Problems running Hornby 2-BIL / 2-HAL units in multiple (DC)

[Tony Teague]

I am having problems when running Hornby EMU's in multiple, especially at low speeds.

 

I use traditional DC control and what happens is that the train will slow down and speed up irregularly; this effect reduces at higher power settings.

 

It has been suggested to me that this is because the motors are "unmatched" - but how would I match them?

 

I had decided to remove the motor from one unit so that it became an unpowered trailer, but unpowered motor bogies are not available, so the only way to do this would be to completely remove or isolate one of the motors.

 

(The motor bogies are fitted into units in a different way to all of the other bogies within the units).

 

has anyone else experienced this issue and / or solved it?

 

Tony

[smokebox]

How good is your power supply to the tracks? Do you use just one power connector or have multiple soldered connections?

[kevinlms]

Exactly what controller are you using?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...has anyone else experienced this issue and / or solved it?

 

 Yes to both. The answer may not be welcome. DCC is the easy winner for this problem. You get complete flexibility in that the units can be matched very precisely across the speed range, and freely moved independently if that aspect of MU working is to be modelled.

 

Back in the day when DC operation was all we had, 'matching' motor units was a matter of fettling them so that they ran as sweetly as possible and then trialling to find the most compatible pairings. Practically it is far easier to match all spur gear drive mechanisms than worm drive, the reversible nature of spur gear drive makes them more tolerant.

 

If planning to always run the motor units together, then wiring the pick ups together is very advantageous.

 

Replacing a motor unit with an unpowered bogie. Now I have not done this with modern RTR and suspect the construction will require quite a rebuild. The method I would think to use is attaching the external cosmetic frames taken from the motor bogie to a fold up etched kit coach bogie frame (intended to take external cosmetic frames) to make an unpowered bogie. A floor and pivot will then have to be installed in the vehicle to mount the bogie, quite an extensive modification, and possibly not fully reversible with the existing parts should that ever be required.

[10000]

Before you start taking them apart or modifying do some testing.

 

1) Ensure each unit works properly on its own for an extended period of time.

 

2) Try both units on the track about a foot apart and see how they behave like that.  If they are badly mismatched then either the rear one will catchup quickly or fall behind. So you will know that it's not possible to run them both motored.

 

What is your DC controller, a standard model like a gauge master or a feedback controller

[tender]

 

 

Replacing a motor unit with an unpowered bogie. Now I have not done this with modern RTR and suspect the construction will require quite a rebuild. The method I would think to use is attaching the external cosmetic frames taken from the motor bogie to a fold up etched kit coach bogie frame (intended to take external cosmetic frames) to make an unpowered bogie. A floor and pivot will then have to be installed in the vehicle to mount the bogie, quite an extensive modification, and possibly not fully reversible with the existing parts should that ever be required.

 

Why not just remove the motor (and spur gears) from the power bogie.

 

Edited March 13, 2018 by tender

[New Haven Neil]

It sounds to me as if you are using a back-EMF type controller - having two motors in circuit will always confuse these.

[Pete the Elaner]

Why not just remove the motor (and spur gears) from the power bogie.

 

2 Bil.jpeg

Similar to what I have done for double heading & top n tailing Hornby / Lima 31s with DCC. Bith have sound but the Lima has the gears removed. I may have got away with this with double heading but I am sure top n tailing would have been a complete disaster. I tried to isolate the motor with programming but I could always hear it whirring so I just removed the gears.

The solution would also work for DC, but you could also then isolate the motor.

[Phatbob]

We regularly run these in multiple on Star Lane.  Trains with up to 4 motor bogies and have had no such problems.  This is using Modelex controllers on plain vanilla DC.  They are excellent electronic controllers, that do NOT have feedback.  I can sincerely recommend them for this sort of appplication.
Usual caveat, no connection, just a happy customer.
HTH, Bob.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Why not just remove the motor (and spur gears) from the power bogie.

