No wires - System specification

[Ken Anderson]

Chris Klein wrote:-

"I just think that a simple system that completely eliminates the need for energised track and wheels and all of the other associated impedimenta with recharging via a small plug can't be beyond the wit of man or woman."

 

Let's try and build a specification for a new system.

What would be your wishes and wants of such?

[Tim V]

Don't you think Tesla was right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

[railwayrod]

This is something that I for one would be very interested in buying. There is of course the red arrow system which seems to have great potential but it does not go far enough at present. The idea of having locos self contained with regards to power eliminates at one stroke chore of keeping the track scrupulously clean (although some periodic cleaning may be required in the interests of smooth running) and saves all that wiring with its possibility of dry joints and breakdowns, often resulting in having to scrat beneath baseboards while the fault is found and put right.

 

Such a system would also need to take into account a sound system of some sort and maybe some form of "smoke" . However I feel that the biggest problem would be battery life and space within the loco to accommodate the power source plus all the electronics.

 

At present I am using a control system with a long wander lead to operate Ramchester which for most of the time is OK ish but when the railway room is full of visitors it becomes problematic,  Plus with my eyesight there is always a danger of me tripping up on the lead.

 

So Chris thiese are my first thoughts- it will be interesting to see how this develops and to hear other peoples views.

 

Rod

[Simond]

Ken

 

Great thread idea!

 

My "Wish List":-

 

Synchronised sound (steam era), with appropriate user-controlled bells & whistles - prototypical sound project.

No-touch recharging, (like the buffer idea, but need to be careful with double headers), obviously without removal of batteries

Up to 5 digit addressing (I'm GWR, but BR era needs it, and the Southern had some odd ideas about numbers too...)

Small enough to fit 00, so the price benefits from the economies of scale that ensue - receiver should be comparable with DCC pricing. Batteries and handsets should be comparable, price wise, with DCC controllers, command stations, and boosters.

Powerful enough to pull the biggest reasonable train in 0 (12 bogies, 25 wagons, maybe a bit more?)

Sufficient capacity to last a few hours running session, probably 25% running, 75% simmering in a siding?

Absolutely safe - no issues with a grand's worth of loco (and your house...) being destroyed by a failure of an el-cheapo Li-poly battery

Control range to be big enough for a garden railway, non directional, and immune to sunlight, moonlight & interference from unexpected sources (like solar power inverters causing ASDL modems to fail)

No more complex or difficult to fit than a present-day sound decoder.

Some kind of common standard for the data protocol between controllers & receivers.

 

I think that would do it. Anyone got any other needs?

 

Best

Simon

[55H]

Ken

 

see my post on "7mm the future" there a 2 proprietary systems available now

 

these are tried and tested one has been used in gauge 1 for over 5 years

 

2.4ghz systems wireless

 

suppose the question is do we need to re-invent the wheel?

 

John

 

FSB

[55H]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R25AJINkQbA

 

have  a look a this gauge 1 but it will give you an idea

 

we are working on getting british sounds !!

 

Ticks all your boxes Simon

 

John

[Simond]

Hi John

 

Not quite... Cheap as a current DCC installation it ain't, and it ain't no-touch neither!

 

And whilst you could argue it has prototypical bells and whistles, they aren't exactly Great Western, more Wild Western!!!

 

From the demo, it certainly shows that something of this ilk is possible, though it's clearly difficult to assess the size, complexity of installation, haulage power and run time.

 

Looking back at my list, I should of course have said H0, not 00, as the economies of scale are US driven, I'm sure.

 

Taking Chris' point about no pick ups does make no-touch charging a bit more difficult, but near field resonant power transfer is feasible, (Tesla derived, effectively) and could offer a route to remote on-off switching too I.e., start it charging and the loco switches off, as does the charger when fully charged, pulse the charger once to switch the loco back on, or some similar protocol.

 

And an extension of my last point - the data protocol betwixt tx & rx should be an open standard too.

 

Best

Simon

[Stubby47]

What about a re-charge facility via the wheels, when the loco is standing at the platform or in the shed ?

 

Short sections of powered track to boost the on board battery.

 

( Edit : That's 5,000 posts of mostly drivel...)

