BigGRacing
Aka. Gary Russell
Doesn’t make sense unless it’s the drop of current probably required for DCC?(something I didn't know till now)
Doesn’t make sense unless it’s the drop of current probably required for DCC?(something I didn't know till now)
I agree, it doesn't make any sense, but no matter what I tried, the only way not to get a short was to connect each set of droppers wires separately.Doesn’t make sense unless it’s the drop of current probably required for DCC?
Normally, I would say it sounds like you have some hot frog turnouts in there (electrofrog), but looking at your pictures they all look like Insulfrog. So yes, mysterious.took each set and tried each track individually, all worked fine, no short. put two tracks together, and it shorted out. This particular set were for the two TO's that are in sequence, so not sure if that had anything to do with it,
Yes, my points are all insulfrog, (it's all Hornby track), so I'm not sure what the problem was.Normally, I would say it sounds like you have some hot frog turnouts in there (electrofrog), but looking at your pictures they all look like Insulfrog. So yes, mysterious.
What exactly do you mean two turnouts "in sequence". Does that mean point to frog or frog to frog?. Did you ever put in that double crossover you mentioned earlier in the thread?
Yes, In my opinion many folks who write about DCC wiring totally over engineer everything and make it much harder than it has to be. I always start with two wires to the track and then measure to see if it needs more. Much of what is published is to solve problems that 90% of layouts will never have.It's amazed me how much wiring I did, that I didn't need to have done, not understanding DCC then, as I do now,
I agree, I've read articles where every piece of track has to have feeders, solder feeders directly to the track, don't use fishplate feeders (I do) feeders should be every 2' to ensure smooth running etc. So many do's and dont's, it's mind numbing.Yes, In my opinion many folks who write about DCC wiring totally over engineer everything and make it much harder than it has to be. I always start with two wires to the track and then measure to see if it needs more. Much of what is published is to solve problems that 90% of layouts will never have.
I would guess a layout of this size would need 6 feeders, and I for sure would not worry about bus. The last layout I built is basicaly an oval track plan on a rhomboidal 12 x 12 to 9 on one side. It has five feeders of 18(?) gauge wire There is one at the center of each side plus one for a siding. That way the train is never more than 4 feet from power.
Thanks, still a long way to go before I get somewhere close to you guys.Smudge,
Very nice modification to your layout and great lighting effects.
Thanks, just some cheap Chinese lamp posts and generic LED's, really happy how it turned out tho'.The lighting looks awesome Smudge !
I've noticed in the foto a few of my lamppost's are a little off kilter, need to sort them out plus one of my frog motor's is misbehaving, but as it's Hornby Surface Point Motor, probably needs a little adjustment.
View attachment 150748
Thank you, the old layout had more yard lights, but I overused them, as someone here said, "less is more"That lighting photo is quite nice.
I agree, I've read articles where every piece of track has to have feeders, solder feeders directly to the track, don't use fishplate feeders (I do) feeders should be every 2' to ensure smooth running etc. So many do's and dont's, it's mind numbing.
I know I've still used too many feeders, 3 sets on each frog, (I have a pet hate of loco's stalling over frogs) plus one set at the end of each siding, and another set every few feet on the mains, I think it's the old saying of "better to have too many than too few."