A Really Useful Layout - Caught out by flashing!

[Guest Jim Read]

Hello Mike and Hello Richard,

 

I do say this with the greatest respect to you both, seeing what you do to the Peco points it occurs to me that you could make the points yourselves from rail and copper clad strips very easily. Other than the soldering which you are both quite good at, all you would need is a mini-vice and a file.

 

The resultant point will look much better than a Peco one and will be a lot easier to wire up, needing only one feed to the frog from the point motors or from a double pole switch if you are using wire in the tube. Or even simpler a loop of wire under the board that contacts with the blades and connect that to the frog, if it fails you just bend it a bit more :-)

 

I'd only too pleased to do you a cutting and wiring diagram and post it here.

 

Regards - Jim

[MikeTrice]

Jim, thanks for the suggestion regarding handbuilt track. I have been down that route going as far as cutting my own PCB and using C&L Code 55 flatbottom rail. There might even be to odd article or two on RMWeb about my efforts. I have made both prototypical and toy train geometry in the Swiss style, but for this layout I was just too bone idle to bother. It is probably why I have never finished any layout I have started ;-)

 

Just to prove I could do it here is a formation based on Peco Settrack geometry but with live Vs and tightened flangeways:

[Guest Jim Read]

Hello Mike,

 

That looks absolutely excellent and so much better than the bought stuff. Fair play to you.

 

This is my best effort and though not as good as yours was quite complex

 

 

A three way and two singles all made in one and on card sleepers.

 

Cheers - Jim

[MikeTrice]

This is my best effort and though not as good as yours

No idea why you think it is not good as mine, it looks fine.

[Guest Jim Read]

Hello Mike,

 

That's very nice of you thank you. If it's any consolation about your layouts, I failed in 2mm, 3mm and 4mm over 4 or 5 years and finally turned to 7mm and found that I could do it.

 

Cheers - Jim

[mjcampbell]

I've used SEEP point motors and their in-built switch for frog switching for years with no problems. I've used them for 009 and the trick is getting the motor sited dead central and in line with the tie-bar, so that the washer which forms the switch moves from one part of the PCB track to the other, as the throw is so small. I just stick the motor onto the underside of the board with bostik, the contact area is plenty big enough to hold the motor and it can be carefully prized off if need be. However the glue stays soft enough for the motor position to be checked, adjusted, checked, point thrown one way and the other, the switch checked ... you get the idea!

[MikeTrice]

I do indeed Michael. I was thinking of using a small sheet of ply to screw the motor to then gluing to the underside of the foamboard. Your use of Bostick should work very well.

[MikeTrice]

I have never designed, nor built a control panel before so please feel free to comment if I have made any gaffs. I reckon I can get by with something like this:

Fortunately it is small enough to fit below baseboard level and therefore will not encroach on any buildings or scenery.

 

The large holes will locate the switches, those for turnout control on the left and those for the sections on the right. I could have inlcuded the section switches on the track plan in with the turnout switches but feel it would have been confusing (happy to be pursuaded otherwise). The smaller holes are for 3mm dia LEDs. I will probably go with green throughout.

 

It did dawn on me that if I was operating from the rear behind the scenic break, I should reverse the trackplan but on thinking it through decided to be selfish and operate from the front.

[47137]

Jim,

Yes. I wanted to try copper clad, but I could find only 4mm and N gauge strips to buy and I really wanted something in between, and so I cut my own from ply.

 

Mike,

I used Seep motors with push buttons on an N gauge layout some years ago. The action is noisy and nothing like the real thing, and I've never felt a wish to repeat the excercise ... given a compact model I would go for wire in tube or bicycle spokes. You can use a toggle switch or (probably better) a slide switch to provide mechanical operation and to switch the vee. I do realise this is at odds with the desire for a separate control panel, but to my mind the effort in setting up the mechanism is more satisfying than the yards of wiring and extra power supplies to operate the motors and LEDs.

 

---

 

I have just bought an off-the-shelf 'OO/HO' Y point for my new 4mm project, and the last few posts might well encourage me to try to copy the geometry with copper clad and some FB rail.

 

Edit: PS sorry Mike I missed your last post while I composed this.

[MikeTrice]

I think I have determined a source for my Station building. If is a Faller model http://www.faller.de/App/WebObjects/XSeMIPS.woa/cms/page/pid.14.17.89/agid.1128.1194.1247/atid.2904/ecm.at/Small-town-station-Sonnenbuehl.html.

