Trouble with switchblade hinges losing conductivity

[Dagworth]

I’ve been having a lot of trouble with the points on Ravensclyffe when I finally put the whole layout together after a long period. I should say initially that the layout lives in its transport cases in the garage. Normally I bring individual boards into the house to work on. All the points are electrofrog and have the normally recommended mods done to bond stock rails to switch rails, with frogs then switched by either the Tortoise inbuilt switches, Peco switches under point motors or by the relay that throws the Peco motors in some places. I’ve not had any issues with frogs not switching correctly but I’ve had massive issues with dead switch blades. I don’t expect the little tongue contacts below the switch blades to be reliable but I didn’t expect the hinges to lose contact entirely.  I’m getting the same problem on both code 75 and code 100. I’m now starting a rolling program of fitting jump wires from the hinged blade to the fixed part of the switch rail. The wire I’m using is plain copper 7/0.2 stripped out of the insulation. (I may switch to a thinner wire in some places that are more visible) I’m leaving three or four centimetres of wire between the solder points to allow plenty of length for the minimal flex that is needed. Once painted track grot colour the wires disappear at “normal viewing distance”. On the scenic parts I’m making sure that the wires are as close to the sleepers as I can but in the fiddle yard I’m not too worried. Likewise in the fiddle yard the stock rail bonding is above the sleepers as it was a later addition! 

 

 

Has anyone else experienced this problem and if so how have you dealt with it? 
 

Andi

Edited December 30, 2022 by Dagworth
Replace photo

[Ben Alder]

I had the same problem with three of mine and did exactly that. Worked fine but I am now in the process of replacing them with bullhead ones.

 

 

[Gilbert]

8 hours ago, Dagworth said:

I’ve been having a lot of trouble with the points on Ravensclyffe when I finally put the whole layout together after a long period. I should say initially that the layout lives in its transport cases in the garage. Normally I bring individual boards into the house to work on. All the points are electrofrog and have the normally recommended mods done to bond stock rails to switch rails, with frogs then switched by either the Tortoise inbuilt switches, Peco switches under point motors or by the relay that throws the Peco motors in some places. I’ve had issues with frogs switching correctly but I’ve had massive issues with dead switch blades. I don’t expect the little tongue contacts below the switch blades to be reliable but I didn’t expect the hinges to lose contact entirely.  I’m getting the same problem on both code 75 and code 100. I’m now starting a rolling program of fitting jump wires from the hinged blade to the fixed part of the switch rail. The wire I’m using is plain copper 7/0.2 stripped out of the insulation. (I may switch to a thinner wire in some places that are more visible) I’m leaving three or four centimetres of wire between the solder points to allow plenty of length for the minimal flex that is needed. Once painted track grot colour the wires disappear at “normal viewing distance”. On the scenic parts I’m making sure that the wires are as close to the sleepers as I can but in the fiddle yard I’m not too worried. Likewise in the fiddle yard the stock rail bonding is above the sleepers as it was a later addition! 
 

 

Has anyone else experienced this problem and if so how have you dealt with it? 
 

Andi

I'm part of a group with an HO layout where we use this type of Peco point in the Fiddle yard and we've been modifying below the track prior to installation. I had the same issue on 7mm points on Bakewell Street which being one sided viewing was easy to fix using your method.

Chris

[Dagworth]

To add to this I'm also getting failures around the frog area where the original frog wire is now only making contact with one of the frog rails, leaving the rest of the frog dead. More jump wires...

 

Andi  

[autocoach]

If you have ballasted the turnouts, the only simple way without tearing out the track is to fix the problem is by adding a keep alive capacitor to any locomotive that is loosing contact. Brutal choices.

 

The ultimate solution  will be inexpensive RTR drop in WiFi/Bluetooth engine control with new  high capacity nano battery technologies.  I have already started to convert my US prototype locomotives to WiFi control so they are now only using he rail as as a power source.  I am attending a zoom seminar this Saturday on  an inexpensive do it yourself micro keep alive board.  The technology is starting to move forward to eliminating dependence on the rails for control and power.  

[Gilbert]

23 hours ago, Dagworth said:

To add to this I'm also getting failures around the frog area where the original frog wire is now only making contact with one of the frog rails, leaving the rest of the frog dead. More jump wires...

 

Andi  

Funnily enough a friend had exactly the same issue with a Code 83 turnout and we added a new dropper...

[Ben Alder]

How old are your misbehaving points? For decades I used Peco, Code 100 and then 75 as they came with nary a problem  yet the lot I installed new in 2012 have been giving problems almost from the start - not all by any means but about six have had to have attention and I have added extra connections to most of the rest as a matter of belt and braces, which has led me to wonder if might be a batch problem - mine are Code 75 electrofrogs.

