Jump to content
 

Completely flummoxed!! Part 2/


transferman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think the only comment that I'd make is that the links you have added between the stock and closure rails seem to be very close to the cuts that you've made in the closure rails.  If it was me, I'd have wanted to have the cuts and the links separated by at least a sleeper.  If your new soldered links aren't that good, then there may be scope for there to be a loose strand of wire that is intermittently shorting across the gap to the frog.

 

Apart from that, I can't see anything that is obviously wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris,

 

like Dungrange says the links are rather close to the cuts, but likewise I can see nothing obvious. It’s hard to tell how you have wired up the controller for the points, but looking at things I think you need to divide things up into logical steps to isolate the issue. My first thought would be is to remove the controller from the equation, wire the points directly to the power bus like it was just plain track, ( set point to problematic route)  obviously you can’t throw the point as you will lose frog switching. This will prove two things that the loco wheels are ok or not ie back to back or too wide. And the other is the wiring to the controller is at fault. I hope this makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I second the above - when modifying Peco points there is clear provision to cut the links and a clear position for installing the new links between stock and closure rails - further apart than your diagram indicates (but I appreciate that may be how you have indicated it).

In addition, I see that the points are differently set - the one on the right is to the curve, the one on the left straight. The DCC Concepts manual for these motors (which I am also using) suggests that the motors should be linked to change simultaneously. I presume you have done that, since there appears to be no plug on the lower side of the Cobalt SS control unit (but maybe it is just no visible). I can see you have used the upper contacts on the control box to switch the frog power (since there are no connections on the lower side). If the points are differently set, as here, then the frogs will be at opposing polarities, causing the problem you relate.

Edited by Derekl
correct spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Derekl said:

I second the above - when modifying Peco points there is clear provision to cut the links and a clear position for installing the new links between stock and closure rails - further apart than your diagram indicates (but I appreciate that may be how you have indicated it).

In addition, I see that the points are differently set - the one on the right is to the curve, the one on the left straight. The DCC Concepts manual for these motors (which I am also using) suggests that the motors should be linked to change simultaneously. I presume you have done that, since there appears to be no plug on the lower side of the Cobalt SS control unit (but maybe it is just no visible). I can see you have used the upper contacts on the control box to switch the frog power (since there are no connections on the lower side). If the points are differently set, as here, then the frogs will be at opposing polarities, causing the problem you relate.


Good spot I missed the points being set differently. But the one on the left is neither set curved or straight, it’s half way 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Derekl said:

If the points are differently set, as here, then the frogs will be at opposing polarities, causing the problem you relate.

 

I'm not sure I understand your rational here.  If the points are set differently, then yes you can get a short but that would occur at the location of the insulated rail joiners that are shown at the infill section between the two turnouts.  That is, a short would occur when part of the pickup arrangement of a locomotive is on one side of the joiners and the other half is on the other side of these insulated rail joiners.  The solution to that issue is, as you say, ensuring that the two turnouts are thrown simultaneously.

 

However, @transferman is indicating that the shorting is occurring between the switchblades and the crossing vee.  That therefore implies that the problem has nothing to do with the fact that it's a crossover, but that the problem either lies with the modifications that have been made to the turnouts or it is a problem with the frog switching.  It just so happens that the same issue appears twice - ie it's a consistent mistake. 

 

As indicated in my last post, I think there should be greater separation between the new bonding wire between the closure and stock rails and the cuts in the closure rails.  However, if the same issue is observed at two turnouts and with both throws of the turnouts, then that would imply four separate stray wires, which seems unlikely (but not impossible).  As such, it's perhaps more appropriate to consider that it's a methodological error rather than an accidental one.  The issue with that is that if the frog switching is wired up incorrectly, or the bonding wires were on the wrong side of the closure rail cuts, then I'd expect the problem to always be there and not to be an issue when first run that subsequently goes away.  As such, I'm not sure what to suggest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the system needs to be cycled once for the frog polarity to be synced with the point motor?

 

Is the frog phasing (polarity)of both points correct when,

1—the system is first switched on?