 

The only problem is the station is the wrong way round from what I imagined, e.g. I wanted the goods shed to be on the left, not the right.

 

Looking at the instructions in detail (on the Faller site) it should be possible to assemble the other way round but I might have to build my own base which should not be too onerous.

 

One now on order from Gaugemaster!

[MikeTrice]

I wanted to try copper clad, but I could find only 4mm and N gauge strips to buy and I really wanted something in between, and so I cut my own from ply.

As mentioned in a previous post I need 1.6mm strips for Swiss N so end up having to cut my own. This was described in some depth on RMWeb but seems to no longer be available. I have therefore taken the opportunity to upload an offline copy.

DIY PCB Sleepers.pdf

[47137]

It did dawn on me that if I was operating from the rear behind the scenic break, I should reverse the trackplan but on thinking it through decided to be selfish and operate from the front.

Supposing you stay with green LEDs for the route indications, you could use red, yellow, blue and white for the four section indicators. Then add matching, colour-coded covers to the dollies of the toggle switches, and you could dispense with all the labelling on the panel ... and it would look equally good from both sides. There aren't many more LED colours available, but this would work with four sections.

[MikeTrice]

Trouble is with the LEDs unlit it would not be obvious which switch was which.

[mjcampbell]

Or you could just colour the diagram according to the sections - green track operated by the green switch, blue by the blue switch, etc. If you have LED's they just show that it is live or not.

 

As an example here is one of my panels. I don't have LED's, being British a switch in the DOWN position is on! Silver switches are points. I operate from the front too.

 

 

For the panel I used an offcut of 2mm Aluminium from the scrap bin at work, although thin Ply or acrylic sheet would probably do just as well. The plan is printed out and used to mark for the holes, then stuck on after drilling them. Finally a layer of clear plasticard is over the top, the whole lot held together by the screws and switches. Simple, but looks surprisingly good!

[MikeTrice]

I do like colour coding the sections as you have done. Very clear.

[MikeTrice]

Tried a coloured version:

 

Having purchased them today I am having second thoughts regarding the LEDs. They don't really add anything and the toggle positions should be enough:

[47137]

I have never designed, nor built a control panel before so please feel free to comment if I have made any gaffs.

 

I don't think this is a 'gaff', but you may find it helpful to be able to isolate the feeds into the points at the two ends of the layout, i.e. where it links to the fiddle yards. This could mean two more toggle switches, or switching on the panels associated with the fiddle yards.

 

At the limit, if the panel is to be a self-contained item connected by a multiway plug and socket, you could build a rough 'control panel' with just a row of toggle switches, use it and find which switches you need and which ones you never touch. Then build the real panel to suit, you can always hard-wire or parallel up any feeds you know will be always on. It is easy to put in a few extra section breaks and feeds now, and you can always hard-wire them to an adjacent section feed. The downside of the 'temporary panel' is you may memorise the functions of switches very quickly once you operate the layout, and the mimic diagram becomes only helpful to new operators, and so you never build it ...

[MikeTrice]

I am planning to use cassettes either end so isolating them is not really an issue. When in situ they will be connected, when not, they will be insulated.

 

I will probably go with some form of mimic diagram just to get experience from doing so. I can always remodel it later.

[mjcampbell]

Looks good, and should be easy to use. Depending on space, if not using the LED's you might get the section switches in the track schematic. I'd probably not use yellow and orange as too similar, try green, purple, or another different colour? See what coloured switch caps you can get then match the colours...!

 

A minor point but the point between sections 1 and 2 will need to be fed from the toe, and have both rails isolated from the one facing it to the left. So it might as well become part of section 2, saving some wires and isolating breaks? You can't run over it without section 2 on anyway. Another trick is that you can rely on the point to isolate the track just beyond it, so if you move the isolating section break further away from the point you can isolate 2 locos. On my plan above, the engine shed siding bottom-right does this, note where the break is shown.

[Kenton]

A minor point but the point between sections 1 and 2 will need to be fed from the toe, and have both rails isolated from the one facing it to the left. So it might as well become part of section 2, saving some wires and isolating breaks? You can't run over it without section 2 on anyway. Another trick is that you can rely on the point to isolate the track just beyond it, so if you move the isolating section break further away from the point you can isolate 2 locos. On my plan above, the engine shed siding bottom-right does this, note where the break is shown.

