Different transformers on separate tracks, all running conventional and DCS via Double Pole - Double Through switch.

I have a very similar operation. I don't think you have missed anything.  I would just mention to use the best DPDT switches. I used some from china, and they shorted out my DCS.  Other than that I have/had no operational problems...

These switches are good quality from Grainger.

@RWL posted:

..

Each of these three three power supply bricks will be wired thru a DPDT switch.
One side of the DPDT switch will send power, from the brick, thru its respective transformer controller.
The other side of the DPDT switch will send power, from the brick, directly to and thru a DCS Remote Commander receiver box.

Power will only, ever, be sent to either the Controller or the DCS Remote Commander box, but never both.

How these will be opperated:
1. When running any Lionel conventional, Lionel Lion Chief, or MTH non-DCS locomotives, the DPDT switch will be set to send power thru the transformer controller.

2. When running any MTH DCS locomotive, the DPDT switch will be set to run power thru the Remote Commander receiver box.

..

To be clear, is this the configuration?

That is, one pole of the DPDT switches "hot" and the other pole switches "common".  And the "hot" and "common" outputs of the Controller and the mating DCS Remote Commander are always tied together (e.g., at the track).

If so, when in DCS Remote Commander mode, the track voltage "back-drives" the output of an un-powered Controller.  I'm not saying this is good/bad...just asking for clarification.

Thank you for that information.
I did see that in my original wiring plan, so I made a correction.

My current plan, and this is currently working on a single loop of track, is to run power from the brick directly to bot controllers.
Each controller, is then wired to one or the other outer poles of the DPDT switch.
The center poles run of the DPDT switch, go out the track.

While both controllers would always be powered, only one can ever be connected to the track.

If you take your layout and move the DPDT switch to the downstream side of the controllers, you will have the layout of what I am currently using.

Thoughts?

Right.  Without descending into the technical muck, I'm happier with the revised configuration.

As you say, the penalty is both controllers are powered at the same time.  I measured the idle power some time back.  Memory not so good these days but seems it was just a few Watts a piece.  Do not have a ZW so don't know its idle power consumption.

You can usually find a center-off 3-position ON-OFF-ON DPDT for the same price and form-factor as a 2-position ON-ON DPDT.  This can be handy to quickly disconnect any power from the track without pulling cables or what have you.

Why not just connect the DCS-RC directly to the tracks and run it in passive mode?  You can add a 22uh choke to the center rail feed of the transformer to improve the DCS signal strength if you have issues.  Then there's no switching of power.

Two things.

1. I think it may have been from a scope photo you posted, but I believe at full-throttle the Z-controller puts out a chopped sine-wave vs. a brick's unadultered "pure" sine-wave.  The degradation to DCS signaling may be small but it surely doesn't help.

2. The pesky 22 uH inductor/DCS-choke, if needed, can be a nuisance to find in small quantities.  For a 100 Watt brick you'd want one rated at least 5 Amps...and essentially double that for the 180 Watt brick (again, if needed).  By the time you account for shipping, you might be coughing up $5 each.  YMMV.

By The Way, my assumption is this:

While the 180-Watt PowerHoue does put out 180 watts, the voltage stays at a maximum of 18, making it safe to run the PH-180 direct thru the Remote Commander receiver box, as explained above, and to the track, for DCS operation.

Would this be a correct (safe) assumption?

@stan2004 posted:

Right.  Without descending into the technical muck, I'm happier with the revised configuration.

As you say, the penalty is both controllers are powered at the same time.  I measured the idle power some time back.  Memory not so good these days but seems it was just a few Watts a piece.  Do not have a ZW so don't know its idle power consumption.

You can usually find a center-off 3-position ON-OFF-ON DPDT for the same price and form-factor as a 2-position ON-ON DPDT.  This can be handy to quickly disconnect any power from the track without pulling cables or what have you.

The DPDT switches that I am using are good quality 3-position On-Off-On switches, from Grainger.com.
And, yes, the center OFF position is a very handy Power Cut-Off feature.

@stan2004 posted:

To be clear, is this the configuration?

That is, one pole of the DPDT switches "hot" and the other pole switches "common".  And the "hot" and "common" outputs of the Controller and the mating DCS Remote Commander are always tied together (e.g., at the track).

If so, when in DCS Remote Commander mode, the track voltage "back-drives" the output of an un-powered Controller.  I'm not saying this is good/bad...just asking for clarification.

Here is an outside the box question:
When placing the DPDT switch between the power brick and two controllers as shown, the risk would be, as Stan mentioned above, the back flow of current thru the off-switched controller.
This is why my plan is to move the DPDT switch to the 

Would it be reasonable to consider the placement of some sort of directional flow diodes in the two wires coming out of each of the two controllers to the track?

That would allow current to travel only out to the track, and not back to the off-switched controller.

I am a mechanical guy, and am not that well versed in the details of what this might entail, so I put it out there for discussion among those of you who are  much more electrically inclined.

Roger

@RWL posted:

By The Way, my assumption is this:

While the 180-Watt PowerHoue does put out 180 watts, the voltage stays at a maximum of 18, making it safe to run the PH-180 direct thru the Remote Commander receiver box, as explained above, and to the track, for DCS operation.

Would this be a correct (safe) assumption?

No, the DCS-RC is designed for a maximum of 6 amps through the internal PCB connections. 

@RWL posted:

...

Would it be reasonable to consider the placement of some sort of directional flow diodes in the two wires coming out of each of the two controllers to the track?

That would allow current to travel only out to the track, and not back to the off-switched controller.

...

Problem is AC or Alternating Current alternates the direction of current flow 60-times per second to and from the track so to speak.  It is true that diodes block flow of current in one direction...but to allow AC current to flow to and from the track you need to insert a pair of diodes.  Unfortunately in doing so those same 2 diodes would allow current to flow backwards, i.e., from and to the track.

