Battery powered/Radio controlled locos

[fallen]

Hi Stuart,

 

Here is a photo of the 009 RNAD loco:

 

 

 

 

You can see the switch in the cab and also just about make out the beacon as one of the two small items on the bonnet just in front of the cab.  Otherwise its as per the kit, with all the battery and electronics tucked away inside the body and the bottom of the cab.

 

Frank

Edited June 11, 2013 by fallen

[StuartM]

Hi frank,

Thanks for the info

I'm thinking about using a shunters wagon to house the battery and receiver

I was looking to use the 20mA battery from here

http://www.micronradiocontrol.co.uk/lipo_fullriver.html

 

Rgds,

Stuart

[fallen]

Hi Stuart,

 

I got my batteries from Micron but they have now decided to stop selling them so it is just what is left on the sale pages which changes daily.

 

If they sell out of what you want then there are other suppliers eg Robotbirds but I have not checked if they have these. They do have the Hyperion ones I use.

 

I think you will find these 20 mAh batteries won't give you much battery life. The n-gauge chassis I have tested take anything from 60 to 250 mA so at say 100 mA these batteries will only last 12 minutes or so of continuous running whereas 200 mAh batteries will last a couple of hours. I think it would be worth seeing if you can get bigger capacity ones in.

 

Another point to watch is battery connectors, the ones you mention and some others have solder tags which you can solder to whatever you want, but most LiPos come with some form of connector attached which correspond to the connector on the model aircraft they are designed for. Unfortunately there are several designs of connector. It's quite important to find a supplier of the appropriate connector to be able to us them for something else. The ones with solder tags are probably the easiest to use if you can find the right sized ones.

 

Frank

[Robin2]

Hi Stuart,

 

I won't be at home until Friday so this is a brief comment. I'm using 80ma Turnigy nano cells from Hobby KIng (76p each). They are 7mm diam x 30 mm long and were the smallest I could find with decent capacity.

 

I looked briefly at an exploded diagram of a Grafar 04 diesel shunter (assuming that's what you are talking about) and it seems to have a can motor. If it won't run well on a single cell you should be able to find a 6v equivalent in a suitably sized servo. That's what I did with my class 101 dmu.

 

...R

[raymw]

Some more experiments in battery power and radio control here http://railwayherald.com/uknews/bombardier-shows-off-its-last-mile-power-with-class-187

[fallen]

Interesting!

 

I wonder what batteries they are using?

 

Are they maybe hidden in the second loco body?

 

Frank

[StuartM]

Hornby has a new chairman Roger Canham,

I contacted him explaining the merits of BPRC locos

This is his response.....

 

Thank you for getting in touch Stuart, I have passed this email across to the Hornby Brand team. They have a deeper understanding of the technology and its potential application in model rail for Hornby.

I have asked them to evaluate your ideas and contact you if they believe it is something we should pursue with you.

Thank you once again, kind regards

Roger Canham

Chairman

 

We live in hope,

Stuart

[fallen]

Good move Stuart. It will be interesting to see how they respond.

 

Frank

[StuartM]

I was thinking today about using a lower voltage motor like Robin and seeing if I could power it from a solar panel like the ones found in calculators.

The panel could be laid atop of a shunters wagon

[Robin2]

Sorry to disappoint you Stuart, but calculators operate on micro-amps and tiny solar cells wouldn't produce nearly enough power for a motor even in bright sunlight.

 

If you want to environmentally conscious I suggest you buy a big solar panel and use it to charge a good-sized 12v battery which you could then use to charge your loco batteries.

 

...R

[SimonME46]

It is the dcc communications protocol that is useful. it doesn't matter whether it is communicated through the track, radio, infra red, ultra sound, or whatever. It is a standard that is the most popular, and has been fairly widely  adopted. At the moment, as far as I know, the radio systems do not implement this, they use their own proprietary methods, which appear to be limited in functionality.

 

If we want to talk diy, then rough retail pricing of rf receiver £5.00, transmitter £20.00, ir receiver 25pence, transmitter (but you need a few  - 10pence) - these piggy backed onto existing dcc control gear. It would not be difficult to then run rf/ir and track all on the same layouts while the changeover was commenced. Now, afaik, the Deltang, and the like does not have such a rich protocol as dcc, and it may mean an all or nothing change. It depends also, on the scale of the model - 2, 4, 7mm or larger, as to the ease of fitting batteries, etc. For an individual, whether any of it is worthwhile depends on their personal wishes, capabilities, and disposable income. 

