Jump to content
 

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


halsey
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, BoD said:

Give careful consideration to the DCC system you go for.  It is much more complicated to throw points on some than it is on others.  By complicated I mean number of key presses needed both to get there and back to loco control - it’s not hard when you have done it a few times just more time consuming depending on the number of turnouts to throw - although some systems do allow setting whole ‘routes’ through a few key presses.

I was imagining NCE Powercab as a starter.

 

The layout will be a preserved line single line loop with two terminus stations to allow end to end running - one will be a derivative of Minehead and the other Oxenhope.

 

So there won't be a lot of points to manage, certainly not with moving trains but I see your point (no pun intended) about getting from one mode to the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, BoD said:

Give careful consideration to the DCC system you go for.

It is much more complicated to throw points on some than it is on others.  

By complicated I mean number of key presses needed both to get there and back to loco control ........

 

That's quite an important point (no pun intended).

I'd put it more strongly. Some, if not most systems are very poorly designed for accessory switching.

 

 

24 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I was imagining NCE Powercab as a starter.

 

The layout will be a preserved line single line loop with two terminus stations to allow end to end running - one will be a derivative of Minehead and the other Oxenhope.

 

So there won't be a lot of points to manage, certainly not with moving trains but I see your point (no pun intended) about getting from one mode to the other.

 

With the PowerCab, you can buy and just plug-in a point switching controller.

There's an initial set up, where you allocate each point motor to each button and after that, no addresses to learn or type in.

Just press a button to switch each point.

 

The same point controller can be used with other DCC systems, or on its own with either DC or DCC layouts, with an additional, affordable interface added.

 

Alternatively, there's the option of DCC operated mini point levers, or a DCC operated mimic control panel, if inclined to use this form of point control, rather than typing DCC addresses into a handset or control console keypad.

 

 

.

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I was imagining NCE Powercab as a starter.

 

The layout will be a preserved line single line loop with two terminus stations to allow end to end running - one will be a derivative of Minehead and the other Oxenhope.

 

So there won't be a lot of points to manage, certainly not with moving trains but I see your point (no pun intended) about getting from one mode to the other.

As Box Brownie said, there are other options for controllers that give easier control of points, Z21, ECoS, & Digikeijs DR5000. With all you have the option of a traditional handheld controller, plus a large creen where a mimic diagram can be created and then changing a point can be as simple as touching the point on the 'touchscreen' display. I believe all these systems also support the creation of routes, so multiple points can be changed by selecting the appropriate route.

However there's no right or wrong answer and a lot of people prefer the button pushing approach.

 

Regards,

 

John P

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the Powercab guide:

  • It has an Accessory button
  • Looks like straight forward selection
  • 16 macros that can set 8 points each for route setting - that sounds more than enough for my needs.

Wow, I might actually be doing this.

 

Edit: only because I get stuck on wiring DC and chicken out and I can't build a decent schematic with switches and buttons to save my life.

Edited by woodenhead
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good on you Woodenhead - come over to the dark side. Mind you, it's so dark you won't see a thing even with your eyes wide open :).

 

Do have a good think about it before pressing that 'commit' button, but for what it's worth, I'm glad I did do it, even though I may not as advanced as halsey (yet).

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, Philou said:

Good on you Woodenhead - come over to the dark side. Mind you, it's so dark you won't see a thing even with your eyes wide open :).

 

Do have a good think about it before pressing that 'commit' button, but for what it's worth, I'm glad I did do it, even though I may not as advanced as halsey (yet).

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

 

Whoa there - the last thing I would call myself is "advanced" I'm more like a cliff diver I've jumped and am committed but god knows where I will end up and will I decide to jump higher ????

The big thing for me is I'm no longer intimidated by it (DCC) so that is a result!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Reading the Powercab guide:

  • It has an Accessory button
  • Looks like straight forward selection
  • 16 macros that can set 8 points each for route setting - that sounds more than enough for my needs.

Wow, I might actually be doing this.

 

Edit: only because I get stuck on wiring DC and chicken out and I can't build a decent schematic with switches and buttons to save my life.

You have not mentioned driving trains.

It is possible & perfectly feasible to run points & accessories from DCC but still drive trains with DC if you prefer the feel of operating this way.

 

Don't be persuaded by others on here to build something which doesn't really suit you. They won't have to live with it.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

You have not mentioned driving trains.

It is possible & perfectly feasible to run points & accessories from DCC but still drive trains with DC if you prefer the feel of operating this way.

