for the Blue Pullman and a HST unit.

 

 

I have already played with drawing the layout I propose on the screen and have programmed two points (off board) as a trial, the complete layout plan (Bredon) took less than an hour to draw and programming the points (once I figured out the odd instructions from Veissmann) was a doddle and works great.

 

I cannot wait to get started for real now.

 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by boxbrownie

[boxbrownie]

11 hours ago, NIK said:

I don't know any technical solution available that gives extra electrical functionality without some extra wires.

 

Regards

 

Nick

I thought long and hard about this due to my modelling dexterity restrictions (as mentioned previously) which is why I decided upon the Trix track route, all the track related DDC accessories (points, signals, light etc) can be powered and switched directly from the track itself so no extra cabling is required for those components, the Trix/Märklin stuff has been designed so it can be assembled and disassembled at the end of the day just like an old “train set” but is also obviously fine for permanent board layouts as well.

 

Thats the theory, hopefully it’ll work that way in practice for me.

[Right Away]

On 23/10/2019 at 08:28, halsey said:

 

Here's a different question if I go down the DCC route and don't like it.........

 

Having dipped your toes into digital control, installed decoders into your motive power units and experienced the flexibility and ease of control that DCC offers, you would be  hard pressed not to like it.

[Sol]

23 hours ago, NIK said:

I don't know any technical solution available that gives extra electrical functionality without some extra wires.

 

Regards

 

Nick

 

I think the DCC Concepts Alpha system works on the principle of two wires serving all the layout accessories & it may follow this process

https://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/lcc_faq_handout.pdf

 

[Pete the Elaner]

On 23/10/2019 at 08:28, halsey said:

Here's a different question if I go down the DCC route and don't like it say a year in will that involve me in a lot of rebuilding and VV if I start building an analogue layout and wish I had gone DCC will that also involve a lot of work

Put another way is the decision mutually exclusive and must be made before I start??

I thought you wanted to keep it simple? 

 

On the latest club layout I am working on...

The track is laid. Lots of insulated rail joiners separate sections & droppers will be fixed to every rail.

Only after this will it matter to me whether the layout is DC or DCC.

It is intended that the layout will be DCC & the sections will be fed through block detection inductors, but to start with, they will all connect back to the same fatter 'bus' wires. If we have a change of membership & they prefer DC, converting it will result in some work underneath the boards only. No track will need to be removed.

 

I have seen several layouts where wiring has been kept to a minimum & as a result short circuits have been created by feeds being in the wrong places.

 

I agree with Right Away. If you ignore extra features offered by DCC, I think you will like the freedom it offers & the feel of driving locos rather than everything which happens to be on that particular track...& the excellent slow speed control that a constant high(er) voltage allows.

[Sol]

10 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

I agree with Right Away. If you ignore extra features offered by DCC, I think you will like the freedom it offers & the feel of driving locos rather than everything which happens to be on that particular track...& the excellent slow speed control that a constant high(er) voltage allows.

 

I had good slow control for shunting on my DC layout but I find DCC allows my crew to run 4 locos in the main station ( 2 shunting & 2 driving trains in & out)  at the same time without having any hassles about what section is connected to what controller !

Loco lights & sounds are not on my "to do" list.    In fact I operate on a sound layout that has 6 locos on the move at the same & its gets distracting while shunting specific wagons to specific drop off locations with all the toots, whistles, bells  & horns outside of the standard loco sounds - chuffs & growls ...

[Pete the Elaner]

4 minutes ago, Sol said:

 

I had good slow control for shunting on my DC layout but I find DCC allows my crew to run 4 locos in the main station ( 2 shunting & 2 driving trains in & out)  at the same time without having any hassles about what section is connected to what controller !

Loco lights & sounds are not on my "to do" list.    In fact I operate on a sound layout that has 6 locos on the move at the same & its gets distracting while shunting specific wagons to specific drop off locations with all the toots, whistles, bells  & horns outside of the standard loco sounds - chuffs & growls ...

That's an excellent example. I often see "I don't like DCC because I don't want this/that" but it wasn't the features which appealed to me in the first place; it was the freedom to drive a train & stop in anywhere then drive another one up to it.