Separately, getting back to what GRJ mentioned about "passive mode".  I'll elaborate later but here are some quick sketches.

The DCS-RC is rated for 6 Amps maximum current flowing thru it (from the input barrel-coax connector to the output banana jacks).  Isn't it "amazing" how MTH's Z-1000 brick's 100 Watts matches?! 

But a 180W brick could exceed 6 Amps.  Hence the passive-mode configuration.

Passive-mode is shown on the left with and without the controller.  If this is getting too weird just say so.  Otherwise we can continue the discussion!

@stan2004 posted:

Two things.

1. I think it may have been from a scope photo you posted, but I believe at full-throttle the Z-controller puts out a chopped sine-wave vs. a brick's unadultered "pure" sine-wave.  The degradation to DCS signaling may be small but it surely doesn't help.

2. The pesky 22 uH inductor/DCS-choke, if needed, can be a nuisance to find in small quantities.  For a 100 Watt brick you'd want one rated at least 5 Amps...and essentially double that for the 180 Watt brick (again, if needed).  By the time you account for shipping, you might be coughing up $5 each.  YMMV.

1. Connect directly to the brick.  You are correct, all the Z controllers are simple triac power controls. 

2. True, but is $5-6 really a major impediment?  If so, I'm in the wrong hobby.

The passive connection simplifies the connections, no switching needed, the DCS signal is there when you want it.

@stan2004 posted:

Problem is AC or Alternating Current alternates the direction of current flow 60-times per second to and from the track so to speak.  It is true that diodes block flow of current in one direction...but to allow AC current to flow to and from the track you need to insert a pair of diodes.  Unfortunately in doing so those same 2 diodes would allow current to flow backwards, i.e., from and to the track.

Separately, getting back to what GRJ mentioned about "passive mode".  I'll elaborate later but here are some quick sketches.

The DCS-RC is rated for 6 Amps maximum current flowing thru it (from the input barrel-coax connector to the output banana jacks).  Isn't it "amazing" how MTH's Z-1000 brick's 100 Watts matches?! 

But a 180W brick could exceed 6 Amps.  Hence the passive-mode configuration.

Passive-mode is shown on the left with and without the controller.  If this is getting too weird just say so.  Otherwise we can continue the discussion!

 

This is not getting weird at all.
I love to learn, and the answers are very good and clear.
I am also more than happy to continue this discussion, as it has opened up a whole new realm of understanding for me.
Again, this is my first true layout, and I want to build it the beast that I can, within financial reason.

I am very glad to learn about the 6 amp max for the DCS system, and am very glad I asked that question, or I may have caused some severe damage.

So, running in passive mode turns the DCS RC box into a signal entry point only, with power always coming from the transformer and thru the controller. Correct?

My Questions:
1) What does the 22uh choke do?
       Does it keep any of the DCS signal from back feeding to the controller?
2) Do the controllers effect the wave pattern in a negative way with regard to the DCS signal?
3) Do I need to measure where 16 and 18 volts, to the track, is on each controller, so that I can know where to set the controller for either Lionel-Lion Chief or for MTH-DCS locomotives?
4) Is there any way to limit the Amperage coming out of the 180 watt PH bricks?
       Probably not, but I have to ask.

No, passive mode connects ONLY the output terminals to the track, nothing is plugged into the input jack.  This allows the DCS-RC to inject the DCS signal onto the tracks, but no transformer current actually pass through the DCS-RC itself.

The 22uh choke in the transformer lead to the track keeps the transformer from attenuating the DCS 3.27mhz track signal.

The sawtooth waveform is not exactly good for the DCS signal, but many people do run that way.  In addition, when running DCS on the tracks, one would presume you'd be at full throttle, that yields close to a standard sine wave.

You can run DCS and LC/LC+ on up to 19 volts on the track.  No need to do measurements.

You can obviously put a smaller fuse or circuit breaker in series with the PH180 output, but I don't see a reason to do that.

John,

Very cool, so whenever running Lion Chief or DCS, just run the controller close to full power.
Yes, DCS box become just a place to inject the signal.

I have some of these chokes, that I ordered awhile back, for installing in the hot side of the transformer to track wiring, for just keeping the DCS signal clean. I think it is the same issue here, but just want to verify:

22uh 11A choke

Is this the correct choke for this application?
Would this work for both the ZW 180s and the Z-1000?

Correct that is a perfect match, AAMOF it's the one I use.  It will work for any transformer. 

Obviously, a pure sine wave is better for DCS, but if you use just the Z-1000 brick or have the Z-Controller full throttle, it'll be similar to a full-wave.

I guess I am missing something. How is the DCS-RC powered in passive mode?

Back fed from the transformer power in the track.

Passive mode through the track voltage on the output connections.  Same way you power TIU channel in passive mode.  In either case, no power in connected to the input power connections.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Correct that is a perfect match, AAMOF it's the one I use.  It will work for any transformer. 

Obviously, a pure sine wave is better for DCS, but if you use just the Z-1000 brick or have the Z-Controller full throttle, it'll be similar to a full-wave.

So John,
What about the wave form of the 180 PH bricks thru the ZW controller, with regard to the DCS signal?

The PH180 and the Z-1000 brick are both pure sine wave outputs, but the Z-Controller will hack either one into a sawtooth.

But what about the PH180 thru the XW Controller?
How does that effect the wave form?

Again, per your comment above regarding the Z-Controller:
When running at almost full power, does it really matter?
Is the wave more or less in tact?

I'm not sure what the XW controller is, but if you're talking about the ZW controller, it's the same basic principle of a chopped sine wave for anything but minimum power.  I don't have a ZW controller anymore, sold both of them.  However, here's my bench supply, a Z750 brick and a Z-Controller.  I start with the brick input to the Z-Controller and then the waveforms; min, middle, and max.  All were done with a 75 ohm resistive load.