 

Don't be persuaded by others on here to build something which doesn't really suit you. They won't have to live with it.

Haha

 

It was only as I began reading this thread that it struck me that I might be able to opt for DCC this time - I have a lot of N gauge stock, there are some locos in the stud that are not DCC ready - they can be chipped but only through hard wiring, but I have more than enough to run the railway I want without an issue.  In the past it was the simple number of locos I have which caused me to balk at DCC, should have tried when I went onto OO again, but I again balked as the model was too simple to justify DCC on a primarily one engine in steam layout.

 

I would like a railway with about 8 engines and this feels manageable in terms of purchasing chips, then the accessory items for the points and the NCE Cab for control.

 

Here's how my stress level sees this:

  • Loco control - I don't have to wire up isolation sections
  • Point control - I don't have to have long runs of three wires other than between the accessories and the point motor but they can be located nearby
  • Switches and buttons - Apart from some sections to manage the overall bus I don't need any more.

What will stress me

  • how thick should my wires be
  • the cost
  • how thick should my wires be
  • OMG the cost.
  • How do I get this chip into the loco

I need to overcome my fear, that is the basic issue here and get on with it otherwise no more railways DC or DCC.

 

One question, I note some Zimo chips come with a stay alive - do they take up much more room that a Zimo without stay alive?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
41 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Haha

 

It was only as I began reading this thread that it struck me that I might be able to opt for DCC this time - I have a lot of N gauge stock, there are some locos in the stud that are not DCC ready - they can be chipped but only through hard wiring, but I have more than enough to run the railway I want without an issue.  In the past it was the simple number of locos I have which caused me to balk at DCC, should have tried when I went onto OO again, but I again balked as the model was too simple to justify DCC on a primarily one engine in steam layout.

 

I would like a railway with about 8 engines and this feels manageable in terms of purchasing chips, then the accessory items for the points and the NCE Cab for control.

 

Here's how my stress level sees this:

  • Loco control - I don't have to wire up isolation sections
  • Point control - I don't have to have long runs of three wires other than between the accessories and the point motor but they can be located nearby
  • Switches and buttons - Apart from some sections to manage the overall bus I don't need any more.

What will stress me

  • how thick should my wires be
  • the cost
  • how thick should my wires be
  • OMG the cost.
  • How do I get this chip into the loco

I need to overcome my fear, that is the basic issue here and get on with it otherwise no more railways DC or DCC.

 

One question, I note some Zimo chips come with a stay alive - do they take up much more room that a Zimo without stay alive?

 

Go for it ………………… a step at a time, ask carefully structured questions on specific issues and RMW will come good my experience is if you ask wide questions you get opinions if you ask focussed questions you get answers - I haven't yet got stuck thanks to some great people on here...………….

 

More than happy if this topic moves towards helping you as we will all gain from it...……………………….

 

So is the new layout to be N or OO??

 

Cheers

 

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Haha

 

It was only as I began reading this thread that it struck me that I might be able to opt for DCC this time - I have a lot of N gauge stock, there are some locos in the stud that are not DCC ready - they can be chipped but only through hard wiring, but I have more than enough to run the railway I want without an issue.  In the past it was the simple number of locos I have which caused me to balk at DCC, should have tried when I went onto OO again, but I again balked as the model was too simple to justify DCC on a primarily one engine in steam layout.

 

I would like a railway with about 8 engines and this feels manageable in terms of purchasing chips, then the accessory items for the points and the NCE Cab for control.

 

Here's how my stress level sees this:

  • Loco control - I don't have to wire up isolation sections
  • Point control - I don't have to have long runs of three wires other than between the accessories and the point motor but they can be located nearby
  • Switches and buttons - Apart from some sections to manage the overall bus I don't need any more.

What will stress me

  • how thick should my wires be
  • the cost
  • how thick should my wires be
  • OMG the cost.
  • How do I get this chip into the loco

I need to overcome my fear, that is the basic issue here and get on with it otherwise no more railways DC or DCC.

 

One question, I note some Zimo chips come with a stay alive - do they take up much more room that a Zimo without stay alive?

My advice is don’t get bogged down in the detail,  take it one step at a time. There are many here that will give good advice but like any question ask 100 people the same question your get 100 different replies. Which I’m sure will stress you out even more. I would say build a small test layout, chip 1 loco, see how you get on, as to buss wire size this is not a straight forward answer but I always say 2.5 or 1.5 mains wire and is fairly cheep. And if possible visit someone who has dcc and a good understanding of it aswell.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I know nothing about N gauge  - which may be obvious from this question - BUT I hear people talking about not being able to fit a "wired" chip inside a certain loco body etc - why not use an N gauge one - in this instance why aren't N gauge sized items the standard??