[NIK]

5 hours ago, Sol said:

 

I think the DCC Concepts Alpha system works on the principle of two wires serving all the layout accessories & it may follow this process

https://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/lcc_faq_handout.pdf

 

Hi,

 

As far as I understand it the DCC Concepts Alpha system works by separating off the DCC bus for accessories and providing modules to simplify the provision of switches,  mimic panels and ground signals. Only the Cobalt Alpha digital switch seems to have no wires apart from the cable to the Alpha sniffer) but part of it is duplicating what is in the DCC system (the sending of DCC accessory commands).

 

The same wires run to point motors, signals and track sensors.

So it doesn't seem to be a system that allows expansion without the provision of some wires as I said in my OP.

 

In an ideal world accessories would have no wires.

 

I don't think the Alpha system is compatible with the NMRA LCC which I believe uses CAN hardware to send data to and from LCC accessory modules.

 

Regards

 

Nick

[halsey]

Thanks for all of this guys but I have decided to stay with DC - reasons - I am a bit of a traditionalist and a nostalgia freak and this will feel like playing trains in my childhood which I enjoyed also I will be the only person using and enjoying this layout so there is a limit to what I can mentally keep track of.

Its a bit akin to my liking old canal boats with vintage engines and valve amplifiers!!!!

All your contributions have been invaluable in my coming to this decision I'm sure the thread will run (and run...……..)

Thanks again

Edited October 25, 2019 by halsey

[Sir TophamHatt]

On ‎21‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 15:02, jpendle said:

As regards to DCC controllers/systems, and I'm being deliberately provocative here, I can't abide the systems mentioned already, the Digitrax Zephy, Gaugemaster Prodigy, & other US designed systems. To my eyes they remind me of American school busses, like they were designed 75 years ago and no one can be bothered to bring them up to date. 

 

You're not being provocative just speaking the truth!

The Prodigy Advance 2 is a yellowy colour that looks like it's 80's beige left out in the sun too long.

 

I plan to get the ECoS when I have spare monies - but I suspect that'll be in a few years!

[Sir TophamHatt]

Here's some basics:

 

DC: Connect the controller to the track using the little clip and you're away.  Put more trains on the track and they all go round at the same time.

 

There are more advanced DC layouts where people split tracks into "districts" and all sorts of things.  This means they can run different trains at different speeds or stop one train while the other still whizzes round.  I don't know anything about this, how to achieve it or how it works.  This advanced DC approach seems rather complicated.

 

DCC:  It was said at the beginning that "only two wires are needed".  This is true.  You can connect your layout like DC above and you're away.  However, for reliability most people run the two power cables coming from the controller round their baseboard and connect each piece of track to those wires.  In theory, each piece of track is then powered meaning no dead spots.

 

 

The Differences: Without getting too technical, think about TV.  The old system (now not available) was analogue.  It was replaced by digital.

With DC, the track is only powered when you turn the controller up.

With DCC, the track is always powered.  When you turn the controller up, only then does it move the trains.

It's often said with DCC, you drive the trains not the track.

 

DCC also enables you to drive whatever train you want (instead of DC's all of them at the same time).

Each train has an address (up to 4 digits) - a lot of people use the last 4 digits of the train number.  I use the first 4 unless I only have one of that loco.  So my Class 08 "address" is 0885 (it's number is 08 856), my 4MT is 8041.  I only have one 68, so that address is just 68.  I have other locos that use numbers 1-10 so couldn't allocate the 08 to 08.

 

Each train has a little chip inside it (called a decoder) that runs the motor, lights, sounds and other features.  The Decoder "decodes" the computer signal from the controller and does whatever the command says.

DCC sounds complicated but it's not when you learn it.

 

DC is fairly basic.  You put the train on the track, turn the controller and go.  DCC is the same, but you have to customise it a little before play.  A bit like buying a chicken from the supermarket.  You can buy a chicken and roast it - it's chicken, like DC.  But if you grate some salt and pepper on it, or slap a bit of mustard on the skin, that's like DCC.  At the end of the day, both will give you roast chicken but one has taken a little more work to make it taste better.