 Worth trying. Typically the result is not very free rolling, but this may be acceptable if the remaining traction has sufficient grunt to move the complete train smoothly, and the drag is not sufficient to cause derailment on the smallest radius curve used.

[Wickham Green]

Why not just remove the motor (and spur gears) from the power bogie.

 

2 Bil.jpeg

If you want a 'dummy' unit don't forget that the 2BIL Driving Trailer is supplied with a 'dummy' motor bogie in place of the ( lighter ) pickup bogie it should have - so if you can get the latter ( Peter's Spares ? ) that Hornby filled to the 2HAL you're on your  way !

[Tony Teague]

How good is your power supply to the tracks? Do you use just one power connector or have multiple soldered connections?

 

Multiple soldered connections - and switchable sections. These are no problem with other double-headed trains.

 

Exactly what controller are you using?

 

Gaugemaster Model 100 / UQ in multiple - no feedback.

 

 Yes to both. The answer may not be welcome. DCC is the easy winner for this problem. You get complete flexibility in that the units can be matched very precisely across the speed range, and freely moved independently if that aspect of MU working is to be modelled.

 

Back in the day when DC operation was all we had, 'matching' motor units was a matter of fettling them so that they ran as sweetly as possible and then trialling to find the most compatible pairings. Practically it is far easier to match all spur gear drive mechanisms than worm drive, the reversible nature of spur gear drive makes them more tolerant.

 

If planning to always run the motor units together, then wiring the pick ups together is very advantageous.

 

Replacing a motor unit with an unpowered bogie. Now I have not done this with modern RTR and suspect the construction will require quite a rebuild. The method I would think to use is attaching the external cosmetic frames taken from the motor bogie to a fold up etched kit coach bogie frame (intended to take external cosmetic frames) to make an unpowered bogie. A floor and pivot will then have to be installed in the vehicle to mount the bogie, quite an extensive modification, and possibly not fully reversible with the existing parts should that ever be required.

 

DCC is not an option, I have over 200 locos!

Your suggestions on trialing the pairs and on how to rebuild are very helpful, thanks.

 

Before you start taking them apart or modifying do some testing.

 

1) Ensure each unit works properly on its own for an extended period of time.

 

2) Try both units on the track about a foot apart and see how they behave like that.  If they are badly mismatched then either the rear one will catchup quickly or fall behind. So you will know that it's not possible to run them both motored.

 

What is your DC controller, a standard model like a gauge master or a feedback controller

 

This is very helpful, thanks.

Standard Gaugemaster analogue, no feedback.

 

Tony

[Tony Teague]

Why not just remove the motor (and spur gears) from the power bogie.

 

2 Bil.jpeg

 

This sounds worth trying - relatively little effort involved.

Thank you

 

Tony

[Tony Teague]

It sounds to me as if you are using a back-EMF type controller - having two motors in circuit will always confuse these.

 

Nice idea, but no, no feedback and other double-headers work (two very different locos)

 

Tony

[Tony Teague]

If you want a 'dummy' unit don't forget that the 2BIL Driving Trailer is supplied with a 'dummy' motor bogie in place of the ( lighter ) pickup bogie it should have - so if you can get the latter ( Peter's Spares ? ) that Hornby filled to the 2HAL you're on your  way !

 

This is a nice idea, however, the dummy motor bogie is fitted like the other non-powered bogies, wheeas the motor bogie is pivoted from much higher up and so one cannot be substituted for the other without the sort of surgery suggested by 34theletterbetweenB&D

 

Tony

 

[TRAILRAGE]

I've been running my Bil / Hal pairing without any issues with my 20 year old Guagemaster Model W controllers for the best part of a couple of years.  What type of couplings do you use?. I have been using Kibri bar couplings in the shape of screw couplings that came with some Track machine kits of theirs.

 

This is the Symoba version

 

https://www.dccsupplies.com/item-p-103647/symoba-104-drawbar-nem-362-compatable.htm.