 

[Dagworth]

15 hours ago, Ben Alder said:

How old are your misbehaving points? For decades I used Peco, Code 100 and then 75 as they came with nary a problem  yet the lot I installed new in 2012 have been giving problems almost from the start - not all by any means but about six have had to have attention and I have added extra connections to most of the rest as a matter of belt and braces, which has led me to wonder if might be a batch problem - mine are Code 75 electrofrogs.

 

Mostly installed around 2005. Both code 75 and code 100 giving both failures.

 

Andi

[Dagworth]

17 hours ago, autocoach said:

If you have ballasted the turnouts, the only simple way without tearing out the track is to fix the problem is by adding a keep alive capacitor to any locomotive that is loosing contact. Brutal choices.

Fitting the extra jump wires is not difficult, just tedious. All the scenic area points are ballasted but it is easy enough to scrape away a little ballast to be able to solder the jumper wires in. Rather than adding capacitors and other fiddles to locos I would prefer to sort the problem at source and make sure that ALL rails are powered when they should be.  I tend to view keep-alives as like using a crutch to stop you putting weight on a broken ankle rather than getting your leg plastered so it can heal.

 

Andi

[Ruston]

On 15/08/2020 at 23:34, Dagworth said:

I’ve been having a lot of trouble with the points on Ravensclyffe when I finally put the whole layout together after a long period. I should say initially that the layout lives in its transport cases in the garage. Normally I bring individual boards into the house to work on. All the points are electrofrog and have the normally recommended mods done to bond stock rails to switch rails, with frogs then switched by either the Tortoise inbuilt switches, Peco switches under point motors or by the relay that throws the Peco motors in some places. I’ve had issues with frogs switching correctly but I’ve had massive issues with dead switch blades. I don’t expect the little tongue contacts below the switch blades to be reliable but I didn’t expect the hinges to lose contact entirely.  I’m getting the same problem on both code 75 and code 100. I’m now starting a rolling program of fitting jump wires from the hinged blade to the fixed part of the switch rail. The wire I’m using is plain copper 7/0.2 stripped out of the insulation. (I may switch to a thinner wire in some places that are more visible) I’m leaving three or four centimetres of wire between the solder points to allow plenty of length for the minimal flex that is needed. Once painted track grot colour the wires disappear at “normal viewing distance”. On the scenic parts I’m making sure that the wires are as close to the sleepers as I can but in the fiddle yard I’m not too worried. Likewise in the fiddle yard the stock rail bonding is above the sleepers as it was a later addition! 
 

 

Has anyone else experienced this problem and if so how have you dealt with it? 
 

Andi

I haven't had the problem but I pre-empt it by soldering wires to the tags that hold the moving part to the sleeper, on the underside. It's a much tidier way of doing it than what you have done but of course it can only be done before laying the track.

[dasatcopthorne]

With the point blade pivots, how about putting something between the blade and the pad it sits on?

 

Say, graphite powder or similar?

 

Dave

[tomparryharry]

One thing I have done in the past is to gently 'tweak' the toe of the rail out ever so slightly. I use 2 sets of jewellers pliers for this; one as a vice, and the second one as a manipulator. The total adjustment is less than 1mm, so a steady hand is required. 

 

Cheers,

Ian. 

[wainwright1]

My Hawkhurst exhibition layout is over thirty years old and the track is code 100 with all electro-frog points.

I was not happy with the original colour of the rails and started getting issues when I repainted them with acrylic paint which seemed to get into hinge bits and caused problems. I therefore added small wire links to the point blades the same as you which seemed to solve the problem.

I now have a different problem as I have three points where the point blade has broken off from the tie bar on one side. I think that this may in part be due to the force from the point motors which are powered by a Gaugemaster CDU powered by one of their 24 volt transformers.

I have made temporary repairs by drilling and inserting  a shortened Peco rail tack into the tie bar and Aralditeing the blade to that which so far has held up. We had the same problem with a point on one of our club layouts, and I extracted the whole point and inserted a new one. This was not too disruptive as the ballast on there was heavily weathered, basically painted, and it did not show. On my layout the ballast is much more subtly weathered using weathering powder, so it will be difficult to hide staining when gluing down new ballast and also matching the weathering to the existing track.

 

All the best

Ray

Edited October 24, 2020 by wainwright1
Extra info.

[melmerby]

On 17/08/2020 at 20:44, autocoach said:

 

 

The ultimate solution  will be inexpensive RTR drop in WiFi/Bluetooth engine control with new  high capacity nano battery technologies.  I have already started to convert my US prototype locomotives to WiFi control so they are now only using he rail as as a power source.  I am attending a zoom seminar this Saturday on  an inexpensive do it yourself micro keep alive board.  The technology is starting to move forward to eliminating dependence on the rails for control and power.  

IMHO I find this an overkill suggestion.

TBH I don't think anybody is going to completely change technology just because of a few dicky point blades

[wainwright1]

I am sure that it would not take too much effort for Peco to update these parts of the points to eliminate these problems without any great expense. They are pretty basic engineering issues.