Z750 Brick Output

Z-Controller Min Setting Output (75 ohm load)

Z-Controller Midrange Setting Output (75 ohm load)

Z-Controller Max Setting Output (75 ohm load)

I found some old waveforms from the ZW-C with PH180 bricks driving it.  Half throttle and full throttle with a 2 ohm resistive load.  Not super, but better looking than the MTH Z-Controller.

Then we get to the CW-80 and the reason why it's not an approved MTH transformer!  Imagine what the electronics was thinking when it saw those waveforms!

CW-80 at half throttle and full throttle. 

Geez, I go out to run some errands and you guys solve the world's problems!

As GRJ suggests, and as shown in his scope photos, the track voltage when the controller is set to full throttle (either the Z-controller OR the ZW) looks close enough to the un-adultered "pure" sine brick output.  Since you already have the Murata inductors, there's no out-of-pocket expense.  I'd just put them as shown above at the outputs of the ZW and Z-controller.

If for whatever reason you suspect the chopped/adultered voltage is degrading the DCS control (even with the 22uH inductor installed), you could try a simple experiment bypassing the ZW or Z-controller and feeding the pure sine brick voltage thru the 22uH inductor and into the track with the DCS-RC in passive mode as shown above.

Yes I did mean ZW. I bought one of your ZW's over a year ago. But again, what do these chopped  wave forms mean for DCS running?

The work on my layout keeps getting interrupted. A couple of years ago was was a layoff. Most recently, bladder cancer. Praise God it is non-muscel invasive, so there is treatment. I do have all of the Ross track, switches, and Rossbed to lay the outer loop, but I do have to add the L to my table, along with the transformer and control station. Oh, I also bought a 4' x 7' resin shed, which grew into a full blown construction and landscaping protect. I do plan to get back to itin the fall. I really do.

Don't feel bad, I re-injured my torn rotator cuff and I'm stalled on getting my layout track down.  I can't handle the sheets of wood to cut the elevations for the raised sections without help.  So, I'm a little stuck, I really want to get the track laid so I can move on.

If you want to stick your switch in, you could use it to switch in and out the transformer controller.  If you wire the track to the commons and the brick to one side and the output of the controller to the other side, you can have variable to run conventional, and pure sine wave to run command.  You can have the controller connected to the transformer, it just won't have any load if you're running right off the transformer.

@CAPPilot posted:

I guess I am missing something. How is the DCS-RC powered in passive mode?

That is a good question.  It is not obvious at all!

The DCS signaling circuit receives its power from either the input coax/barrel jack on the left OR the output banana jacks on the right.  In passive mode as is being discussed, there is no connection to the input jack.  So the DCS signaling circuit receives its power from the track voltage via the output banana jacks on the right.

The DCS signaling circuit injects the high-frequency command-control signals to the track on-top-of the 60 Hz track voltage power.  The DCS choke isolates this high-frequency control signal because it has a hard time competing against the transformer or controller. The actual technical explanation is somewhat tedious techno-babble so that's one way I like to think of it.

Thus, if operating the DCS-RC in "passive mode" you now must insert a DCS choke externally so that the DCS signaling circuit does not have to compete against the powerful transformer/controller.

Stated differently:

That is, in passive-mode you are effectively cutting the DCS-RC in half.  And you forgo the internal DCS choke.  So you must restore the function of the choke externally.

@stan2004 posted:

That is a good question.  It is not obvious at all!

The DCS signaling circuit receives its power from either the input coax/barrel jack on the left OR the output banana jacks on the right.  In passive mode as is being discussed, there is no connection to the input jack.  So the DCS signaling circuit receives its power from the track voltage via the output banana jacks on the right.

The DCS signaling circuit injects the high-frequency command-control signals to the track on-top-of the 60 Hz track voltage power.  The DCS choke isolates this high-frequency control signal because it has a hard time competing against the transformer or controller. The actual technical explanation is somewhat tedious techno-babble so that's one way I like to think of it.

Thus, if operating the DCS-RC in "passive mode" you now must insert a DCS choke externally so that the DCS signaling circuit does not have to compete against the powerful transformer/controller.

Stated differently:

That is, in passive-mode you are effectively cutting the DCS-RC in half.  And you forgo the internal DCS choke.  So you must restore the function of the choke externally.

Very good expatiation Stan,
You are an absolute master with the pictorial layouts.

Can you lay out the configuration that GRG proposed above regarding putting the switch back in, with the brick on one side and the controller on the other side? I think I understand, but a diagram would be very helpful.

@RWL posted:

...

Can you lay out the configuration that GRG proposed above regarding putting the switch back in, with the brick on one side and the controller on the other side? I think I understand, but a diagram would be very helpful.

I believe he means something like:

Notes.

1. The ZW controller is always powered...even when the DPDT is selecting the pure sinewave brick output to go to the track for DCS command mode.  Presumably the penalty is small - maybe a few Watts stolen from the available 180W.

2. The 22uH inductor is in-place for both DPDT selections.  The 22uH is benign in conventional mode.

3. The DCSRC is always powered.  Yes, in conventional mode the DCSRC will turn off/on every time you press the DIRECTION button on a conventional controller but this too is benign.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

If you want to stick your switch in, you could use it to switch in and out the transformer controller.  If you wire the track to the commons and the brick to one side and the output of the controller to the other side, you can have variable to run conventional, and pure sine wave to run command.  You can have the controller connected to the transformer, it just won't have any load if you're running right off the transformer.

This is a compelling idea John, and I am very glad that you suggested it.

