Tales from The Room of Doom. Dipping a toe in various bucolic backwaters.

[76043]

Hi Rob,
I found for Dublingham, three things are necessary for good exhibition running, spotless track, feedback and well maintained locos. All obvious, but I wonder what DC system you were using, was it feedback? As I understand it all Zimo DCC chips have feedback built in, so does this explain why you are getting better running under DCC if your DC controller was not feedback?

I also fitted track sweepers under the two brake vans to clear debris during the day at a show. They are obviously not to everyone's taste, but by the look of mine are doing a job.



Tony

 

[NHY 581]

Hi Rob,
I found for Dublingham, three things are necessary for good exhibition running, spotless track, feedback and well maintained locos. All obvious, but I wonder what DC system you were using, was it feedback? As I understand it all Zimo DCC chips have feedback built in, so does this explain why you are getting better running under DCC if your DC controller was not feedback?

I also fitted track sweepers under the two brake vans to clear debris during the day at a show. They are obviously not to everyone's taste, but by the look of mine are doing a job.

View attachment 199425

Tony

Hi Tony.

I tend to avoid feedback controllers. There has been much debate on Rmweb regarding the effect feedback can have on locos fitted with coreless motors. That said, the standard Gaugemaster Combi serves/served me well on the layouts todate, including exhibition running.

Using DCC on Ewe was an experiment which has worked and though adopting sound on locos is not a must have, it's a possibility so the door is left open if we have DCC control. The Zimo decoders have back EMF which I read as kicking in as and when required. I'm not sure how this compares with a feedback controller. In any event, running on DCC won't resolve any running issues on DC. A loco must run well enough on DC before fitting a decoder. What I can see is better slowing/acceleration and smoother stopping/starting, especially when on the 128 speed step option thingy.

The other, unforeseen benefit is the ease of holding the Powercab compared to the small Gaugemaster controller. However, this is offset when operating Ewe as the fiddle yard is on the right and instinct tells me to hold the controller with my right hand therefore uncouple with my left. Tricky and the complete opposite to my other layouts where the fiddle yard is to the left of the scenic section but I digress somewhat as what I'm trying to say is the Powercab is easier to hold...........and there's no centre off direction switch, a trap I frequently tumble into.

Clean track is of course essential but DCC needs very clean track and I confess to being surprised as how quickly this was compromised at Uckfield. At Railwells, there were fewer sticky moments but perhaps my pre-show cleaning wasn't as good this time and something to bear in mind ahead of Ewe's next outing.

The locos are checked, cleaned and tested post show and pre next show to be absolutely sure. Fortunately, I rarely take more than four out. All three J70s were excellent.

Rob.

 

[76043]

Thanks for the feedback (groan) Rob, with my Dublo stock I don't have the coreless issue.

Totally agreed on preparation, at the last show but one, I didn't clean the track properly and as a result spent some time in front of punters with my head in my Ricey cameo cabinet cleaning track. At the recent GETS show I obviously cleaned the track and even cleaned my Dublo commutators, I had two good days running as a result.
Tony

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

Clean track is of course essential but DCC needs very clean track and I confess to being surprised as how quickly this was compromised at Uckfield. At Railwells, there were fewer sticky moments but perhaps my pre-show cleaning wasn't as good this time and something to bear in mind ahead of Ewe's next outing.

I used to clean the track just before an exhibition opened and about an hour or so later after the dust has been kicked up by the visitors. After which I never cleaned the track if things were running faultlessly. All wheel pick-up and stay-alives help.

Like yourself I used to take a handful of locos and should one have failed for any reason (intermittent or no-go) it was replaced by a stand-by. The failure was withdrawn from service, set aside and marked up for attention when I got home. I felt there was no point trying to faff around with it at an exhibition.

Using DCC on Ewe was an experiment which has worked and though adopting sound on locos is not a must have, it's a possibility so the door is left open if we have DCC control. The Zimo decoders have back EMF which I read as kicking in as and when required. I'm not sure how this compares with a feedback controller. In any event, running on DCC won't resolve any running issues on DC. A loco must run well enough on DC before fitting a decoder. What I can see is better slowing/acceleration and smoother stopping/starting, especially when on the 128 speed step option thingy.

Both Zimo and ESU have back EMF, motor and speed control which can be fined tuned to the individual motor - CVs 9, 56 and 112 for Zimo and CVs 51, 52, 53, 54 and 55 for ESU. Both also allow you to change the motor control frequency from 20 kHz to 40 kHz or vice versa. One thing I automatically do for my decoders is set CV29 for DCC only operation - i.e. disable analogue operation.

With DCC the back EMF can be programmed to switch out when a certain speed step is reached. I have a feeling the back EMF is on all the time with analogue feedback controllers and think were originally designed to provide low speed running for iron-core motors - in turn making them undesirable for the more efficient coreless motors.