Apologies for backtracking. We tried this route 2 or so years ago, but ran into a problem. Can't recall the details, but I think it was that the transmission was clipped to only show half the signal (lets say the upper half). This wasn't enough to get the DCC signal through to the decoder. I see that the Americans appear to have solved this, but as they are on different frequencies, and won't sell outside the US, it isn't much help.

 

Another supplier of radio gear is Malcolm at rpmmodels.co.uk

[fallen]

This looks like a promising development.

 

TrainworxOz are offering complete radio control installation kits:

 

http://themodelworksaustralia-com.webs.com/

 

Frank

[Robin2]

That looks very like a Deltang tx21 transmitter. No need to go all the way to Australia!

 

http://www.deltang.co.uk/tx21.htm

 

...R

[fallen]

True, but I think the attraction for many will be that you get the complete package with no need to worry about sourcing the ancilliary components.

 

Frank

[Robin2]

You can get all the bits from Deltang except the battery. The receivers just have 4 wires to connect - two to battery and two to motor. Probably less trouble than installing a wired DCC chip.

 

I don't see any information on the Australian site about what their kit contains.

 

Of course if people want to buy locos with the stuff already installed that's a different matter.

 

...R

Edited June 26, 2013 by Robin2

[fallen]

You can email for more info to:

 

themodelworks@ozemail.com.au

 

The info you get back suggests it is the complete package for the loco - receiver, battery, switch, charging socket. They say they advise on battery choice. I suspect this complete package is the most useful aspect. However the loco they show is I think 1:35 scale although they claim all scales down to n gauge can be fitted.

 

Also they have various transmitters which do look like DelTang units.

 

As I said, looks promising but I have no experience of them as yet.

 

Frank

[Robin2]

I discovered recently that the Deltang Rx6x receivers are based on the Atmel Atmega328 microprocessor and can be programmed to be compatible with Arduino devices. http://www.deltang.co.uk/

I bought two Rx6xs and got a lot of advice from DavidT of Deltang and I have now succeeded in getting them so they can be programmed like Arduino devices and can transmit and receive data wirelessly.

Using them in this way I reckon one of them could be used as a "transmitter" in conjunction with a PC to controlling a large number of locos and could also receive data from the locos if required.

An Rx6x in a loco could be programmed to operate lights and sound and do everything a DCC chip can do. It could probably produce the codes necessary to operate a DCC chip - although I'm not sure that offers any advantage.

I have created a Topic about this on the Arduino forum and I have included a link to my explanatory PDF and my demonstration program code. http://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?topic=174358.0

I will be happy to answer questions.

 

...R

[StuartM]

Good write up Robin, thanks for sharing

I know little of Arduino (apart from what I've just read on Wikpeadia)

I prefer the pickaxe platform, because that's what I know, however I doubt that the Picaxe code could be used in the onboard chip used in the Detang products. I suppose its all down to the compiler that's used. My knowledge of things is not extensive.

Still I am impressed with your efforts

Rgds,

Stuart

[Robin2]

Thanks Stuart,

 

I have programmed Microchip's PIC microcontrollers in the past but never used the Picaxe system. Overall I suspect Microchip and Atmel microprocessors are as good as each other. I only became fond of the Arduino system because Maplin had the Uno boards in stock. Of course if I had gone down the Picaxe route I would not have become involved in programming the Deltang devices.

 

I can't immediately see any indication that Picaxe Basic can be run on an Atmel microcontroller - I suspect the leaders in both camps like to keep things separate!

 

If you are comfortable programming the Picaxe devices you should have no problem figuring out the Arduino system. I suspect (because I don't know it) that the Picaxe system doesn't allow direct access to the underlying microprocessor in the way the Arduino system does.

 

...R

[raymw]

Hi Stuart,

 

This looks useful - http://www.picaxe.com/Hardware/Project-Kits/XBee-Connect-Starter-Kit/ maybe a bit expensive, but I expect you would learn something. They have cheaper radio , too. The Picaxe is programed in a version of basic, Arduino is in a version of 'C'. I had a freeware ide that worked with both Arduino and PICs (in 'C')

 

 My opinion is that the Arduino is ok for development, but the predefined layout, board size, etc. is not what I would necessarily want to build into a final system - I think the PIcaxe may give a 'neater' result. There iwas a guy supplying the bits for an Arduino type circuit for very little money - http://cefn.com/blog/tag_arduino.html but I can not discern from his blog if he is still doing this - maybe you'd want to email him. You will then not be restricted by the arduino layout, but still be able to program it in the normal way. There will be little difference, apart from the syntax, in programming in 'C' or Picaxe basic both can get to the bits.