Lets see if I understand what you are suggesting:
1) One side would take the current from the brick thru the controller, then to the track.
2) The other side would take the current from the brick directly to the track, keeping the good sign wave form.
        2a) While switched directly to the track, the controller would remain powered, but would have no load.

The only difference between this and my original plan is that the DCS RC box is not in the switching system.
Rather, it is still in passive mode connected directly to the track, being back fed from track power, and with the 22uh choke in the Hot ware between the switch and the track.

QUESTION:
Does this not put the full amperage of the PH-180 into the track, like was the case with my original plan, there by endangering the DCS RC box PCB?
OR:
Does the passive mode method, somehow, protect the DCS RC box PCB from the full amperage of the PH-180?

There is no danger to the DCS-RC, it's internal circuits only take what power they require to operate.  If you were to power the DCS-RC the conventional way from the input jack, you'd still be delivering full power to it's internal circuits and to the output.  The only thing between the input and output jacks of the DCS-RC is a 22uh choke to prevent the input transformer from affecting the injected DCS carrier signal on the output.  The choke is invisible as far as 60hz track power is concerned.  By moving the transformer to the output jacks, we just added the 22uh choke so the transformer doesn't affect the DCS carrier to the tracks.

FWIW, this arrangement is the same for the full DCS TIU for passive mode.  After some testing, I determined that by adding the choke to the transformer feeds, the DCS signal on the tracks in passive mode was the same as in active mode.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

There is no danger to the DCS-RC, it's internal circuits only take what power they require to operate.  If you were to power the DCS-RC the conventional way from the input jack, you'd still be delivering full power to it's internal circuits and to the output.  The only thing between the input and output jacks of the DCS-RC is a 22uh choke to prevent the input transformer from affecting the injected DCS carrier signal on the output.  The choke is invisible as far as 60hz track power is concerned.  By moving the transformer to the output jacks, we just added the 22uh choke so the transformer doesn't affect the DCS carrier to the tracks.

FWIW, this arrangement is the same for the full DCS TIU for passive mode.  After some testing, I determined that by adding the choke to the transformer feeds, the DCS signal on the tracks in passive mode was the same as in active mode.

As I suspected, passive mode, while taking in only the current that it needs, does not see the full amperage from the brick.
This is really awesome.

I get what I wanted, in the first place, by having the un-chopped wave forms going directly, from the brick, to the track, when in DCS mode, while still protecting the DCS RC from the full amperage of the PH-180.

There is no difference, in practice, from me original layout. I am just moving the DCS-RC box from, in line from brick to switch, to out on the actual track (i.e. passive mode) and with the 22uh choke in the hot wire from switch to track.

Thank you so much John for suggesting this.
Thank you Stan for making the diagram.

If I had not gone thru this exercise in verification of my plan, here in this post, I might have done considerable damage to my DCS equipment.

Thank you both again.
Roger

Don't know if you'd have cooked anything, but maybe.   However, given your requirements, this seems to be at least on good solution to achieve your goals.

just to be clear:

I have one more question:
I will have the commons going out and into Hot and Ground terminal strips.
Each pair of wires will go out, from the terminal strips, thru a two position (On-Off) switch to the blocked sections of the track.
This being the case, my understanding is that the DCS-RC box would be connected to the commons, or to the two wires going out, from the commons, to the Hot and Ground terminal strips.

Is this correct?

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Don't know if you'd have cooked anything, but maybe.   However, given your requirements, this seems to be at least on good solution to achieve your goals.

No. I have done no damage yet, as I have only been running one loop of track, so far, and have been powering it with a Z-750, which I have recently upgraded to the Z-1000.

The PH-180s have, not yet, been introduced to the system.
And now I know how to do it safely.

I'm not sure I follow that, I need diagrams too.   Seriously, just follow Stan's diagram, that's exactly what I was talking about.  The two wires going to the TRACK go to whatever distribution system you have for wiring the track.  Note that the DCS-RC will only drive a limited amount of track, it's designed for starter systems, not full-blown layouts.  I suspect by the time you get to 80-100 feet of track, you may start having DCS signal issues.

Yep, Stans sketch is what I am following.
Those two wires, out to the track, are where I would plan to attach the DCS-RC.
These wires would also extend to the distribution system ( Hot and Ground terminal strips).

There would be three separate DCS-RC receiver boxes, with one for each of the three separately powered tracks.
These would also be, strategically, placed around the inside edges of my "L SHAPED" layout, such that only one would read the remote at any one time.

Each side of the ZW will feed one of the two loops:
           Each loop is approx 40 feet long.
           Each loop is divided into 3 approx equal length blocks.
           Each loop will have Hot and Ground Terminal strips with:
                      4 sections: 1-In / 3 Out
                      Each "Hot Side" will be separately switched (On-Off).
           All 3 blocks would be running at the same time, except during switching exercises.
                     ,when a train might be parked on the far side of the loop.

The Z-1000 will feed the sidings, which total about 80ft of track:
          Divided up into 8 separately fed blocks.
          Hot and Ground Terminal strips with:
                      9 sections: 1-In / 8-Out
                      Each "Hot Side" separately switched (On-Off).
          Only 2, or maybe 3 of these would ever be live at the same time.

So do you think there is trouble here

I am still trying to understand the reason for the switch.  Since the ZW, when the throttle is set at maximum power (10 amps max), produces close to a pure sine wave (see GRJ's inputs above), the more complex wiring seems overkill for the very small benefit of a pure sine wave.  No added switch, no cutting off the PH180 plug (I assume), and easier troubleshooting. Use the same circuit on the other throttle for the second loop.

If you are using a Z-1000, which only puts out 6 amps max, I do not think you need to wire the DCS-RC in passive mode, which makes the wiring even simpler.  You do need to find a plug for the DCS-RC.

I guess I'm a KISS kind of guy. 

