Would you say that the 4 AMP, #400 version of the Dallee E-Unit would suffice for a Lionel semi-scale, two motored GG1 ?

Dan Padova

 

"In the course of my life I have had to eat my words, and I must confess it was a wholesome diet"..........Winston Churchill

                                                                                                                                        

Original Post

Thanks.  Figuring that I will be using this in a Lionel GG1 with Pullmor motors, perhaps the 12 AMP version might be a better choice.  

Dan Padova

 

"In the course of my life I have had to eat my words, and I must confess it was a wholesome diet"..........Winston Churchill

                                                                                                                                        

Are there any other brands of an electronic E-Unit available ?

Dan Padova

 

"In the course of my life I have had to eat my words, and I must confess it was a wholesome diet"..........Winston Churchill

                                                                                                                                        

PaperTRW posted:

I've had good luck with the board that Lionel used in the mid-1990's with their Pullmor motors. It's part number 610-8689-110.

I think I have an extra or two, if you're interested -- $50 shipped. My address is in my profile.

TRW

Is the Lionel board strictly a substitute for an E-Unit ?  i.e. it's not a LCRU board or anything of that nature, is it ?

Dan Padova

 

"In the course of my life I have had to eat my words, and I must confess it was a wholesome diet"..........Winston Churchill

                                                                                                                                        

Dan Padova posted:

Is the Lionel board strictly a substitute for an E-Unit ?  i.e. it's not a LCRU board or anything of that nature, is it ?

It's just an e-unit. In fact, it was the immediate predecessor to the first TMCC LCRU.

It was called the LionTech SSRU - solid state reversing unit. It was Lionel's first collaboration with Neil Young, and as mentioned above, TMCC came a few years later.

The board was in use 1992-1997 or so, and was included with steam and diesels, single and dual motors.

TRW

Dan,

You may be able to use the 4amp reverse unit.  Are you familiar with running pullmor motors using the combination brush-field winding method?  To do this you are not running on the track, you support the trucks either on rollers or small wooden blocks and tie  one field winding to one brush, and do the same for the other field and brush.  You need a transformer with a volt and ammeter to check this.  I recently did this with an American Flyer Alco, each motor pulled 3.8amps and the field windings got hot.  When I tied them in series (together)  one going forward, the other in reverse, the current dropped to 2.0 amps and the field windings did not heat up bad at all.

The easiest way to explain this is as follows.  Take one brush and one field winding- call it #1.  Take the second field winding and other brush - call it #2.  Do the same for the second motor.  Tie #1 from one motor to #2 on the other motor and run them together.  One motor will go forward, the second motor reverse, just like in your locomotive.

Try it.

bruce

 

bruce benzie posted:

Dan,

You may be able to use the 4amp reverse unit.  Are you familiar with running pullmor motors using the combination brush-field winding method?  To do this you are not running on the track, you support the trucks either on rollers or small wooden blocks and tie  one field winding to one brush, and do the same for the other field and brush.  You need a transformer with a volt and ammeter to check this.  I recently did this with an American Flyer Alco, each motor pulled 3.8amps and the field windings got hot.  When I tied them in series (together)  one going forward, the other in reverse, the current dropped to 2.0 amps and the field windings did not heat up bad at all.

The easiest way to explain this is as follows.  Take one brush and one field winding- call it #1.  Take the second field winding and other brush - call it #2.  Do the same for the second motor.  Tie #1 from one motor to #2 on the other motor and run them together.  One motor will go forward, the second motor reverse, just like in your locomotive.

Try it.

bruce

 

You've lost me Bruce.  Not sure what running the motors in opposite directions means.  

I have been thinking of getting an AMP meter.  Would you recommend what to look for ?   I don't want to spend alot on one, but I want to be sure to get one that isn't junk either.

Dan Padova

 

"In the course of my life I have had to eat my words, and I must confess it was a wholesome diet"..........Winston Churchill

                                                                                                                                        

I *think* this is what Bruce is talking about (see image attached.)  It stands to reason that current draw would be lower with shunt wiring because the resistance of the armature and field are in parallel, rather than in series.  If it works, I would expect the motor to have lower RPM and a more constant speed response to changing loads in this configuration.