 

[Captain Kernow]

I applaud the brave sheep's bold move into the Fantastical World of DCC, sheepily going where no sheep has been before.

Unfortunately, despite the promise of excellent running, this Captain will not be following the warp trail of the Sheep Continuum, due to the provisions of the Kernow Towers State Edict about not venturing out of one's Comfort Zone, unless the relevant suite of Official Committees has approved any such venture in writing, in triplicate and in harmonisation.

Such deliberations take a very long time and most never come to fruition. In fact, the Committee for Public Safety are currently officially exhausted, having just rushed through a State Dispensation allowing the construction of a structure using DAS...

However, use of feedback is officially authorised in Kernow Towers. Clean track and wheels is taken as a given (it is rumoured to even form part of the Constitution). Before anything turns a wheel on any Kernow layout, fanatical track cleaning gangs are set to work, equipped with the purest and most effective brand of cellulose thinners and woe betide any citizen unfortunate enough to inadvertently interrupt their worthy toils.

The official Kernow State hand-held Controllers are of a type no longer made, by a long-disappeared tribe who called themselves 'AMR'. Ancient texts discovered by archaeologists describe them as 'slow speed control'.

By virtue of some kind of alchemic magic, they seem to emit a dilute form of feedback, which well-paid governmental physicists in modern state laboratories have so far been unable to replicate, but they say is less than the full strength feedback emitted by current feedback controllers. These units are very, very rare, virtually irreplaceable and they are normally kept under armed guard in a mausoleum, when not required for use.

Folklore, handed down from generation to generation, describe how such 'feedback-lite' controllers were once used to control the coreless motors of the day, motors said to have been manufactured in the the fabled realm of 'Portescap', without apparently causing any damage to such mechanisms, but whether you believe in such fairy tales is, frankly, up to you.

 

[David Mylchreest]

I really don't understand why people tie themselves in knots over DCC when the solution is radio control.

 

[76043]

I'm interested in radio control, so what are the space requirements for radio control in small 4mm locos with almost no space inside? I have a Hornby 48DS converted to EM as my most extreme example and working 6 hours in one stretch at an exhibition? I do have enough locos to swap out at shows. But Panniers, 08's are my usual staple.

I have been impressed with Hornby's Bluetooth DCC system, seems pretty logical to me, supply a full 15v to the track, and get your phone to control the chip via Bluetooth. Still has issues with dirt though I would imagine.

I assume my trusty Gaugemaster HH's have feedback on all the time, but I wouldn't know.
Tony

 

[David Mylchreest]

Firstly, the chip (or more correctly PCB) needed for radio control is the same size or smaller than a DCC chip, so that isn't an issue.
But there are two issues with converting small (and tiny) RTR locos to radio control, none of these apply to kit built locos.
First is getting the battery in, the second is whether or not the motor will respond to a 3.7V battery.
The second is dead easy, if the 12V motor won't turn over on battery power, just replace the it with a 6V N20 motor off eBay, but the first can be more difficult.
I have converted a Dapol/Model Rail Sentinel to RC but I had to reduce the size of the weight block by hacking some of it away to get a battery in. In the instance the supplied motor was replaced with a 12V N20 motor to give more even more space for the battery and it works just fine. You don't need the full range of 0V to 12V in model railways.
I am thinking of converting the Hornby 48DS which I have in my stack but the battery will have to go in the runner truck, I think the motor will be OK but I'll have to test it first.
The Bachmann Jinty isn't a problem, but mine has a Comet chassis I'm not sure about the Bachmann chassis. In that case the RTR model is so old that the motor probably won't work on 3.7V. I replaced mine with an N20 motor in a High Level gearbox which fits in the Comet chassis.
The Bachmann 08 is just about impossible unless you replace the motor (which is a very old design) and put the battery in a runner truck. I saw Mike Edge at Scaleforum and asked him if he would consider designing a chassis for the Bachmann 08 (he has got the very similar Maunsell DE shunter in the Judith's range) which would resolve the issue of the Bachmann 08 being utterly out of loading gauge and give space for a battery. I don't know if that will have a positive outcome.
I have seen 2mm RC locos and this book will offer insights too. Perhap Giles can comment.

 

[Jordan]

Clean track is of course essential but DCC needs very clean track and I confess to being surprised as how quickly this was compromised at Uckfield. At Railwells, there were fewer sticky moments but perhaps my pre-show cleaning wasn't as good this time and something to bear in mind ahead of Ewe's next outing.

Sir should avail himself of a 2B Graphite Stick

Lyra Graphite Crayons | Cowling & Wilcox Ltd.