Not that close to a sine wave, that's why I recommend the switch.  Those vertical edges play havoc with the DCS carrier.

Z-Controller Fill Throttle

ZW-C Full Throttle

This waveform is much more "DCS Friendly"

As for passive mode, that jack on the DCS-RC really is straining to handle more than a couple of amps, I've already replaced several of them that melted down.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

 

Not that close to a sine wave, that's why I recommend the switch.  Those vertical edges play havoc with the DCS carrier.

...

As GRJ says, it's those pesky vertical edges.  To wit, while I haven't seen anything "official" from MTH, it has been reported that the "best" track power waveform type for DCS is plain-old DC which of course is a flat-line and as benign as they come.

FWIW, I use DC on the bench whenever I'm programming sound or chain files, it works considerably better than any AC feeding them.

@RWL posted:

..

Each side of the ZW will feed one of the two loops:
           Each loop is approx 40 feet long.
           Each loop is divided into 3 approx equal length blocks.
           Each loop will have Hot and Ground Terminal strips with:
                      4 sections: 1-In / 3 Out
                      Each "Hot Side" will be separately switched (On-Off).
           All 3 blocks would be running at the same time, except during switching exercises.
                     ,when a train might be parked on the far side of the loop.

The Z-1000 will feed the sidings, which total about 80ft of track:
          Divided up into 8 separately fed blocks.
          Hot and Ground Terminal strips with:
                      9 sections: 1-In / 8-Out
                      Each "Hot Side" separately switched (On-Off).
          Only 2, or maybe 3 of these would ever be live at the same time.

So do you think there is trouble here

I don't know if I'd use the term 'trouble" but there is what might be an unexpected behavior when using the DCSRC in this way.

You may have noticed if you power up your DCSRC with a PS2/3 engine on the track, the engine turns on silently in the Shutdown condition.  You then press StartUp on the remote and the sounds start, lights come on, and you can then send the engine on its way.  When a DCSRC first turns on, it sends a so-called watchdog signal telling any DCS engines to turn on in the Shutdown condition.  It only sends this brief watchdog "bark" once when first turning on in active or passive mode.  OK, hold that thought.

Consider your 8-out yard with 8 output sections individually controlled by an on-off switch.  Most, if not all, 8 sections will be turned OFF when you power up your layout.  The DCSRC will turn on, send out its watchdog bark once which no engine can hear.  Then you flip on the one or more switches to power up one or more sidings.  Power is applied to the engine(s) on the newly powered sections but there is no accompanying watchdog bark signal!  The engine(s) think they are in a conventional mode environment and start-up with lights, sounds and possible immediate violent motion if they were locked in Fwd or Rev given 18V AC on the track.  Yikes!

This is a well-known behavior for which there are many OGR threads.  Some guys find this to be a SWWC (So What, Who Cares) and yawn.  Others are more, say, agitated and prefer a method where a DCS engine on an unpowered siding turns on silently in the Shutdown condition when the siding is turned on.  If this makes any sense whatsoever and you feel any anxiety or agitation, then we can explore it further. 

Enter the barking WD board.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Enter the barking WD board.

Can't remember- kit only?

@stan2004 posted:

I don't know if I'd use the term 'trouble" but there is what might be an unexpected behavior when using the DCSRC in this way.

You may have noticed if you power up your DCSRC with a PS2/3 engine on the track, the engine turns on silently in the Shutdown condition.  You then press StartUp on the remote and the sounds start, lights come on, and you can then send the engine on its way.  When a DCSRC first turns on, it sends a so-called watchdog signal telling any DCS engines to turn on in the Shutdown condition.  It only sends this brief watchdog "bark" once when first turning on in active or passive mode.  OK, hold that thought.

Consider your 8-out yard with 8 output sections individually controlled by an on-off switch.  Most, if not all, 8 sections will be turned OFF when you power up your layout.  The DCSRC will turn on, send out its watchdog bark once which no engine can hear.  Then you flip on the one or more switches to power up one or more sidings.  Power is applied to the engine(s) on the newly powered sections but there is no accompanying watchdog bark signal!  The engine(s) think they are in a conventional mode environment and start-up with lights, sounds and possible immediate violent motion if they were locked in Fwd or Rev given 18V AC on the track.  Yikes!

This is a well-known behavior for which there are many OGR threads.  Some guys find this to be a SWWC (So What, Who Cares) and yawn.  Others are more, say, agitated and prefer a method where a DCS engine on an unpowered siding turns on silently in the Shutdown condition when the siding is turned on.  If this makes any sense whatsoever and you feel any anxiety or agitation, then we can explore it further. 

My interest is truly peaked.
I think I understand.
Any DCS loco that I want to run, would need to be on a powered up siding, or track section, when ever DCS RC box is powered up.

So, that would be whenever I flip the DPDT to the DCS-RC side, correct?

If so, what if I flipped the DPDT to the Center Off position, then opened the switch to which ever track the DCS located on, then flipped the DPDT to the DCS-RC side again.
That should send the watchdog signal to that engine.
Would that be correct?

How close am I to an understanding of this?

Also, what about DCS locos on a powered track that is powered thru the controller only side?
I guess that would never be possible, since the DCS-RC is connected to the mains to the track.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Enter the barking WD board.

OK, I will ask the question:

What is the Barking WD board?

It continuously sends out the DCS watchdog signal so DCS engines come up silent. I think GRJ sells a kit, or the parts to make one are in another topic. I’d buy one that was already built. 

@RWL posted:

OK, I will ask the question:

What is the Barking WD board?

Tom has kits for the latest version, see this thread: DCSRC (Watchdog Signal Generator) How To Purchase?

This is the original thread that got the ball rolling.