Of course the original post is about TWO motors, which yields additional possibilities:  The two motors could be wired in parallel to each other (but each motor having a series circuit between its own armature and field.)  Or, both Fields could be wired in parallel to the track while the armatures are in series to each other; etc.  It might be fun to experiment and see how various configurations affect the performance.

I've often wondered whether modern, hi-tech solutions such as the Dallee e-unit, ERR AC commander, etc., do funny things such as holding the field current constant while varying the voltage to the armature, etc.  A solid-state circuit could also impart a pulse, or use half-wave DC for improved starting performance.  By adding a few diodes, I would think it's even possible to use a command control board intended for a DC motor.  @gunrunnerjohn@bruce benzie have you ever experimented with this?  What further insight can you add?

 

Creep, coast, and pull.  We're not talking about cold fusion here.

Attachments

Photos (1)
Ted S posted:

I *think* this is what Bruce is talking about (see image attached.)  It stands to reason that current draw would be lower with shunt wiring because the resistance of the armature and field are in parallel, rather than in series.  If it works, I would expect the motor to have lower RPM and a more constant speed response to changing loads in this configuration.

Of course the original post is about TWO motors, which yields additional possibilities:  The two motors could be wired in parallel to each other (but each motor having a series circuit between its own armature and field.)  Or, both Fields could be wired in parallel to the track while the armatures are in series to each other; etc.  It might be fun to experiment and see how various configurations affect the performance.

I've often wondered whether modern, hi-tech solutions such as the Dallee e-unit, ERR AC commander, etc., do funny things such as holding the field current constant while varying the voltage to the armature, etc.  A solid-state circuit could also impart a pulse, or use half-wave DC for improved starting performance.  By adding a few diodes, I would think it's even possible to use a command control board intended for a DC motor.  @gunrunnerjohn@bruce benzie have you ever experimented with this?  What further insight can you add?

 

Pullmore motors are series wound, universal motors. They will not run shunt wound, but they will overheat and burn up if you wire them shunt wound.

RoyBoy

@bruce benzie I'm not a Flyer guy... do those Flyer Alcos have a double-wound field (like Lionels with the simplified two-position reverse?)  Otherwise it sounds like what you're suggesting is some variation of parallel wiring.  If you're running on AC current, the only thing that matters for direction is the polarity of a motor's brushes relative to it's OWN field.

Creep, coast, and pull.  We're not talking about cold fusion here.

Ted S posted:

I *think* this is what Bruce is talking about (see image attached.)  It stands to reason that current draw would be lower with shunt wiring because the resistance of the armature and field are in parallel, rather than in series.

 
 
Ted, Shunt wiring will double the current draw of the same armature and field over series wiring.   J

Dual Motors

Ted,

This sketch shows how I wired both motors direct to the transformer for the test.  The motors run opposite, just like two AC motors in a Diesel or GG1.  The current, running two motors together was about half of when running one motor by itself.  This enabled the motors to run cooler and was able to use the Dallee 400 in the Alco.  The field windings were new, each read 1.2 ohms, as per the original AF specification.  The fields are single winding.

Try it, if you have a Z4000 or some way of monitoring the voltage and current while running.

bruce

Attachments

Photos (1)

Pretty sure they didn't run that way. The field reactance is much less than the armature reactance and the motors would heat up if shunt wired like that. The current in each motor has to go through the field and through the armature in series. If the motors are wired shunt would like in the diagram, the field will take the bulk of the current and overheat.

RoyBoy

Fredstrains posted:

Call Dallee and ask there advice!! Good folks to deal with & VERY knowledgeable on their Products, believe me !!

Fredstrains

I'll second that.   They guided me on questions I had about installing their solid state model 400 E unit into my postwar engine and I love the additional circuitry instructions they included,  I used the one that lets you add directional lighting with just a diode and an LED to add a backup light to my 2426w tender.  

Jim 1939 posted:

I have had the 4 amp blow with can motors so I sure wouldn't use one with Lionel's AC motors. The 4 amp is a good board but it has it's limits

 

I'm using the 4 amp with a Postwar Berkshire with a 671-M1 pullmor motor.  Have had no issues and in fact the major improvement the 400 has provided is in slow speed performance.  My Berkshire can now crawl almost as well as my can motor MTH Hudson does.   

Add Reply

Post
OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
330-757-3020

www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
×