2—when both points are set to straight

3—when both points are switched to curved

Are both frogs connected to the frog pwr connections? (If yes then this could be your problem)

Or

Is one frog connected to the “frog PWR” * connection & the other frog connected to the “DPDT Sw2” connections then one frog may be the incorrect phase

If this is the case then swap the red & black wires for the corresponding frog at the cobalt SS connection

John

 

* I am assuming that the “frog PWR” connections are a DPDT set of contacts similar to the “DPDT Sw” connections

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, transferman said:

The point being used are Peco Electrofrog.

In this photo I have tried to include all the relevant facts and info.

I must add that the locos will stall when first run, but very seldom after that.

If anyone could help it would be much appreciated.

 

Chris

Crossover Problems.pdf 1.69 MB · 14 downloads

Chris,

 

About all I can add is to recommend continuity checking of the crossings, just in case the Peco fitted underside jumper wires are loose or poorly connected. That's mean continuity checking with a multimeter between A1/A2/A3/A4 and B1/B2/B3/B4 i n the marked up photo below.

799838824_crossoverproblems.jpg.593edcbbecd1f375c586d64ea92af8b3.jpg

My only other comment is that I'd normally put the IRJs all on the heel of the crossing, thus relocating one to where I marked 'IRJ', leaving your 'infill section' with one rail powered from either side. That's how I've done my crossovers, and had no problems.

 

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dungrange said:

I'm not sure I understand your rational here.  If the points are set differently, then yes you can get a short but that would occur at the location of the insulated rail joiners that are shown at the infill section between the two turnouts.  That is, a short would occur when part of the pickup arrangement of a locomotive is on one side of the joiners and the other half is on the other side of these insulated rail joiners.  The solution to that issue is, as you say, ensuring that the two turnouts are thrown simultaneously.

 

However, @transferman is indicating that the shorting is occurring between the switchblades and the crossing vee.  That therefore implies that the problem has nothing to do with the fact that it's a crossover, but that the problem either lies with the modifications that have been made to the turnouts or it is a problem with the frog switching.  It just so happens that the same issue appears twice - ie it's a consistent mistake. 

 

Perhaps if unsure of rationale, you should consider further rather than simply being dismissive. In fact, we don't know which direction the loco is traveling when it stalls. But if (and I agree it is an "if") running into the crossover and the frog is at incorrect polarity, it will cause a short as it crosses the gap in the switch rails. It won't need to go as far as the IRJs.

I am suggesting that there is something wrong with the wiring of the frogs and the switching on the Cobalt SS controller.

I doubt it is stray wires, although I suppose that is possible.

If the points were disconnected I am not sure that you could expect the setup to work properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Derekl said:

Perhaps if unsure of rationale, you should consider further rather than simply being dismissive. In fact, we don't know which direction the loco is traveling when it stalls. But if (and I agree it is an "if") running into the crossover and the frog is at incorrect polarity, it will cause a short as it crosses the gap in the switch rails. It won't need to go as far as the IRJs.

I am suggesting that there is something wrong with the wiring of the frogs and the switching on the Cobalt SS controller.

 

I agree that if the polarity of the frog is incorrect, then a short will occur at the location @transferman has highlighted.  The issue is, what is causing the polarity to be incorrect?  Are you suggesting that the frog for turnout A is being powered from the switch on the point motor connected to turnout B and vice versa?  If so, then I agree it would matter which way the two turnouts are set and if they are not set correctly (or one doesn't throw properly) then there is clearly the possibility that the polarity is wrong and a short will occur at the location identified.

 

However, that's not the way that I'd arrange for the frog polarity to be changed.  I'd power the frog for turnout A from the point motor switch connected to turnout A.  That is, I'd wire up each half of the crossover as I would any other standalone turnout and if that was the case, then a short caused by only throwing half the crossover would always occur at the insulated rail joiners in the infill section: not at the location shown.  Apologies for simply assuming that this is the way @transferman has wired these - I realise that may not be the case.  That is therefore one possible explanation for the problem.