Proposed Solution to DCS Watchdog in Yard Tracks (DCS-RC WD Gerber Files Added to First Post)

Again, awesome information.
I could really use three of these.
I will contact Tom to see if he has them in stock.

When I set out on this hobby again, after so many years, I had no idea that I would need to learn so much about electronics.

Thanks again to all of you.
Roger

@RWL posted:

..

If so, what if I flipped the DPDT to the Center Off position, then opened the switch to which ever track the DCS located on, then flipped the DPDT to the DCS-RC side again.
That should send the watchdog signal to that engine.
Would that be correct?

Correct!  Honestly that is quite an astute assessment of the situation!

So. If willing to perform steps 1 and 3 (which only takes a second or two), you do NOT need a DCSRC modified with the Perpetual Barking Watchdog board.

@RWL posted:

...
I could really use three of these.

To be clear, the PBW board is an add-on to a DCSRC.  You must supply a stock DCSRC base unit itself (handheld remote not needed).  Once you modify the DCSRC to become a Perpetual Barking Watchdog, that becomes its sole purpose in life.  It cannot be used to control DCS engines via the handheld remote.

So the configuration might look like:

The stock DCSRC on the left is what controls any DCS engines via the handheld remote.  The modified DCSRC on the right barks the watchdog about once per second as long as there's power from the DPDT.  As shown, if going this route you should put a piece of black tape over the PBW DCSRC's red sensor window so that any handheld remote commands do not cause the PBW to issue DCS signaling commands in competition with the left DCSRC.

Of course going this route means you can skip steps 1 and 3 in previous post.  In other words, just turn sidings ON with the SPST and count on the PBW to issue a timely watchdog bark to keep a newly powered DCS engine silent in the shutdown mode.  To each his own as to the value of this convenience.

I'd go for the dual DCS-RC configuration, for $30-40 for another DCS-RC, and a few bucks for the kit, you have a smooth and natural interface.  Turn on the track, and the engine comes up silent, just as God intended.

@stan2004 posted:

To be clear, the PBW board is an add-on to a DCSRC.  You must supply a stock DCSRC base unit itself (handheld remote not needed).  Once you modify the DCSRC to become a Perpetual Barking Watchdog, that becomes its sole purpose in life.  It cannot be used to control DCS engines via the handheld remote.

So the configuration might look like:

The stock DCSRC on the left is what controls any DCS engines via the handhelf remote.  The modified DCSRC on the right barks the watchdog about once per second as long as there's power from the DPDT.  As shown, if going this route you should put a piece of black tape over the PBW DCSRC's red sensor window so that any handheld remote commands do not cause the PBW issue DCS signaling commands in competition with the left DCSRC.

Of course going this route means you can skip steps 1 and 3 in previous post.  In other words, just turn sidings ON with the SPST and count on the PBW to issue a timely watchdog bark to keep a newly powered DCS engine silent in the shutdown mode.  To each his own as to the value of this convenience.

I absolutely love this solution.
It seems very simple elegant, and does exactly what I want it to, with out going full boat DCS, which I really do want to avoid.

I have done a cursory search, for the DCS RC Receiver only, but the only ones that I find are with the remote, and or with the track lock on.
They are all going for about $50, which is a bit steep, $100 per track, plus the PBW.
Approaches the cost of a DCS System, however, I think that I still prefer the simple nature of it.

Do you think that any of the guys here would have any of these lying around from sets that are now running on full DCS?
I guess I will check out the "Want To Buy" forum.

I have to be honest here, I think you're probably making a long term mistake not going for the full TIU, it offers a lot more capability than the basic functionality of the DCS-RC.  I think if you start investing in a forest of DCS-RC boxes, you'll quickly discover shortcomings in the operation.

@RWL posted:

..

Do you think that any of the guys here would have any of these lying around from sets that are now running on full DCS?
I guess I will check out the "Want To Buy" forum.

I know they do.  Half of the problem is getting them to rummage thru the garage/attic to find it!  There was a period of several years during which MTH shipped the DCSRC in their "Ready-to-Run" train sets.  My understanding is this was Marketing 101 - get guys hooked on the idea of DCS command control so they "graduate" to full DCS/TIU.

If you bide your time on eBay, you can usually find one for about $25 like this one which just sold - it may be the receiver unit only but of course that's all you need.

Note that there is no difference in the wiring between the 3-step single-DCSRC method and the "automatic" dual-DCSRC (one being a PBW-DCSRC) method.  That is, if you don't want to cough up MSRP for 3 additional DCSRC receivers, you can use the 3-step method until they pop up on eBay or on the OGR Buy/Sell forum.  Then just connect the PBW-DCSRC with 2 wires and you're off to the races!

You may even find the 3-step method is not much of a burden...but instead discover you really want to go with the full DCS/TIU system, you have 3 DCSRC receivers that can become the donor units to become PBW-DCSRCs!

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I have to be honest here, I think you're probably making a long term mistake not going for the full TIU, it offers a lot more capability than the basic functionality of the DCS-RC.  I think if you start investing in a forest of DCS-RC boxes, you'll quickly discover shortcomings in the operation.

I am beginning to see your point, more and more.
I would need 2 DCS-RC's per track, for a total of 6.
I have 1 now, so I would need another 5, and at approx $50 each I would be looking at another $250, plus the cost of 3 PBW's.

Now, I will say that these would be added, slowly, as I slowly add Track #2 (Inner Loop), then finally Track #3 (Sidings&  Pass Thrus). So, from a cost standpoint, I could spend the money over time.

It does seem to be getting a bit busy, however, it does still seem simpler that Full DCS.