 

In fact I cannot really see why Section 2 is required at all? Adding IRJs to the heel of a point (which I presume you are doing to create Section 2) simply to create a section seems very at odds with normal wiring practice.

 

In my view there are only 2 reasons to provide sectioning on a DC layout:

1. To "isolate" a loco within a siding (either to stand idle while something happens elsewhere, or to bring a second loco into the same siding perhaps to remove stock from the rear of the first).

2. To enable multiple controller use - something clearly not intended in this case.

 

Section 3 is only required if a second loco is intended to pass on the loop - which as it is a real possibility makes sense for its inclusion even though in 1 loco operation the switch will remain closed at all times.

 

It also should be noted that all these isolations need only to happen on a single rail (though different in polarity) and if they are positioned at some distance along the siding, for example to enable loco release, then further IRJs and possibly feed will be required.

[MikeTrice]

Thanks for the feedback. I realised early this morning that I still need the LEDs to show the turnout route as I am intending to use centre off toggles. Doh!!!!

 

Now I have dispensed with the LEDs for the sections I can chose more pleasant colours. Will give it further thought tonight and post an update

[MikeTrice]

Kenton, regarding section 2 does this not contravene "My first comment is that you have taken the lazy DC wiring approach - there is generally nothing wrong with that as long as it works (but obviously it doesn't in this case. The "lazy" approach is not to bother wiring every point and to rely on feed from a previous point - thereby leaving out the odd isolated joiner."

 

I have not shown all breaks in the panel (perhaps I should) nor feeds.

[47137]

Hmm. If you are prepared to fit the LEDs for route tellback indication, you could dispense with the centre-off toggle switches and provide some push buttons, one button per route rather than one button per point setting. Drive the point motors through a diode matrix, so pushing a button sets up all of the points for a particular route. It will use fewer switches and be easier to use. I suggest 3 amp diodes; and experiment beforehand to make sure the cdu can shift 3 or 4 motors together. If this is a success, you could develop it to add latching relays to switch the track feeds, and dispense with most or all of the row of four toggle switches.

 

It is terribly easy to build a control panel which is nice to look at but which is limited or even awkward to use and does not really provide any intelligent functionality - but you will still do all the hard work of building the panel and wiring it up. And with all those LEDs there will be lots of wiring. It is much better to think of how you want the layout to work, and then design a control system, and only then design the panel for it. The design process may be iterative, hence my suggestion to rough something out first. Arguably though, you can see the route at glance by looking at the layout, so providing a route setting scheme will make the LEDs add a lot more value.

 

Perhaps this time my post will arrive in sequence ;-)

[Kenton]

Kenton, regarding section 2 does this not contravene "My first comment is that you have taken the lazy DC wiring approach - there is generally nothing wrong with that as long as it works (but obviously it doesn't in this case. The "lazy" approach is not to bother wiring every point and to rely on feed from a previous point - thereby leaving out the odd isolated joiner."

 

I have not shown all breaks in the panel (perhaps I should) nor feeds.

 

No, I would also take the approach of wiring every point (so always a feed to each stock rail) and then a dropper to each section of track thus not relying on the metal joiners. However, I would only use IRJs on the frogs and on separating an isolated part of a siding (as being suggested for the loco siding) or where you require loco release. What can be confusing is the sectioning of track and the sectioning for DC operation, not quite the same.

 

Keep the panel as simple as possible put feeds and breaks on a wiring diagram - you only need it to chase faults (hopefully none).

[MikeTrice]

Thanks Richard. I will have to digest all that until I understand it. I assume (based on the diagram below) that potential routes would be:

1) W1 -> W2 -> S3 -> W4

2) W1 -> W2 -> W3 -> S2 -> W4

3) W1 -> S4

4) S1 -> W3 ->S2 -> W4

 

Going back to first principles this would be the feed and break arrangement based on Kenton's simple rules (from another thread and which were extremely useful):

 

1) Dropper to every stock rail (red and black), dropper from every frog (cyan)

2) Isolating joiner at both frog rails

3) Droppers to every siding rail lthat is connected to an isolated frog rail.

 

OK I have a few extra droppers that are not strictly needed but no big deal and it save relying on the fishplates conducting current.

 

That leaves me 4 sections of track between the turnouts that could be turned into sections S1, S2, S3, S4 by simply taking the feeds through switches.

 

Did I do wrong?