[Simond]

Stu

 

That meets my list, but not Chris K's. ( he doesn't want pick-ups - and I'd have to agree with him)

 

BR

Simon

[Stubby47]

I'm guessing the chassis would still need to be isolated so the loco could be used on DC/DCC layouts ?

 

So could not the re-charge supply pick up via wheels and axles/ chassis frame ( obviously with a split chassis) ?

[55H]

 

 

And whilst you could argue it has prototypical bells and whistles, they aren't exactly Great Western, more Wild Western!!

 

yup you can hear the prairie dogs howl no GWR pun intended   

 

the system will eventually  have a library of sounds including GWR which you will be able to load into the receiver wirelessly though a usb transmitter taking the sounds from the web

 

​from the installations done so far 2 hours is achievable for O gauge and up to 3 for G1 the new receiver is HO but no prices yet

 

pulling power depends more on the motor gearbox look at peters other videos all G1 but it gives you a  feel,fitting complexity no more difficult than DCC using a big chip in the tender, in G1 Peter does an idiots installation guide which even I can follow

 

don't forget rc is lead by planes & cars so if they get no touch then it will trickle down

 

we are just doing an o gauge schools with RC using the TX21 system, one advantage of the RC is that the boiler is full of batteries so no need for extra weight

[flexible_coupling]

Everyone should have a closer look at S-Cab before posting........ it's gotten my attention, although shoehorning it into an Ixion Fowler seems very difficult at this point! Never say never though.

 

Edit: I popped mine out of the box (the body and chassis are separate at present as I procrastinate against completing conversion to S7!), and a smaller 550mAh battery module will fit inside under the hood - the decoder and wireless board may have to scoot elsewhere. Strategic placement of "power-up" siding space and leaving the rest of a railway electrically dead allows you to use existing pickup arrangements (phosphor bronze-looking wipers on the back of the wheels, in this example) and charge up whenever/wherever you can. There is a bit of a start-up cost (like most off-the-shelf DCC systems), but for me - the ability to theoretically make perfect trackwork without any visible wiring, no stops or stutters or keep-alive capacitors.... for exhibition use (or simply for someone that hates layout wiring!), the potential is enormous.

[chaz]

Everyone should have a closer look at S-Cab before posting........ it's gotten my attention, although shoehorning it into an Ixion Fowler seems very difficult at this point! Never say never though.

 

 

Ah, there's the rub. I would be looking for an "all or nothing" solution. If I can't fit the "gubbins" into my smaller locos then the system is a non starter. Personally I don't think DCC layout wiring is as big a chore as it's being painted and Slater's plunger pickups have served me well for fifteen years with few problems. I would welcome making my locos stall proof but I am getting there with keep-alives. Certainly my kit-built Peckett 0-4-0ST has been transformed by its recent upgrade.

 

So these are the hurdles that any new control system has to overcome before I would consider it....

• the batteries and electronics must fit into smaller 7mm locos like Ixion's Fowler diesel and their Hudswell Clarke saddle tank
• the price should be on a par with DCC - both in the control gear and the equivalent to a loco decoder and keep-alive
• there must be convincing sound projects for both UK steam and diesel models
• it must offer the same level of control as my Lenz DCC set-up does

I am not a luddite and will happily embrace innovations if they do what I want and offer an improvement over what I already have. I remain to be convinced that track transmitted DCC is obsolescent.

[johnarcher]

As I am  bit of a Luddite (or just out of date) could somebody explain what a keep alive is?

[55H]

John

 

in simple terms a DCC accessory although the ESU XL has a version fitted as standard

 

A stay alive is a storage capacitor that holds a small amount of power so if the main supply to the loco is broken say by dirty track the loco will continue to be powered for a few seconds until it finds track power again

[Ken Anderson]

Ken

suppose the question is do we need to re-invent the wheel?

John

FSB

I'm not sure that I'm asking to reinvent the wheel.

My personal opinion is that existing systems are fairly crude in terms of what could be achievable together with international licensing problems.

I'm asking for a wish list that could be turned into a system specification for the design, development and manufacture of something new. The wish list should concentrate on required features and not on technologies, e.g. Remote control does not necessarily imply radio control.

[Ken Anderson]

My thoughts.

1. Individual hand held loco controller with automatic pairing of loco and controller for say several thousand combinations.