DCS Questions:
1) The TIU has 4 channels, but all are not variable. 
          Can all types of trains (DCS, Lion Chief, Conventional) on all channels?
2) How critical is the Star Pattern wiring?
          My plan is to run all feeders, for each track, to a dedicated terminal strip, then out from there.
          I then plan to keep the feeders approx the same length.
3) What equipment is required other than a TIU and a Remote?
4) Would I have any use for me ZW or Z-Controller?
          Would all of the bricks attach directly to the TIU?

I do have a copy of the DCS O GAUGE COMPANION 2nd Addition.
I will go back and reread.

My head hurts....................

@stan2004 posted:

Note that there is no difference in the wiring between the 3-step single-DCSRC method and the "automatic" dual-DCSRC (one being a PBW-DCSRC) method.  That is, if you don't want to cough up MSRP for 3 additional DCSRC receivers, you can use the 3-step method until they pop up on eBay or on the OGR Buy/Sell forum.  Then just connect the PBW-DCSRC with 2 wires and you're off to the races!

You may even find the 3-step method is not much of a burden...but instead discover you really want to go with the full DCS/TIU system, you have 3 DCSRC receivers that can become the donor units to become PBW-DCSRCs!

So, if I understand correctly, the PBW is required for use, at each track, with the DCS/TIU as well.
Does the TIU, also, only send out the watchdog signal upon startup?

Do you happen to know the cost of a PBW?
If not, I can reach out to Tom to find that out.

If I would need three DCS/RC boxes anyway, I may, just as well, buy one more DCS-RC box, and one PBW to put in it, and run my current single loop with the two DCS/RC receiver system, to see how it goes.
I will can put a two position On-Off switch in the hot wire, downstream of the two boxes and just before the track connection, to simulate the block switches in the hot wires coming out of the terminal strip. I can then experiment to see how it goes.

I won't be out anything if I decide to go DCS/TIU, as I would seemingly need another DCS-RC receiver and two more PBW's anyway

@RWL posted:

..

DCS Questions:
1) The TIU has 4 channels, but all are not variable. 
          Can all types of trains (DCS, Lion Chief, Conventional) on all channels?
2) How critical is the Star Pattern wiring?
          My plan is to run all feeders, for each track, to a dedicated terminal strip, then out from there.
          I then plan to keep the feeders approx the same length.
3) What equipment is required other than a TIU and a Remote?
4) Would I have any use for me ZW or Z-Controller?
          Would all of the bricks attach directly to the TIU?

I do have a copy of the DCS O GAUGE COMPANION 2nd Addition.
I will go back and reread.

My head hurts....................

I think the O Gauge Companion will address your questions.

BTW, I believe it also addresses yet another "manual" alternative to the PBW-DCSRC.  That is, as long as you send ANY valid DCS command to a newly powered DCS engine, it will start up silently in the shutdown mode.  So.  There is a 2-step process to power up a siding with a DCS engine:

Step 1. Flip the SPST switch to power up the siding and presumably a DCS engine.

Step 2. Within 1 sec (or so) of Step 1, press a DCSRC remote button so that the DCSRC receiver sends a DCS command on the track to the engine.  That is, a DCS engine will power up in the silent shutdown mode if it sees ANY valid DCS command.  It does NOT have to be the watchdog bark.

I believe this is the first instance of a pair of DCSRCs in this configuration.  All previous OGR discussions have been with a full-blown TIU augmented by a PBW-DCSRC.

So if you only have 1 DCSRC at present, I guess one way to look at it is you need at least 3 DCSRCs.  If you end up converting the 3 DCSRCs to PBW-DCSRC and pony-up the cash for a full-blown DCS/TIU then so be it.  Otherwise, from what I can tell using eBay as a metric, you should probably be able to re-sell any extra DCSRC units and make a small profit!  I'm not sure I've seen a PBW-DCSRC on eBay, but then again that too may be an avenue to at least breaking even on your experimentation!

@stan2004 posted:

I think the O Gauge Companion will address your questions.

BTW, I believe it also addresses yet another "manual" alternative to the PBW-DCSRC.  That is, as long as you send ANY valid DCS command to a newly powered DCS engine, it will start up silently in the shutdown mode.  So.  There is a 2-step process to power up and siding.

Step 1. Flip the SPST switch to power up the siding and presumably a DCS engine.

Step 2. Within 1 sec (or so) of Step 1, press a DCSRC remote button so that the DCSRC receiver sends a DCS command on the track to the engine.  That is, a DCS engine will power up in the silent shutdown mode if it sees ANY valid DCS command.  It does NOT have to be the watchdog bark.

I believe this is the first instance of a pair of DCSRCs in this configuration.  All previous OGR discussions have been with a full-blown TIU augmented by a PBW-DCSRC.

So if you only have 1 DCSRC at present, I guess one way to look at it is you need at least 3 DCSRCs.  If you end up converting the 3 DCSRCs to PBW-DCSRC and pony-up the cash for a full-blow DCS/TIU then so be it.  Otherwise, from what I can tell using eBay as a metric, you should probably be able to re-sell any extra DCSRC units with a small profit!  I'm not sure I've seen a PBW-DCSRC on eBay, but then again that too may be an avenue to at least breaking even on your experimentation!

Thank you for the info Stan,

I really do appreciate that you appreciate what I am trying to do.
It may be a bit out of the box, but again, even if I do go full DCS, I will need three PBW's anyway.

Roger

FWIW, I've saved a couple of my DCS-RC units to use for my yard tracks.  I'll have a TIU channel feeding the yard switch bank, and the PBW tied in to keep the newly powered up engines quiet.

@RWL posted:

..

It may be a bit out of the box, but again, even if I do go full DCS, I will need three PBW's anyway..

Right.  Who knows how the MTH business shutdown will shake out, but as I stated previously I think you won't be left holding-the-bag on extra DCSRC receivers...whether equipped with the PBW board or not.  You'd have to contact member rtr12 as it seems the ability to buy a packaged kit, assembled unit, or whatever for the PBW comes and goes.  The "official" OGR Electrical Reference thread is here.

