D1056WesternSultan Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I am looking at mounting some point motors remotely and am considering using wire in tube between the motor and the point. Points are all Peco Code 100 and I will be using peco point motors surface mounted. Is there anything I should consider/avoid. i was thinking of using wire in brass tube rather than plastic tube - ie slippery sid. Will the punch of the point motor be too much for the tube toi stay in place - it will be stapled down or indeed sufficient to overcome any friction of the wire in the tube. Any advice gratefully received. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailWest Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 It may be the New Year bringing on a sense of 'deja vu', but I'm sure that I have read a very similar question not that long ago. Perhaps a search on RMWeb may throw up whatever answer(s) were provied on that occasion? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
corax67 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 What sort of distances betwen the motor and point are we talking about? Are you going to use cranks of any description or are you looking at a straight line drive from point to motor? Over relatively short distances (18"-24") provided you firmly staple the tube in place, there should not be too much trouble with a direct link but care must be taken when ballasting and weathering the points to ensure that the point action remains free to ensure reliable operation. I have no experience of separation greater than this but would imagine that performance and reliability may drop off the longer the link becomes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bécasse Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Two points of concern: 1) Peco points incorporate a plastic "spring" to lock the points normal or reversed, Peco point motors are powerful enough to overcome this spring when mounted directly under or alongside the point but it is possible that the wire-in-tube connection that you are proposing will have enough slack in it to make point changing unreliable. I believe that Peco make a similar "spring" add-on that can be fixed directly to the point motor and it may be that may be used, together with cutting the spring on the point, if you experience a problem. 2) The wire in tube method may have too much inherent friction for the "quick throw" modus operandi of the Peco point motor (as opposed to the steady throw of, for example, a Fulgurex motor). One way of overcoming this might be to use a series of very short (1cm) tubes soldered to screws in the baseboard at, say, 5cm intervals rather than a continuous tube; providing they are aligned correctly, the hard steel wire will still behave as if the constraining tube were continuous but with much less friction. You may need to add a cover (cardboard, plastikard) to keep the scenery above clear. I might be inclined to do this anyway (I've used it in the past) because it greatly reduces the amount of expensive copper tube required. I think the main issue is that your proposed method has potential but that you need to experiment so that you are certain that it works well for each and every point before you put scenery in place over the top. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveyg Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I use wire in tube but then fix the end to a small servo slower throw than a point motor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruffalo Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 In any remote operation, I have always previously installed an "omega" loop so the throw can be slightly more than the required movement (the excess being absorbed by this loop). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D1056WesternSultan Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Thank you and Happy New Year to all that responded so quickly. The information is very useful. The maximum length of wire in tube will be about 300mm, 12" in old money. I am using remote motors as I am introducing a new level of baseboard above an existing solid top baseboard which prevents me from fitting motors below the points. The motors will be hidden under some scenery at the rear of the layout near the backscene. Oh! for forward planning and open top construction baseboards. This has all occurred as I received the Bachmann Clay dries and chimney units for Christmas (having asked Father Xmas for them) and so now need to construct a new area for them alongside my already constructed embankment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted January 2, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 2, 2014 In any remote operation, I have always previously installed an "omega" loop so the throw can be slightly more than the required movement (the excess being absorbed by this loop). Not picking on the Gruff but .. I would never use an Omega loop, I always use a Z - an Omega loop is one sided and tends to cause the wire to pull to that side, a Z will give a straight pull and absorb any extra throw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomJ Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Although I model in N rather than OO I have done something v similar with Peco motors and code 55 points. I have put all my point motors behind the back scene and linked them to the points (15-30cm away) with piano wire, which I got from the local model shop. Much easier to install than underneath the board and they seem to work very reliably. I have brought the Peco mounting plates and simply bent the wire up at either end. I believe the mounting plate is designed to cope with the spring and the throw in the point Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.