 

However, if they've been wired as I'd do and the frog for turnout A is connected to the switch for the point motor connected to turnout A, then I think the only way in which a short would occur would be if the switchblades don't throw but the frog switch does, or the switchblades are changing, but the frog switch isn't.  That would sound like a faulty Cobalt SS controller, would it not? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

 

I agree that if the polarity of the frog is incorrect, then a short will occur at the location @transferman has highlighted.  The issue is, what is causing the polarity to be incorrect?  Are you suggesting that the frog for turnout A is being powered from the switch on the point motor connected to turnout B and vice versa?  If so, then I agree it would matter which way the two turnouts are set and if they are not set correctly (or one doesn't throw properly) then there is clearly the possibility that the polarity is wrong and a short will occur at the location identified.

 

However, that's not the way that I'd arrange for the frog polarity to be changed.  I'd power the frog for turnout A from the point motor switch connected to turnout A.  That is, I'd wire up each half of the crossover as I would any other standalone turnout and if that was the case, then a short caused by only throwing half the crossover would always occur at the insulated rail joiners in the infill section: not at the location shown.  Apologies for simply assuming that this is the way @transferman has wired these - I realise that may not be the case.  That is therefore one possible explanation for the problem.

 

However, if they've been wired as I'd do and the frog for turnout A is connected to the switch for the point motor connected to turnout A, then I think the only way in which a short would occur would be if the switchblades don't throw but the frog switch does, or the switchblades are changing, but the frog switch isn't.  That would sound like a faulty Cobalt SS controller, would it not? 


 

This was the very reason I said remove the controller and test the locos without it in circuit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Dungrange said:

However, that's not the way that I'd arrange for the frog polarity to be changed.  I'd power the frog for turnout A from the point motor switch connected to turnout A.  That is, I'd wire up each half of the crossover as I would any other standalone turnout and if that was the case, then a short caused by only throwing half the crossover would always occur at the insulated rail joiners in the infill section: not at the location shown.  Apologies for simply assuming that this is the way @transferman has wired these - I realise that may not be the case.  That is therefore one possible explanation for the problem.

 

However, if they've been wired as I'd do and the frog for turnout A is connected to the switch for the point motor connected to turnout A, then I think the only way in which a short would occur would be if the switchblades don't throw but the frog switch does, or the switchblades are changing, but the frog switch isn't.  That would sound like a faulty Cobalt SS controller, would it not? 

 

I agree, that is not the way I  normally wire the frogs in an installation using the Cobalt under board motors (I can't remember the name, off-hand). But these SS motors and their controllers differ in that there is a specific provision for a single output on the controller to control two points on a crossover, intended to work simultaneously, via a splitter - it is visible in the photo to the right of the control box, just below the "frog wire" label. I am not sure that this is the right splitter (I haven't yet got around to the crossovers on the yard I am currently laying and wiring up), as there is also one with three terminals - you choose the two that give the correct result at the turnouts, so that they move simultaneously in the correct direction. 

So my first suggestion to the OP is that he check the manual and that the splitter is wired correctly - you will need to connect it all up and operate to see that the throw is in the correct direction  on each point.

My next suggestion is that the frogs have somehow been wired incorrectly, so that both frogs are at the opposite polarity for the point settings, which would result in stalling on a short at the positions identified by the OP, assuming running in to the crossover. If the running in frog polarity was correct, the other not, then you would get the short and stall at the IRJs, but that isn't the symptom here. It occurs to me (in the nicest possible way) that the OP may have got the incoming wiring to the switching confused, with the result that the wrong poles have been connected, corrected by switching them around. It looks like you are using the black/red distinction for the buses - perhaps switching the power inputs around where they fed the frog switches may work.

The OP mentioned above that the set up was not connected. I am not sure what is not connected, but without the controller being set up and all connected, I don't see how you can test.

It obviously may be that controller is defective, but that seems unlikely. Another suggestion above is testing without the controller, but you can't do that - it is integral to the set up.

Finally, having the power off an running all over this with a multi-meter to see what is connected to what may well be helpful. I see that the SS Controller holds the last setting (I assume) in the switching so you can check without power.

I hope this has been of help and that you get this sorted out (being all too familiar with the feeling when this sort of thing happens).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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...