 

If you really want to get to grips with the PIC, instead of being restricted to the few Picaxe chips, then microchip have a free ide, and also a fee 'C' compiler, but maybe you should try the Pic assembler.  However, you will need, in most cases, to acquire a programmer - for some PIC's that is easy to build. It depends how far you want to be diverted from 'trains'  What makes the Arduino and Picaxe easy is that they have been pre-programmed with a boot loader, but this wastes memory space in the final product.

 

hth,

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

 

 

[fallen]

If you want to get started with PicAXE these are probably as good value as any starter kits:

 

http://www.kitronik.co.uk/products/project-kits/programmable-pic-kits/picaxe-project-kits-and-chips/

 

Frank

Edited June 27, 2013 by fallen

[Robin2]

Hi Ray,

 

I guess you didn't get a chance to read my recent Post #192 above. Using a Deltang Rx6x module you can have an "Arduino" board 

measuring 12mm x 22mm including a 2.4GHz transceiver and a motor bridge . That will fit into most NGauge locos and can run from a single 3.6v LiPo cell.

 

I have nothing against the Picaxe system (I got involved with Arduino by accident) and if there is a matching product it would be great to know about it as it would widen the appeal of the BPR/C concept.

 

...R

 

 

 

 

 My opinion is that the Arduino is ok for development, but the predefined layout, board size, etc. is not what I would necessarily want to build into a final system - 

 

 

[raymw]

Hi Robin,

 

I read your post, but I was replying to Stuart.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

[StuartM]

I bought a book on C++ but to be honest it made absolutely no sense to me at all and the compiler that was recommended, again made no sense, where as 'for me' the Picaxe system is very logical plus you get 3 free manuals from the Picaxe website.

plus there is a very active forum to help people of all levels of skill.

However, having said all that, the only really suitable Picaxe chip would be the 08m2 because of its size, and even that is probably to big, being in an 8pin dil package, although there is a surface mount option. but then you have to add 4.5v supply or a voltage regulator circuit if powering from a higher voltage and then add the radio tx/rx, all of which makes up a massive footprint of around 6sq cm's plus the battery being used to power both the loco and the circuitry.

It would be easy to make a BPRC system out of Picaxe in 00 but squeezing it into n is realistically not really practical, where as the Deltang solution has been purpose made and shrunk onto a tiny pcp with all of the various circuit parts on-board.

 

Your also right regards time. My main passion is model railways, the electronics side of things is a sometimes necessary evil that diverts my attention from what I'd rather be doing. Although I did designed, build and programmed a picaxe controlled servo unit which along with as many other units as you like is connected to a data-bus and controlled from one central picaxe

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/50534-an-asymetrical-double-outside-slip-in-2mm/page-5

a few posts down.

but again this was a diversion from building the layout.

[Robin2]

Stuart, I agree all versions of C are a PITA. Given the choice I write programs in Ruby which is an interpreted language, as is Basic.

 

Having said that the Arduino system makes C++ tolerable because it removes (hides) much of the formality of C. To give you an example the following program is all you need to make a servo move through its range. The "setup" routine runs once when the device is reset. The "loop" routine runs continuously. http://arduino.cc/en/Tutorial/Sweep

 

...R

 

 

#include <Servo.h> // tell the compiler to use the servo library

Servo myservo; // create servo object to control a servo
// a maximum of eight servo objects can be created

int pos = 0; // variable to store the servo position

void setup()
{
myservo.attach(9); // attaches the servo on pin 9 to the servo object
}


void loop()
{
for(pos = 0; pos < 180; pos += 1) // goes from 0 degrees to 180 degrees
{ // in steps of 1 degree
myservo.write(pos); // tell servo to go to position in variable 'pos'
delay(15); // waits 15ms for the servo to reach the position
}
for(pos = 180; pos>=1; pos-=1) // goes from 180 degrees to 0 degrees
{
myservo.write(pos); // tell servo to go to position in variable 'pos'
delay(15); // waits 15ms for the servo to reach the position
}
}