If you do get in the "business" of assembling the PBW add-on board, I'm confident you could sell any extras.

Tom (rtr12) is the "official" holder of the kit franchise for the PBW.  I'm pretty sure he still has kits of parts and will probably assemble one or two for a nominal price.

@RWL posted:

So, if I understand correctly, the PBW is required for use, at each track, with the DCS/TIU as well.
Does the TIU, also, only send out the watchdog signal upon startup?

..

Correct.  The TIU only sends out the watchdog bark when one of its 4 channels first turns ON. 

As stated previously, it has ALWAYS been a TIU augmented by a modified PBW-DCSRC to silently start-up engines on yard sidings, passings, roundhouse whiskers, etc.  This is the first example I can recall where a DCSRC would be augmented with a 2nd PBW-DCSRC.

Talk to a dozen guys and you will get a dozen opinions on whether you should go the full-blown DCS/TIU route.

I can't remember if it was at a train show or a LHS meet-and-greet but I remember talking to the boss of MTH 10 years ago or so.  He said that the overwhelming majority of their customers had what amounted to 4' x 8' layouts.  And that a surpising percentage of customers were simply "collectors" that never even opened the box of an engine!  And while I can't recall the exact words, it was something to the effect that most O-gauge operators simply want one train to go forward and back and go "whoo whoo" (whistle) or "ding ding" (bell).  The point being I think there is no "shame" in just using a DCSRC rather than a full-blown DCS/TIU system.  That is, the DCSRC lets you control an engine forward/back, blow the whistle, ring the bell.  Who can ask for anything more?!

@stan2004 posted:

Who can ask for anything more?!

I can!  How about turning smoke on and off?  That's one major weakness of the DCS-RC.

That's true.  I believe this limitation has come up in discussion before.  IIRC the idea is you use the manual (conventional mode) smoke on/off slide switch.  Of course this is not wireless remote control.  But from what I can tell the overwhelming majority of users either love or hate smoke...so it's either always on or always off...period.  When you want to show off to your friends who come to your house you would have to reach under the engine and turn ON the smoke.  Given current events at least your friends will bring their own masks if they don't want to inhale the smoke.  

Stan, GRJ and all, I do still have PBWs available in kit or assembled form. Also, still planning to keep some in stock for anyone that wants one, same with the TIU Port Testers.  Unfortunately, I don't have any extra DCS-RC receivers to spare, those still need to be supplied by the end users. 

I just press the button on the DCS remote when they come to my house.

The order is in.
I had 3 PBW's on the way.
I will need them one way or the other, whether I use the DCS-RC's or if I go full DCS.

So, I stopped my my LHS to talk DCS, and he has non in stock.
Hi has the TIU's and Remotes on order for receipt in a few months, however, and I am in no rush to buy.

However, he mentioned that MTH is coming out with a new WIFI system, that will have the WIFI unit built right into the TIU
He told me that this sill be out in a few months, and that it will replace the current TIU with Remote, as well as the stand alone WIFI box, that comes with the current WIFI system.
Based on this, he suggested that I not go with the current system but to wait and go with the new WIFI in the TIU system, as the remotes will not be available much longer, and that the Phone/Tablet remote app is much easier to use tnat the current remote.

Can any speak to all of this?
Again, I am in no rush to go out and buy, as I need to do some experimenting with my existing loop of Fast-Trak, and I need to finish adding the "L" to my table so that I cal lay down my first, outer, loop of Ross track.

@RWL posted:

However, he mentioned that MTH is coming out with a new WIFI system, that will have the WIFI unit built right into the TIU

He told me that this sill be out in a few months, and that it will replace the current TIU with Remote, as well as the stand alone WIFI box, that comes with the current WIFI system.
Based on this, he suggested that I not go with the current system but to wait and go with the new WIFI in the TIU system, as the remotes will not be available much longer, and that the Phone/Tablet remote app is much easier to use tnat the current remote.

I'm not so sure he has the facts right.  The TIU/Wifi box he mentions appears in the HO catalog and appears to be a DC output only unit.  That really isn't suitable for conventional running or if you ever plan on running TMCC/Legacy.  Here's a clip from that catalog page, take particular note of the indicated sentence.  If you're putting DC into the input channel, the only thing that's coming out the other side is DC!  Even if your conventional stuff ran on DC, the horn or bell would be sounding continuously.  Forget about TMCC/Legacy, they require AC power.

Thanks for the clarification John. Yes it does seem that that is strictly a DC only . I will have to contact him and ask if he knows more about that.

I did order 3pb W's from Tom because I'll need them anyway. For now I'm going to run my one loop with the two box system and a switch in the power just to test it out. However I am leaning toward a full full DCS system and I'm thinking in terms of the Wi-Fi set.

What is your opinion of running trains with the DCS remote versus a tablet or smartphone app? It would definitely be cheaper not to have to buy one or two remotes.

@rtr12 posted:

... I do still have PBWs available in kit or assembled form. 

What is the current cost of the kit and assembled versions?   Tom, if this is inappropriate for public discussion please just send me an email. 

The PBW kits are $8 shipped and assembled ones are $11 shipped. Public discussion is ok with me, but I don't want to get on the bad side of the moderators for trying to sell things and not being in the for sale forum or a forum sponsor.

But.... I'm actually not selling them, only putting the PCBs and parts together and re-shipping to anyone that wants one. It's more as a service to the OGR forum members. I just try to cover the actual costs for everything and make things come out even. 

@RWL posted:

What is your opinion of running trains with the DCS remote versus a tablet or smartphone app? It would definitely be cheaper not to have to buy one or two remotes.

Strictly a personal decision.  I like the remote, others swear to the smartphone.