 

NOT trying to go off topic just curious...…………...

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, halsey said:

I know nothing about N gauge  - which may be obvious from this question - BUT I hear people talking about not being able to fit a "wired" chip inside a certain loco body etc - why not use an N gauge one - in this instance why aren't N gauge sized items the standard??

 

NOT trying to go off topic just curious...…………...

 

I think the answer is that decoders suitable for use in N gauge tend to have fewer function outputs and have different sockets - eg some N gauge locomotives may use 4 or 6 pin decoders, but 4 or 6 pin sockets are not common in 00 locomotives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, halsey said:

 

So is the new layout to be N or OO??

 

At the moment N

 

I've got a room so I can do a big loop - I want something where the train is doing more than just entering and leaving a station, I also would prefer not to waste space with a fiddleyard this time so I've got some 1200*600 boards coming from Grainge and Hodder - these were going to be the whole layout then I looked around my room after a tidy and thought, I could do a nice narrow layout around this without impacting it being my office as well.

 

So now the two 1200 baseboards will house the two termini and a passing loop (i.e. all the complicated bits) and the rest of the room will represent the space in between.  Going to have to be clever probably fitting it all in the baseboard space but it feels more like the trains are doing something this way, I am inspired by Morfa - Hwyl fawr, so a nice single track line - preserved railway in this case so I can run what I like.

 

M

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, halsey said:

I know nothing about N gauge  - which may be obvious from this question - BUT I hear people talking about not being able to fit a "wired" chip inside a certain loco body etc - why not use an N gauge one - in this instance why aren't N gauge sized items the standard??

 

NOT trying to go off topic just curious...…………...

Bigger locos draw more current, so the components need more surface area to dissipate the heat, so the decoders need to be larger.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, halsey said:

I know nothing about N gauge  - which may be obvious from this question - BUT I hear people talking about not being able to fit a "wired" chip inside a certain loco body etc - why not use an N gauge one - in this instance why aren't N gauge sized items the standard??

 

NOT trying to go off topic just curious...…………...

Can only talk about sound decoders - I often use D&H chips SD16 for my OO locos.

Even smaller than an ESU micro decoder, but same performance as a OO gauge ESU V5 (except having only 6 power outputs).

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@woodenhead Not wishing to hijack halsey's thread, but I'm sure you will see that he was hesitant at first regarding DCC and then went for it - more so than I - even though I decided DCC was me in 2014. Once I heard 'sound' that was it!! As I was setting out again in 00 it just seemed a logical step forward. One of the lads at our club has a French diesel in N about the same size as a Class 37 and has managed to fit a sound decoder in it without any issues. Other than hard-wiring, provided you take a deep breath, and ask if in doubt, you should be OK.

 

Good luck in whichever direction you go for.

 

Philip

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Haha

 

It was only as I began reading this thread that it struck me that I might be able to opt for DCC this time - I have a lot of N gauge stock, there are some locos in the stud that are not DCC ready - they can be chipped but only through hard wiring, but I have more than enough to run the railway I want without an issue.  In the past it was the simple number of locos I have which caused me to balk at DCC, should have tried when I went onto OO again, but I again balked as the model was too simple to justify DCC on a primarily one engine in steam layout.

 

I would like a railway with about 8 engines and this feels manageable in terms of purchasing chips, then the accessory items for the points and the NCE Cab for control.

 

Here's how my stress level sees this:

  • Loco control - I don't have to wire up isolation sections
  • Point control - I don't have to have long runs of three wires other than between the accessories and the point motor but they can be located nearby
  • Switches and buttons - Apart from some sections to manage the overall bus I don't need any more.

What will stress me

  • how thick should my wires be
  • the cost
  • how thick should my wires be
  • OMG the cost.
  • How do I get this chip into the loco

I need to overcome my fear, that is the basic issue here and get on with it otherwise no more railways DC or DCC.

 

One question, I note some Zimo chips come with a stay alive - do they take up much more room that a Zimo without stay alive?

Don't worry about it. There's a lot of advice that leads people to over engineer a DCC layout, and this is particularly true for N Gauge.