Perfect for sketching and shading large areas, each Lyra Graphite Crayon is pure graphite, which can be sharpened with a pencil sharpener and won't mark fingers during use.

www.cowlingandwilcox.com

The above is a quick google for illustrative purposes; other suppliers & prices are available.

Clean track, lightly go over rails with graphite stick, and ... relax.
Ignore the Naysayers with their 1,000,001 theories why it shouldn't work; those with practical experience will tell (& can show) that it does. Any slight issues during the day, reapply graphite.

 

[simond]

Graphite is very conductive. It’s also very slippery.

Many moons ago, at the Chatham show, a pal (who better remain nameless but think “Trees”) decided “graphite was the thing”, and perhaps overindulged. Perhaps the rolling stock was too heavy, perhaps the stocks‘ axle bearings needed lubrication, but despite ample supply of volts, and a sufficiency of amps, wheels turned but motion there was none…

laughter, there was lots…


(perhaps the key word is “lightly”)

 

[NHY 581]

Morning all.

A busier than anticipated week has passed by. Instead of two days working in the shop, a third was requested to cover an absence due to the dreaded lurghi visiting itself upon other staff members on Thursday.

That delayed a proper start on the revamp of the Room of Doom. However, that is now underway though a planned uninterrupted run at it yesterday was thwarted by a request from the Head Gardener to remove some garden was. Two tip runs made at full capacity were mounted ( with a third scheduled for this morning ) has therefore hindered progress but we are on course to have an empty room, hopefully by lunchtime today.

Ploughing through it all illustrated exactly how much accumulated cr@p I had managed to tuck away in various nooks and crannies........two rubbish bags were filled with said accumulated cr@p. How much of this will subsequently be looked for in the future remains to be seen of course.

There are stll a couple of big bits of furniture to remove but as I say, hopefully we arrive at an empty room by lunchtime today...........

hopefully.............

Rob.

 

[NHY 581]

An interesting ( well to me at least ) consequence of a fact finding mission to IKEA to view the proposed shelving for the Room of Doom caused one's beady eyes to settle on these rather nice bamboo breakfast tables.



They each measure 53cm x 30 cm overall. They have their own legs which obviously fold under and will sit on a large dining table or even on the floor. There are clearly a number of compromises to be made but I reckon it's possible to build a perfectly satisfying small or micro shunting layout using these little tables. Ideal for the spacially challenged.



The internal dimension between the outside framing is 514mm x 284mm. The middle table could have both sets of legs down and the others would 'piggyback' off them using just one set of legs....or the end 'board' could use both sets of legs with subsequent boards using just one......etc, etc...

The recess beneath each little table is not deep enough to hide or protect any point motors though I wonder if an above board point motor could be located below and connect using suitable linkage....or there points could be operated using brass rod in tubes, exiting out via the side framing. The recess beneath is however deep enough to hide the legs when retracted therefore wiring shouldn't be an issue.

Quickly measuring the recess above suggests that it's 8mm but an infill of 6mm would allow the rail bottoms on PECO Code 75 trackwork to sit just above the end framing as it crosses between 'boards'.

I reckon such a layout would be easily stored and popped up on the dining table on a Sunday evening to allow a bit of shunting to be carried out, then popped away again afterwards.

I shall explore this is due course.

Rob.

 

[simond]

Rob,

I think you were on RMW, don’t know if you saw the micros that Mikkel Kjartjan (spelling?) has done. His model world is all dining table based, the models are delightful. Might be worth a look.

atb
Simon

 

[76043]

Is the table called RESGODS? I'm sure there's a pun in that name somewhere.

RESGODS bed tray, bamboo - IKEA

Mugs, glasses and plates stand steady on this bed tray so you can read a newspaper or watch TV while enjoying breakfast. Foldable legs.

www.ikea.com

Not sure the boss will go for some bedtime/morning shunting though.

Tony

 

[NHY 581]

Rob,

I think you were on RMW, don’t know if you saw the micros that Mikkel Kjartjan (spelling?) has done. His model world is all dining table based, the models are delightful. Might be worth a look.

atb
Simon

Morning Simon,

Yes, very familiar with Mikkel's stunning work. We drop each other a line from time to time. He's very clever.

Rob.

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

An interesting ( well to me at least ) consequence of a fact finding mission to IKEA to view the proposed shelving for the Room of Doom caused one's beady eyes to settle on these rather nice bamboo breakfast tables.

They each measure 53cm x 30 cm overall. They have their own legs which obviously fold under and will sit on a large dining table or even on the floor. There are clearly a number of compromises to be made but I reckon it's possible to build a perfectly satisfying small or micro shunting layout using these little tables. Ideal for the spacially challenged.