The controller should be capable of controlling multiple functions as would a real live driver - tell me what they should be.

2. A layout controller (signal box) for points, signals, occupation perhaps with visual display and again unique identifications.

[raymw]

I'm not sure if you want a comprehensive - 'one size fits all' system. For example, ir avoids all the radio licensing issues, is cheaper, but has to be line of sight, unless repeaters used. This can be an advantage in certain situations, but not in others. It seems a waste that we are running trains on a pair of conductors, but not wishing to use them to conduct. If the track was used for control, but on board batteries used for power, that would overcome stalling problems. If there was some intelligence in the on board controllers, then apart from a whistle/horn, you would not need to separately control the sound.

 

If you go for batteries, then you will need at least one 'charging siding' for each loco. Ni-cad batteries are easier to charge properly, and have a flat discharge curve, but  li-ion has a better power density, and can be more readily found in different shapes. For low cost, at least initially, it may be better to rip apart mass market consumer items, instead of having bespoke items made for a small number of customers (you can get smallish, rectangular, easily stackable li-ion polymer batteries -nominal 8.4V 1.2Ah for about a fiver, and radio control toy cars for a tenner.

 

If cost/advantage is important, then there will be a crossover where it is better to keep your track clean and use dcc, cf radio/battery. I'd think a  large amount of track, and few locomotives, out of doors, radio would be ideal. Indoors, with a shunting plank, then dc if only one loco, dcc if more than one, say.

 

fwiw, I think if you are using a touch screen phone/ipad/whatever as the controller, you may as well leave out the model railway part, and just run a train simulator on your pc.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

[81A Oldoak]

One of the reasons I want to eliminate control through energised track is illustrated in these two pictures. On the baseboard shown, all wires would disappear except the yellow and brown leads that drive the Tortoise point motors. On the loco, all of the pick-ups and wiring on view would disappear along with the associated maintenance and all but occasional cleaning of the track and wheels. I am agnostic about the means of control. It can be radio control, infra red, telepathy or some other as yet to be invented means that is not afflicted by dasfingerpokenmitkursundschweren.

[Simond]

As I am  bit of a Luddite (or just out of date) could somebody explain what a keep alive is?

John

 

Have a look at my Porth Dinllaen thread

 

Kind regards

Simon

[Ken Anderson]

For example, ir avoids all the radio licensing issues, is cheaper, but has to be line of sight, unless repeaters used.

 

fwiw, I think if you are using a touch screen phone/ipad/whatever as the controller, you may as well leave out the model railway part, and just run a train simulator on your pc.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

At the system specification design stage no assumptions should be made of the technologies to be used.

So avoid what may currently be used (rc, ir or anything else) and preconceived like phones and the like.

I say these things as a very long in the tooth and now well retired professional design engineer.

[Simond]

The s-cab does look like it fits my list, except for the price.

 

Perhaps two more items on the list - legal in the uk, and easily available

 

 

Edit - IMO it does not need to include signalling and turnout operation, as these are hard wired anyway

 

 

Best

Simon

[raymw]

Hi Chris,

 

for the loco, you still need to get power into the thing, to charge the battery, assuming you want electric power. That will mean two connections of some sort. It could be  one through the track, the other through an insulated wiper, resting on a springy type contact in your charging position/s, or inductive loops, or if you had an on board hydrogen fuel cell a means of squirting in some hydrogen! There are other methods of transferring energy - sound/light/whatever, but I guess all could be more difficult than insulated wheels and contacts. Of course, in 00 Hornby made live steam models, so you could simply refill with water and couple up a freshly butane charged tender.

 

In O gauge, within the sort of costs we're paying for dcc, I think we are running out of space for batteries, and so on - a larger scale is easier at an affordable price.  If money is no object, then gold track and loco tyres, and an air condition/filtered room may make dcc tolerable.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

[Simond]

Chris

 

What's the loco?

 

Cheers

Simon

[PaulRhB]

The charging contact is easy to decide later you just connect it to the loco pickup or a socket as the mood takes each person

I've been looking at the same type of thing and there are two US systems neither of which are legal here, Railpro which is unique and another that escapes me at present but is TC control for a DCC, (incl sound as well), chips.

Personally I'd have a switch to change between track or socket for charging so it could be run on a DCC layout too.