 

The advantage of DCC is that you can have lots of lighting configurations, playable sounds (you select when to play them) and allows you to easily set the speed of that train and let it run, while you control another loco, on the same track, using the same controller.

 

It can be complicated though.  You can add decoders to accessories like station lights, level crossings, points meaning you type in the address on the controller to select that accessory and tell it what to do.  I haven't got this far yet and not sure if I will.  You can also set the maximum speed of a loco to be something more realistic and even how quickly it reaches that speed, or if you want a slight delay before pulling off.  All this stuff is optional - most decoders are okay out of the box at default settings and anything else more complicated just needs a period of learning.

 

Bearing in mind, I started off about 4 years ago and said I wasn't interested in sound.  Now I am very interested in it and would rather save for a sound version than buy the non-sound version.

 

DC has it's merits and will have fans using it for years to come but if you are wanting anything more than an oval of track, DCC would be a wise investment.

[halsey]

On 25/10/2019 at 12:08, Sir TophamHatt said:

Here's some basics:

 

DC: Connect the controller to the track using the little clip and you're away.  Put more trains on the track and they all go round at the same time.

 

There are more advanced DC layouts where people split tracks into "districts" and all sorts of things.  This means they can run different trains at different speeds or stop one train while the other still whizzes round.  I don't know anything about this, how to achieve it or how it works.  This advanced DC approach seems rather complicated.

 

DCC:  It was said at the beginning that "only two wires are needed".  This is true.  You can connect your layout like DC above and you're away.  However, for reliability most people run the two power cables coming from the controller round their baseboard and connect each piece of track to those wires.  In theory, each piece of track is then powered meaning no dead spots.

 

 

The Differences: Without getting too technical, think about TV.  The old system (now not available) was analogue.  It was replaced by digital.

With DC, the track is only powered when you turn the controller up.

With DCC, the track is always powered.  When you turn the controller up, only then does it move the trains.

It's often said with DCC, you drive the trains not the track.

 

DCC also enables you to drive whatever train you want (instead of DC's all of them at the same time).

Each train has an address (up to 4 digits) - a lot of people use the last 4 digits of the train number.  I use the first 4 unless I only have one of that loco.  So my Class 08 "address" is 0885 (it's number is 08 856), my 4MT is 8041.  I only have one 68, so that address is just 68.  I have other locos that use numbers 1-10 so couldn't allocate the 08 to 08.

 

Each train has a little chip inside it (called a decoder) that runs the motor, lights, sounds and other features.  The Decoder "decodes" the computer signal from the controller and does whatever the command says.

DCC sounds complicated but it's not when you learn it.

 

DC is fairly basic.  You put the train on the track, turn the controller and go.  DCC is the same, but you have to customise it a little before play.  A bit like buying a chicken from the supermarket.  You can buy a chicken and roast it - it's chicken, like DC.  But if you grate some salt and pepper on it, or slap a bit of mustard on the skin, that's like DCC.  At the end of the day, both will give you roast chicken but one has taken a little more work to make it taste better.

 

The advantage of DCC is that you can have lots of lighting configurations, playable sounds (you select when to play them) and allows you to easily set the speed of that train and let it run, while you control another loco, on the same track, using the same controller.

 

It can be complicated though.  You can add decoders to accessories like station lights, level crossings, points meaning you type in the address on the controller to select that accessory and tell it what to do.  I haven't got this far yet and not sure if I will.  You can also set the maximum speed of a loco to be something more realistic and even how quickly it reaches that speed, or if you want a slight delay before pulling off.  All this stuff is optional - most decoders are okay out of the box at default settings and anything else more complicated just needs a period of learning.

 

Bearing in mind, I started off about 4 years ago and said I wasn't interested in sound.  Now I am very interested in it and would rather save for a sound version than buy the non-sound version.

 

DC has it's merits and will have fans using it for years to come but if you are wanting anything more than an oval of track, DCC would be a wise investment.

THANKS for this - very informative and my kind of language...…………..