 

Ray

[Ruston]

This is what I was describing in my previous post.

I've found that it doesn't even matter if the hinges are accidentally soldered up whilst soldering the wire on as the springiness in the blades still allows them to move anyway. With the connecting wires pulled out, as per Peco instructions, and wires soldered on as shown, the feed to the blades is guaranteed and no longer relies on friction so that you can get as much paint and muck in the hinge as you like and power will always get to the blades. Power to the frog is still by the Peco attached wire.

[cctransuk]

On 15/08/2020 at 23:34, Dagworth said:

All the points are electrofrog and have the normally recommended mods done to bond stock rails to switch rails, with frogs then switched .....

 

Firstly, I am about to build a traditional 4mm. scale DC powered layout; with turnouts mechanically operated via slide switches and wire-in-tube. The slide switches will change the polarity of the turnout frogs.

 

I have just taken delivery of 34 new Peco Electrofrog Code 75 flat-bottomed turnouts, and have read before of these "normally recommended mods", but have never really understood the why, what and how.

 

Could someone please explain precisely why these mods are recommended; what the perceived problem(s) is / are that the mods remedy; and exactly what should be cut / bonded and where?

 

If some work to the turnouts prior to laying will result in more reliable running, I would like to undertake this during the period that my garage is being converted into a railway room.

 

Thank you in anticipation.

 

John Isherwood.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Ruston said:

This is what I was describing in my previous post.

I've found that it doesn't even matter if the hinges are accidentally soldered up whilst soldering the wire on as the springiness in the blades still allows them to move anyway. With the connecting wires pulled out, as per Peco instructions, and wires soldered on as shown, the feed to the blades is guaranteed and no longer relies on friction so that you can get as much paint and muck in the hinge as you like and power will always get to the blades. Power to the frog is still by the Peco attached wire.

 

Ruston,

 

That is very helpful - thank you.

 

I think that the mod below would achieve the same result - but with less visible wire; any comments?

I also have an Electrofrog single slip to lay - both tiebars will be thrown mechanically from a single slide switch. Could anybody recommend mods and a wiring arrangement, please?

 

Many thanks again,

John Isherwood.

[Ruston]

18 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Ruston,

 

That is very helpful - thank you.

 

I think that the mod below would achieve the same result - but with less visible wire; any comments?

I also have an Electrofrog single slip to lay - both tiebars will be thrown mechanically from a single slide switch. Could anybody recommend mods and a wiring arrangement, please?

 

Many thanks again,

John Isherwood.

I was going to do them like that but once the ballast is down the wires aren't visible anyway.

[wainwright1]

Thanks for that, most informative.

I know that Peco have changed the wiring on the points in recent years to make them more reliable and in particular make them more suited to DCC operation. I do not know if they have made any changes to strengthen the tabs where they are attached to the tie bar though.

I have bought three new points to replace the broken ones, so will adopt these wiring adjustments when I get around to fitting them.

 

All the best

Ray

[Free At Last]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

I also have an Electrofrog single slip to lay - both tiebars will be thrown mechanically from a single slide switch. Could anybody recommend mods and a wiring arrangement, please?

 

Many thanks again,

John Isherwood.

From what I remember the insulfrog single slip can work by having both tiebars thrown together but the electrofrog single slip needs to be wired and operated like a double slip for the frog polarities to be correct.

Edited October 24, 2020 by Free At Last

[Sol]

If Peco used solid rail blades like Tillig

 

https://www.tillig.com/eng/Produkte/produktinfo-85314.html

 

then the problem of pivots/hinges wouldn't exist

 

Edited October 25, 2020 by Sol
added a word

[cctransuk]

8 hours ago, Sol said:

If Peco used solid rail blades like Tillig

 

https://www.tillig.com/eng/Produkte/produktinfo-85314.html

 

then the problem of pivots/hinges wouldn't exist

 

 

They do - but only on their new bulkhead track.

 

John Isherwood.

[melmerby]

On 25/10/2020 at 01:10, Sol said:

If Peco used solid rail blades like Tillig

 

https://www.tillig.com/eng/Produkte/produktinfo-85314.html

 

then the problem of pivots/hinges wouldn't exist

 

Then they would cost more

[cctransuk]

On 24/10/2020 at 20:08, Free At Last said:

From what I remember the insulfrog single slip can work by having both tiebars thrown together but the electrofrog single slip needs to be wired and operated like a double slip for the frog polarities to be correct.

 

Having studied the Peco wiring diagram for their Electrofrog single slip, I can see no problem with both sets of switch rails being thrown by the same mechanical switch / lever / solenoid.

 

However, the LH switch blades' polarity switch changes the polarity of the RH frog, and vice versa.

 

That being the case, and in theory at least, a two pole two way slide switch should be capable of throwing both sets of switch blades mechanically, and changing the polarity of both frogs electrically.

 

Please do contradict / debate this theory at will - as I'd like to put it into practice if viable.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.