The internal dimension between the outside framing is 514mm x 284mm. The middle table could have both sets of legs down and the others would 'piggyback' off them using just one set of legs....or the end 'board' could use both sets of legs with subsequent boards using just one......etc, etc...

The recess beneath each little table is not deep enough to hide or protect any point motors though I wonder if an above board point motor could be located below and connect using suitable linkage....or there points could be operated using brass rod in tubes, exiting out via the side framing. The recess beneath is however deep enough to hide the legs when retracted therefore wiring shouldn't be an issue.

Quickly measuring the recess above suggests that it's 8mm but an infill of 6mm would allow the rail bottoms on PECO Code 75 trackwork to sit just above the end framing as it crosses between 'boards'.

I reckon such a layout would be easily stored and popped up on the dining table on a Sunday evening to allow a bit of shunting to be carried out, then popped away again afterwards.

I shall explore this is due course.

Interesting concept. I also see from the Ikea website they each weigh 1.25 kg (just over a bag of sugar) making four trays equivalent to five 1 kg bags of sugar in weight - before the addition of track, scenery, etc.

The tray infill can easily be cut with trenches to allow you to keep and hide all wiring above the board thereby eliminating all underboard wiring and any potential from it becoming trapped and snagged.

With regards to point motors you could easily mount them above board and hide them with judiciously placed buildings and or scenery.

Of course an alternative - dirty European words now - is to use RocoLine (with roadbed) or Trix C track where the point motor is contained within the ready ballasted road bed.

 

[Tim Watson]

We have used the original Stewart Hine Pentrollers with feedback for most of the last 30+ years on CF. In the last ten years these have been replaced with PICtrollers when the Pentroller fails: these automatically detect the motor type in use. All of our motors are coreless and there have been no failures due to the controllers.

However, the world has moved on and DCC clearly offers many benefits in motor control. But, I must say that I like to have direct control of the models I make.

Stay alives and other dodges can help running, but we use pick up skates on our loco that shunts Mrs Wilberforce’s Yard. The more you run the better it gets as the track gets more and more polished. No one ever notices them…

Tim

 

[Captain Kernow]

We have used the original Stewart Hine Pentrollers with feedback for most of the last 30+ years on CF. In the last ten years these have been replaced with PICtrollers when the Pentroller fails: these automatically detect the motor type in use. All of our motors are coreless and there have been no failures due to the controllers.

However, the world has moved on and DCC clearly offers many benefits in motor control. But, I must say that I like to have direct control of the models I make.

Stay alives and other dodges can help running, but we use pick up skates on our loco that shunts Mrs Wilberforce’s Yard. The more you run the better it gets as the track gets more and more polished. No one ever notices them…

Tim

That sounds like a good endorsement of the PICtroller, Tim? Very encouraging, as like Rob, I am always on the lookout for a good DC hand-held controller...

 

[RodneyS]

I've had a Pentroller for years and it worked very well on N gauge open frame motors.
A few years ago I purchased a 009 Ruston 'Dirty Doris' from the late Rod Allcock.
This had a very small coreless motor and Rod recommended a Gaugemaster Combi.

I bought one and found that all my locos ran extremely well using it, from Rod's 'Doris' to one with an old K's motor.
Personally I found it easier to use than the Pentroller.

A friend has an exhibition layout which relies on his one remaining Pentroller.
He was concerned that this might one day fail so he bought a PICtroller but found it wasn't as good on his locos.
As I no longer used my Pentroller I gave it to him as a spare.

Before I gave it to him I did a direct comparison between the Pentroller and the Combi, swapping from one to the other.
I tried several locos from four different manufacturers and could not detect any difference between the performance of
the two controllers.

I'm sure other modellers will have different views and experiences as the subject of control and different controllers seems
to go on for ever.

I am old enough to remember the AMR tribe mentioned by the good Captain, when they used to travel freely across this land,
selling their wares at exhibitions.
A friend bought one of their controllers and it worked very well on his locos.
They were mostly powered by DS10 motors but one did have a Portescap.
That survived many years of use and quite a few exhibitions.

I also remember their ancestors, the ECM tribe.
I had a couple of their controllers but disposed of them as they made my Hornby and Mainline locos sound like road drills.
I believe you could return them and get the feedback turned down but I didn't bother.
I assembled a couple of Codar controllers from kits and they served me well for many years.
Rodney

 

[Tim Watson]

That sounds like a good endorsement of the PICtroller, Tim? Very encouraging, as like Rob, I am always on the lookout for a good DC hand-held controller...

We have both panel & hand held PICtroller. The hand held is not as good as the panel mount. Malcolm Smith (proprietor) has one of our hand held units with a sample small motor for tuning. I only ever use these controllers in direct drive rather than the fancy braking stuff.

Tim