dajt

Can't wait to watch this.

Re the pulley idea, does that put a lot of lateral force on the shaft? It's a pretty short shaft so there is no room for an external support. Being a bodger I wouldn't bother, plenty of spares if it ever did wear out.

The layout is looking great, an excellent trainset!

Someone could certainly weld it.

Above and beyond with that one Dave! I have to remove and redo the cab beading on a 7mm P class but I just can't bring myself to do it, never mind filling the cab opening in and redoing it like you have. At least I know I'll never buy another white metal kit. Horrible things.

Love it.

I have a board of 4 relays triggered by 5v which an Arduino can switch on/off. What I didn't realise is that they are activated by grounding them, not giving them 5v. They are optically isolated, but can still use the Arduino power to power the relays. Anyway, while waking up this morning it occured to me that perhaps having a line with a pull-up resistor going to the relay and the Arduino pin, that can be switched to ground, might work. That way the Arduino can look for level changes on that pin, and the power for the relay isn't coming from the Arduino itself (even though it could), but from the power supply. I'll try it soon. I'm just reluctant to add any more mess to my desk Regards, David.

1. What if I had a pull-down resistor on an Arduino input pin, and that wire was also connected to the relay's operating pin (a 5v operated relay). There is also a switch on that wire, and the other side of the switch is connected to 5v. What would happen when you close the switch? Would both the relay pin and the Arduino pin get 5v or would one of them not trigger? If this doesn't work using a latching serial-in-parallel-out IC could be used if there are more than 2 or 3 relays and switches. 2. So just put the cap across the switch terminals and that's it? Pretty easy!

Re how to trigger a relay. If you're using a switch to signal the Arduino giving either 5v or 0v to a pin, couldn't that same wire be used to trigger the relay? I guess you need latching relays if it is a momentary switch. Also, what is happening with switch bounce in all these installations? Sorry, didn't read the code to see if there is some delay in there.

Forging on I have now got it working with the ethernet shield. Nothing blew up or melted this time but it did take a long time to figure out the ethernet shield must be directly on top of the mega and below the motor shield due to it using the 6 pin in-circuit-programming header. This isn't made completely clear anywhere I could find via google and had me stumped as to why I could get the ethernet shield working on its own but not when it was mounted on the motor shield. I am no longer a fan of the Arduino stacking mechanism - too fragile and I had a few times where pins didn't go there they should leading to more head scratching. The pins went inside the headers which couldn't be easily seen from the outside. It was only when I looked 'through' the shields front to back I noticed it. It also looks too easy for shorts to be made when shields have big metal shrouds on them like the USB socket on the mega, or the ethernet jack on the ethernet board. You have to ensure shields above them have a gap or some insulation between them. I get the idea, I just don't think the execution is very good. The JMRI plugin seems to have problems - if you have say JMRI expecting to talk to DCC++ via serial but you've now changed the DCC++ to talk ethernet, JMRI throws an exception and hangs on startup. You have to manually edit the profile.xml file to get rid of the connection. The ethernet connection doesn't work either, it throws classcast exceptions when it tries to talk to DCC++. I can't be bothered fixing these problems, I think the plugin author already knows about the classcast one. I'd rather use a physical throttle anyway. Computer control doesn't appeal to me other than as a curiosity. Despite all that, a networked DCC controller which is so cheap compared to commercial alternatives and relatively easy to put together for the technically inclined is very cool. I think it's a knock out project and am starting to think of a housing and throttle design that connects up via ethernet. I love this project, it presses all my hobby buttons.

The loco is a RailRoad Jinty straight out of the box - I never even ran it on DC to see how it went. Maybe if I set up circle of track and left it go it might improve. I'm using 12v I think, from an old PC power supply. I thought there were 15v wires in there but my multi-meter is not giving me any more than 12v on any of the plugs. Just typing in <t 3 3 x y> in the serial monitor at the moment to see if everything works. The plan is to use this on a layout for the kids and build a couple of throttles with Arduino nano clones driving them, all talking via ethernet. Would love to be able to power the throttles via the ethernet cable but I don't know power over ethernet works. Regards, David.

It seems I'm destined to make bad power connections every time I turn this thing on. This time I found a likely looking pair of wires to connect the motor driver shield to the track, completely missing the big burnt off bit of insulation on both wires mid way along. Switch it all on and the laptop immediately switched off I thought the laptop was toast - no response to the power button, no battery charging/wall power LED etc. But after taking it apart looking for a fuse and letting it sit like that for a few hours it came back when I put it back together. Lucky. Still blew the Arduino mega clone. I had another one so was able to try again. I'd soldered the decoder into the Jinty and it doesn't run very well but it does run. So DCC++ is working and a loco moving. Maybe the loco needs running in, or the scabby old bit of flex track I'm using is too rough - sanded the rails to clean them. Quitting today while my loss is only the mega clone. Have to buy a few more for spares the way I'm going with these power connections! One thing I should have done before, and have now, is to cut the VIN bridge on the bottom of the motor shield. That separates the two power circuits. It may have saved my mega if I'd done it. Regards, David.

I think the excitement is based upon the idea that it will be possible to buy BH track and points with the same ease and cost as the Peco FB can be today. Certainly around here getting anything other than Peco track would involve a lot of postage and waiting.

