WIMorrison

I think that the option with least wiring will be current sensing, and certainly that will provide reliable results that won’t get affected by external influences - and they can be more cost effective.

installing current sensing is no more hassle on a finished layout than it is if done when building.

superglue the rail chairs either side of where the cut will be and after it has set dremel a gap using a fine cutting disc. Very simple and very effective and doesn’t affect performance or reliability.

Connect each outside bard to the track outputs from your ECoS then sit you loco on top and open the throttle - you can't get it wrong.

If it is happening on every turnout I would immediate suspect the back to back measurement. I would check the back to back - assuming you have a gauge - to see if it is too right.

Also Peco are not unknown for having mouldings which are a bit tight and I know I have has some turnouts where I have eased the check rail by running a Dremel type cutting disc (not mounted in the Dremel though!) through the check rail gap, pressing against the plastic to widen it ever so slightly.

When you say ‘gets stuck’ do you mean that the check rails catch it this physically stopping it, or do you mean it stops electrically due to poor contact

The Z21 is actually sensible in not using DHCP as it prevents support issue from people trying to make it work on their home networks ;)

The only occasion I have seen a Z21 reset back to the defaults was at an exhibition when a child held the button down for long enough to initiate the reset function. The potential for that issue reoccurring is now avoided by leaving everything set using the default 192.168.0.x network.

Essentially what you suggest is correct however (there is always a however) the placement and length of the feedbacks in the track and turnouts can be optimised for reliable running and operations.

if you plan to do automated shunting, or swapping of locos on trains then you will need a small entry feedback that always remains free to allow identification of a loco entering or leaving the block. If you plan to do it either end of a loop then you will need this short feedback at each end.

At stations, or where you want to stop trains then additional feedbacks are beneficial because they will reset the calculated position to actual position. In running blocks where a lower accuracy of stopping is desired then fewer feedbacks are required.

Turnouts do not require occupancy detection but it can be beneficial and should be considered, however (another one) I suspect that your use of frog juicers will prevent the monitoring of turnouts for occupation. If this is the case then you should feed the power to the turnouts and any unmonitored track through back to back diodes to ensure track voltage remains constant across the layout.

the 3, 6 and 9mm throw isn't deadly accurate and doesn't work perfectly for all turnout makes which means that centering of the throw needs to be carefully done when the throw is greater than the tie-bar movement (and omega loops used if surface mount) 😉

The NMRA Standard actually says 23v and the decoder manual doesn't seem to mention this restriction anywhere 😏

You can change the track voltage if you want, or just leave it where it is - works perfectly at 18v, though you may find that you need to alter CV57 to reduce the motor reference voltage. 

6 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

Switches built into point motors like the MTB MP1s don't have this problem. They are constructed to work in tandem with the motion of the motor and enable the frog polarity to match the position of the turnout tie bar. I have no problems with my 30+ MP1s.

 

Yours, Mike.

Mike,

If the MP1 are not correctly aligned to the tie-bar, or the movement is slightly more in one direction compared to the other, then it is possible for the blade operation and polarity switching timing to be out resulting a brief short, but easily cured by aligning correctly.

Correct

Something that seems to have been missed is standard commercial practice by the companies making the models.

They want you to buy their models with their decoder fitted at their price for the decoder to they maximise their profit for the model. Not unreasonably they have the view that their model is available with a decoder that supports all the available functionality from them and if you choose not to use their decoder in their loco (often needing to be procured with the loco at time of purchase) then you are responsible for any issues that arise if you decide to fit a 3rd party decoder.

There is also no reason for them to provide any information of how to map loco A to decoder B or C from some other company.

7 hours ago, ColinB said:

I know this is not a Hornby issue, but wouldn't it be nice if the DCC sound decoder retailers came up with a common file format that contained DCC functions verses Function effects. Then any DCC controller manufacturer could load this file to populate the functions as Hornby do on the HM7000 app. I have a Digikeijs, yes I know that they are bankrupt and I won't get any further updates, but when the new supplier updates its interface it would be nice to load a function map, rather than having to go to a paper copy to read them. Perhaps it is already implemented it which case ignore this.

Read up on Railcom+ and the ECoS command station - that does exactly what you want 😉

The problem is that no-one wanted to pay the fees they want for it.

I think you use iTrain? If not ignore this comment.

You create a switch on the flap which you connect to a 10k resistor (depending on feedback units in use) and then create an action within iTrain that looks for that feedack becoming active. When it becomes active you use iTrain to make the block (or blocks) unavailable and iTrain will stop any trains crossing the flap until you put it back down.

I have set up several people this way.

What voltage does the Z21 Maintenance App, or the Z21 App say that is being output? That is where you will get the true voltage.

Almost all multimeters (especially low end of the market) are designed for 50/60Hz low frequency sine waves and they cannot accurately measure a DCC signal.

According to the manual page  (Z21 switch DECODER Manual (DE, EN, FR)) you will need to set CV#41-48 = 4.

You also need to decide whether you want the addressing as per Roco (DCC+4) or RCN-213 (DCC). This is set in CV#39 with CV#39=0 for Roco addressing and CV#39=1 for RCN-213 addressing. I suggest you check the Z21 to see what addressing scheme you have set within it and adopt the same one.

surely you will still get a short when a loco covers the isolation gap between between the frog and the track when the blades are set against the train - unless the 'frog juicer' somehow cuts the power completely, thus totally isolating the frog when the short remains. 

To make it work as you suggest requires the frog to be totally isolated which will require modifying the turnouts when they are not supplied with isolation cuts (and that is fraught with problems) - hence it is not done for many turnouts. 

22 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

Not quite.

Frog juicers are a solution to cope with operator errors (when you forget to throw a point).

You could argue that the errors are bad operating practise & we all try to avoid them, but they do happen.

Not sure how a frog juicer prevents a short circuit when you run into a turnout set the wrong way.

I would always have the polarity switching of a frog done by the actual motor as that way it is guaranteed to be in sync with the position of the turnout blades.

7 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

The LEDs (the one on the switch and the two in the background) come on for both switch positions. Is this what you intended?

I think the LEDs are red and green and switch over 

22 minutes ago, dasatcopthorne said:

I looked at the link and it didn't look as though it would be anything to do with MRH.

Looks pretty clear to me that it is MRH when you open it

4 minutes ago, dasatcopthorne said:

As I said, that link gives no suggestion that it might take you to MRH.

The link is to the article, which shows clearly that it is from MRH

2 minutes ago, dasatcopthorne said:

I looked at the link and it didn't look as though it would be anything to do with MRH.

 

Dave.

53 minutes ago, dasatcopthorne said:

The list of the chemicals above appeared in Model Railroad Hobbyist in May 2019. Its available on line.

And i provided the link to the article in my post ....

1 minute ago, MattR said:

How do you go about using the contact cleaner?

Spray onto cleaning cloth and wipe over rails or use cup and cotton bud for loco wheels? - seems easy to me 😉

Have you read the article I linked to in the post?

How I clean my track is irrelevant - my method works for me, however I have posted this here before and people have found that the suggestions work - essentially chemically you should be using non-polar solvents.

Incidentally, if you search the internet you will find almost everything on that listed recommended by someone.

The source for this is DiaElec1.pdf