 

Cheers Trailrage

[Tony Teague]

I've been running my Bil / Hal pairing without any issues with my 20 year old Guagemaster Model W controllers for the best part of a couple of years.  What type of couplings do you use?. I have been using Kibri bar couplings in the shape of screw couplings that came with some Track machine kits of theirs.

 

This is the Symoba version

 

https://www.dccsupplies.com/item-p-103647/symoba-104-drawbar-nem-362-compatable.htm.

 

Cheers Trailrage

 

I am using the close coupling bar provided with the Hornby EMU's, but I am confident this is a motor / electrical issue rather than anything caused by how they are coupled.

 

Tony

[FPH 603]

Are both models made around the same time? I'd assume so but I've found that sometimes different batches of models regardless of how similar they appear to be may run differently. Or maybe was one used more than the other prior to the decision to multiple work them?

[tender]

I've recently fitted a second power car (Chassis and Motor Bogie from Peters Spares) to my Brighton Belle by replacing with the dummy unpowered chassis.

This was due to the 5BEL struggling with a  slightly curved 1:50 gradient on the layout (all the other EMU's go up no problem).

I was quite amazed at the difference in speed between the two motors when trying to speed match them. Not relevant here, but I had to resort to using the speed tables of the DCC decoders to get them tracking across the full speed range before linking them together. 

Edited March 14, 2018 by tender

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...DCC is not an option, I have over 200 locos!...

 But there are just four you want to speed match, so the decoders are only required in those, plus a DCC system to programme them. If the layout is of switched section cab control type, the DCC system is used as one of the cabs, and selectively only powers the sections the MU's are operating on.

 

It's the same operating discipline in route setting by allocation of the sections that make up the route to the correct cab. That's how I started with DCC, most of the layout operated DC, just the few trial locos with decoders on DCC. The caveat, I had intended a gradual conversion to DCC, but within a fortnight the order for 60 decoders had been placed...

[Tony Teague]

Are both models made around the same time? I'd assume so but I've found that sometimes different batches of models regardless of how similar they appear to be may run differently. Or maybe was one used more than the other prior to the decision to multiple work them?

 

This is quite possibly an issue - I think the Hornby BILs were made in 3 batches and these are certainly from 2 different ones, although I think their usage would be similar from memory.

 

Tony

I've recently fitted a second power car (Chassis and Motor Bogie from Peters Spares) to my Brighton Belle by replacing with the dummy unpowered chassis.

This was due to the 5BEL struggling with a  slightly curved 1:50 gradient on the layout (all the other EMU's go up no problem).

I was quite amazed at the difference in speed between the two motors when trying to speed match them. Not relevant here, but I had to resort to using the speed tables of the DCC decoders to get them tracking across the full speed range before linking them together. 

 

Interesting - I think that I have been facing exactly that issue.

 

Tony

[Tony Teague]

 But there are just four you want to speed match, so the decoders are only required in those, plus a DCC system to programme them. If the layout is of switched section cab control type, the DCC system is used as one of the cabs, and selectively only powers the sections the MU's are operating on.

 

It's the same operating discipline in route setting by allocation of the sections that make up the route to the correct cab. That's how I started with DCC, most of the layout operated DC, just the few trial locos with decoders on DCC. The caveat, I had intended a gradual conversion to DCC, but within a fortnight the order for 60 decoders had been placed...

 

That is an interesting approach that I have not heard of before and it could have worked for me, except that I have a semi-automated fiddle yard in which trains move up across 20 double length roads, as the front train is removed - which is why the fiddle yard has a separate controller - it is set to a relatively low voltage so that trains do not stop too jerkily when moved up.

 

I am pleased to say, however, that I have now "bitten the bullet" and removed the motor and spur gears as suggested yesterday by tender.

 

This was not as easy as one might imagine and reversing it would probably need a new plastic motor casing, because opening it up was not simple (i.e. bits got broken!).

 

So far, this solution is working fine and so I think I am happy and would like to thank everyone for their very helpful ideas and contributions.

 

Tony