 

I have a large DCC N Gauge layout (in a 36' x 28' shed. I have no switches or buttons anywhere. I use CAT5e network cable stripped out into 4 separate pairs for my track wiring, with a couple of lengths of mains cable running to the furthest sections of the layout. The Cat5e cable is single strand 26AWG. I don't have a DCC 'bus'.

 

If the loco is DCC ready then in a lot of cases you just take the body off, remove a 'blanking plate' and replace it with the decoder. But for earlier DCC ready models you may have to solder wires to the loco's PCB.

 

IMO ZIMO decoders (MX617N for 6 pin locos and the MX618N18 for Next18 locos) are a no brainer. They offer exceptional motor control and are priced at 20 pounds. I have chipped all my locos with Zimos, they all run well and I've never had to tweak the CV settings to get good motor control.

I don't think that there are any ZIMO decoders that are suitable for N Gauge that have a stay alive, but then again I have very few sound fitted locos.

 

Oh and as I said earlier you don't need very thick wires.

 

Regards,

 

John P

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I really wonder about myself and technology.

 

I am currently writing some c# and I was not getting a positive expected result from some code.  Have been looking at it for ages, also been on Stack overflow and then I decide to take a step back and look at actually what the code is returning - get one line instead of 10 then before realising it's because I had a filter on the preceding SQL which restricted it to 1 row and not the row I wanted even.

 

And I think I will handle DCC hahahaha

  • Funny 1
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

Sometimes I really wonder about myself and technology.

 

I am currently writing some c# and I was not getting a positive expected result from some code.  Have been looking at it for ages, also been on Stack overflow and then I decide to take a step back and look at actually what the code is returning - get one line instead of 10 then before realising it's because I had a filter on the preceding SQL which restricted it to 1 row and not the row I wanted even.

 

And I think I will handle DCC hahahaha

All different ways of thinking.

I am comfortable installing & maintaining an OS but less comfortable with programming in Pascal, C or Python. I have never seen C++ or C# but object oriented code seems to use inheritances which I struggle to understand.

SQL is something I have never really looked at, so I don't understand it. I am comfortable with DCC because I have been using it for about 10-12 years now.

 

So if you feel DCC will be beneficial to you, I agree with Andymsa that it is helpful to start small. I started with a small length of track & 2 locos, so I got familiar with running trains 'the DCC way' before having to apply any electrical theory to layout wiring.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
20 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

All different ways of thinking.

I am comfortable installing & maintaining an OS but less comfortable with programming in Pascal, C or Python. I have never seen C++ or C# but object oriented code seems to use inheritances which I struggle to understand.

2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

 

I am currently writing some c# and I was not getting a positive expected result from some code.  Have been looking at it for ages, also been on Stack overflow and then I decide to take a step back and look at actually what the code is returning - get one line instead of 10 then before realising it's because I had a filter on the preceding SQL which restricted it to 1 row and not the row I wanted even.

 

Edited by boxbrownie
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are happy about handling computer code and concerned about cost, don't forget to consider the SPROG with JMRI software, especially if you have a spare laptop. This will also link to a smartphone using 'Engine Driver' software.

I'm afraid I've no experience on using JMRI to control points.

You mention 'Stay Alive' decoders. My experience with OO suggests they are unnecessary if your locos have sprung axles. 'Stay Alive' capacitors which will carry the loco over dead spots, such as insulated frogs, tend to be big. It's worthwhile checking out the DCC Concepts decoders, which have wires that can be connected to a separate 'stay alive' module. They claim their Zen Black decoders shouldn't need stay alive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, grriff said:

If you are happy about handling computer code and concerned about cost, don't forget to consider the SPROG with JMRI software, especially if you have a spare laptop. This will also link to a smartphone using 'Engine Driver' software.

I'm afraid I've no experience on using JMRI to control points.

You mention 'Stay Alive' decoders. My experience with OO suggests they are unnecessary if your locos have sprung axles. 'Stay Alive' capacitors which will carry the loco over dead spots, such as insulated frogs, tend to be big. It's worthwhile checking out the DCC Concepts decoders, which have wires that can be connected to a separate 'stay alive' module. They claim their Zen Black decoders shouldn't need stay alive.

There is also MERG if you really want to get your hands into the electronics, but I am trying to avoid that at the moment, that seems like out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope this isn't deemed too commercial but, as both topics have been brought up, if you join MERG you can get a discount on a SPROG.

 

You don't need to write any code to use it with JMRI, unless you want to write scripts for automation. This is done in Jython, very similar to Python.

 

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...