Ed, I ordered the mega, motor shield, ethernet shield, and bluetooth board probably more than a month ago and the two shields only arrived this week. Most frustratingly the motor shield last of all yesterday! It all worked with no trouble and no changes required. You just have to be careful to make the right connection on the motor board because as Gregg notes in his video he plugs into the wrong pin. I was counting pins and remembered his comment just in time. Also (obv) look carefully when making the power connections to the motor board - mine go GND VIN +A -A when I *assumed* it would be VIN GND +A -A and got smoke and melting and a lucky escape! A wireless throttle should be easy. There's a million ways to talk to an arduino wirelessly. I'm ordering a few bits to make a throttle too but I won't worry about making it wireless. Someone on the trainboard forum is busily making a throttle for phones if you want to check that out. Putting a front-end on the DCC++ to accept the standard IP throttle commands would be a good extension too I think. Regards, David.

Well that was easy. Only two mistakes hooking up the power supply to the motor board and one melted wire Just dumbness on my part. I'd say I'm lucky I didn't let the smoke out of various ICs or the decoder. Rather than solder my one decoder into my one loco I put together a test harness with an '8 pin socket' bodged up from some female headers, a couple of LEDs to simulate head/tail lights, and a couple more female headers to plug the motor into and it worked no worries! So next step is to solder the decoder into the loco and connect some track and see what happens. I only have a Hornby Jinty so there are certainly no bells and whistles to worry about. Looking forward to getting back to my comfort zone of software now I know it works! I hate soldering things together on those prototype boards. Regards, David.

I think there will always be people who scratch-build for the sake of it. I have no desire to have a layout so don't need kits or RTR but I 'enjoy' scratch-building. By this I mean in retrospect it is nice to look at what you have. The actual doing is quite stressful to me. And I've not finished anything. Everything in my workbench thread is still the same and I probably haven't posted to that in years. A 5" mogul has priority and I'm trying to avoid other projects until it is at least running on compressed air. I'm working on the cylinders, pistons, and valves at the moment so it is getting there. But for these smaller scales I am drawn to 1:64, 1:32, and 7mm precisely because I think they are the haunts of most scratch-builders. Even if a kit for something is available I'd usually rather scratch-build it, for cost reasons if nothing else... kits for Australian locos in 7mm cost more than $1000.00. Having the loco isn't worth that much to me! I wouldn't mind building some of Jim McGowen's kits for light relief, but again am reluctant to spend the money. I bought a Roxey 7mm white metal P class kit and an open wagon thinking they would be a nice distraction... what a horror I'm never touching a white metal kit again. I can't even be bothered trying to finish and sell them. I'd much prefer to cut the bits out myself. Regards, David.

I thought the reason for the 90 deg setting on a 2 cylinder loco was so the valves on at least one side would allow steam into the cylinder and make the wheels move. If at 180 deg there is a chance both valves are in a position where steam can't get to the cylinder. Not much of a problem with an electric motor! Regards, David.

Is the mast made from flathead or bullhead rail? :-\

I agreed with you, but then realised that many engines visit from the 'mainland' so Sodor must use standand gauge! I reckon a big layout of Sodor, including the narrow gauge lines, would be pretty cool if it was run in a railway like fashion. Perhaps without the faces on the engines.

I think I agree with you when I consider what I enjoy about the hobby, but I'm not sure it's for everyone. I enjoy the 'miniature engineering' side of things more than any other aspect but what we design and build are nothing like the real thing. I know what an injector does and roughly how it works but the little bit of brass I turn up to look like one doesn't do anything, it is a static prop. Same for every other bit of detail on a loco. Even the con-rods contribute nothing except friction, and the various suspension systems and drive systems owe nothing to the prototype. So I'm not modelling the prototype, I'm building something that looks like it in miniature but mechanically has no relation to it. Same for most things to do with track and signalling. Most of the stuff we build like block detectors, servos to drive signals or points, etc have nothing to do with the prototype. So it's all a fantasy and I can't see why someone can't be taken seriously if they decide the track gauge doesn't matter that much. I love the crafts(person)ship side of the hobby as it pertains to building locos and rolling stock and even prototypical operation as far as emulating it is possible but I think there is room for other approaches. They don't interest me but so what? I skip reading about layouts, especially articles of the "atomosphere, ambience" type but I don't begrudge their existence.

There is a 4th choice - don't think about it at all, and not worry about it. I'm playing with the idea of building a "train set" for the kids, and have designed the track plan using Hornby/Peco set-track parts. I didn't once consider anything else. I'm sure if I was any good at layout design and scenery etc it would look acceptable to me and most other people. If I was the type to build a layout, I'd want to use S scale or Scale-7 or 1:32. But as I'm not the type to build a layout I'm building a train set to play on and it will use set-track! I did make a bunch of BH/copper clad OO-fs track a couple of years ago to see if I could do it, and it was easy enough, but I wouldn't go to all that trouble for a train set or test track. As for the topic of this thread, if Peco made BH flex track I'd opt for that just because it would be a better result for near zero extra effort on an 00 layout or train set and if they made BH points I'd use them too. I discounted use of the existing BH flex track because they're too much hassle to get where I live, whereas I'm guessing Peco stuff would make its way here or somewhere nearby.

@Edwardian Is plain BH track and FB points any worse than SMP plain track and copper-clad, gapped sleepers with solder 'chaired' points? Or BH points with stamped point blades with huge gaps from the stock rails? Would you even notice from 3' away? If I was to use this track system I'd rather have matching points but it doesn't make sense to have it be a deal breaker. @martin_wynne Could they reuse the existing tools in your example? Wouldn't the point sleeper base be one die so they'd need to make another one anyway to accomodate BH stock rails? I'd also question whether Pecos main market is train set people. I'll bet a lot of layout builders in the US and Aus use Peco code 83 or 75 flex track and points for 'serious' layouts in HO. The US market may even dwarf the UK market, I don't know.

This thread is magnificent. Beautiful work!

Is that a 67 a Roxey P class conversion?

Fantastic and inspiring - I wanted an O scale garden railway, so I built one No hand-wringing, just go and do it. Love it!