Radio control for track power

Melbournesparks

Registered
Country flag
Or, in this case, overhead power.

A new traction system for the tramway has been on the cards for a while now. Until this point I've been using conventional straight DC fed via overhead wire, with a maximum voltage of 12v. It worked, but all the inherent problems of straight DC were present, and I really wanted a more robust and flexible system for working outside.

A list of requirements were drawn up:

*independent control of more than one tram at once
*independent lighting
*potential for special function controls
*reliable operation in dirty conditions
*low unit cost
*minimum specialist hardware

The conventional solution, to the first three points at least, is a DCC system. It was an option I looked into, but it falls flat on the last three points, especially cost. The thing that killed it was the need for a a specialist power supply, as well as the DCC equipment that needed to be fitted to each piece of rollingstock.

Instead I decided to go for a radio control system, using the same deltang/RCS equipment I was already using for battery powered rollingstock. Only in this case the radio receiver and motor controller would get power straight from the overhead wire. Of course it wasn't going to be quite that simple, since some ancillary equipment is needed to ensure a clean, reliable DC supply to the motor controller.
IMG_0906small.jpg

Rhb ABE1 34 was picked for the test installation. It has plenty of space inside, and on the old traction system its operation was rather limited by the low voltage and maximum current on the controller.

IMG_8381small.jpg
Here's the main electrical equipment assembled ready to be fitted. Power from the overhead (anywhere between 12 and 40v, DC or AC) is fed to a bridge rectifier (top right), then to two voltage regulators. The top one supplies 6vDC for lighting, and the bottom one supplies 12vDC for traction, to the radio receiver and motor controller (green PCB at the bottom).

In order to provide a reliable power supply on dirty track, there are four 47000uf traction capacitors connected in parallel with the traction voltage regulator. They are charged via a 5 ohm current limiting resistor, otherwise the inrush current on those big capacitors is something nasty! There is also a low voltage cutout for the radio in the form of a relay, which drops out when the capacitors discharge below about 5v. There's a few diodes in series with the relay coil to set the cut in/cut out voltage. There's probably better ways to do this, but I'm not much of an electronics person unfortunately.

IMG_8382small.jpg

Here's the other side of the electrical equipment board, and the traction capacitors under the big birdsnest of lighting wires. The entire car needed a full rewire, which was a fun job! Though not so bad once I worked out what all the wires did.

To keep costs down, virtually all the ancillary electrical equipment is salvaged, including all the wire, resistors, relays and diodes. The voltage regulators cost $2 each on ebay.

IMG_8389small.jpg

Reassembled for testing. Because this thing is so awkward to dismantle, the opportunity was taken to replace the headlights with LED's, and paint the inside of the passenger cabin. The big headlights are 10mm warm white LED's with the lenses cut to a new shape. The headlights are automatically switched for direction by the motor controller. The blue light in the toilet is from the indicator LED's on the voltage regulators, I probably need to desolder those!

Everything seemed to be in order with power applied on the bench, all the lights came on and the motors responded to control inputs.

IMG_8399small.jpg

Time for a real world test! The overhead voltage was increased to 31v DC, which is the most my bench power supply will provide. The difference was immediately apparent, operation is much smoother and consistent than on straight DC. The higher overhead voltage seems to make a huge difference in burning through the crud, try as I might it was nearly impossible to become insulated, save for places where the wheels are physically separated from the rails by leaves or something. Even then, the capacitors hold enough charge to keep the radio on and power the motors for a short time, so it's possible just to move forward a bit until contact is restored and the lights come back on.

Performance seems to be in every way satisfactory, especially with regard to reliability in dirty outside conditions. It's easy to sometimes get caught up in the technical minutiae of fixing some technical problem or other, and forget how much fun it is just to be able to operate without having to worry about stuff.

Work is now proceeding on fitting out the rest of the fleet. Some of the smaller rollingstock is going to provide some interesting challenges in finding space to install the electrical equipment, but that's all part of the fun.
 
Not trying to change your mind, but what was the cost of the receiver and 2 escs vs. a motor only DCC decoder with functions?

You can get a 5 amp DCC motor and function decoder here in the US for $35, so how much cheaper were the 3 components I see? Everything else would be the same, as you would apply the "keepalive" capacitors to the DCC decoder.

The only difference I can see between the 2 approaches is point 5, cost, so this is where I am confused.

(if I was already using a R/C system to control my trains, I guess I would stick with it too)

Greg
 
Not trying to change your mind, but what was the cost of the receiver and 2 escs vs. a motor only DCC decoder with functions?

You can get a 5 amp DCC motor and function decoder here in the US for $35, so how much cheaper were the 3 components I see? Everything else would be the same, as you would apply the "keepalive" capacitors to the DCC decoder.

The only difference I can see between the 2 approaches is point 5, cost, so this is where I am confused.

(if I was already using a R/C system to control my trains, I guess I would stick with it too)

Greg

The receiver and the motor controller (which powers both motors connected in parallel) is a single unit, costing about $60 AU shipped. A 3 amp or above DCC decoder costs about the same here in Australia. The components you're looking at in the picture with the blue PCB's there are the voltage regulators, which only cost $2 each.

The main cost saving though is the lack of a need for a DCC specific power supply, any old power supply with a suitable voltage rating and current will do. The handheld radio transmitters are also a fair bit cheaper than equivalent DCC units, only about $50 AU for a kit. The the same transmitters are common to both the overhead and battery powered rollingstock, so they can be used in any combination.

There's a couple of other subtle, but important differences to DCC as well. Unlike DCC with keep alive capacitors, control is still retained if contact with the track is lost, a useful feature if you happen to stop on a dead section. Because the quiescent current of the radio is low (the lights are not powered by the capacitors) it's possible to stop for several seconds and still have enough charge in the capacitors to move forward onto a clean bit of track. Also because all the control equipment is on board, the overhead powered rollingstock can be taken to a non electrified line and still driven normally, but powered from a simple battery car with a crocodile clip on the pantograph.
 
Again, not to argue, but perhaps correct some data that I think is not right.

Don't know who you are talking about for a "dcc specific" power supply, but you can get a nice regulated 24v supply at about 10 amps for $30 here in the US, look up meanwell power supplies.

I do agree, of course adding a DCC system, i.e. command station and throttle is more expensive than using your existing wireless transmitter, of course.

But DCC has come a long way, keep alive capacitors will allow the loco to get through the dead sections just in the SAME way as your capacitors running your RC system, although you are indeed correct in the very specific case of the R/C system having a lower quiescent current of the receiver, although in DCC the caps will allow the loco to keep moving at the last commanded speed. I would kind of rate these 2 equal, different but sort of equal value.

And clearly battery power allows running on a non powered layout.

So with your specific priorities (which weren't in your original 6 and what prompted my reply) I can see your choice.

Just wanted to hear your reasoning, and thank you for responding.

Regards, Greg
 
Is it not also 'perceived wisdom' (certainly LGB have said as much in their literature in the past) that DCC fed via an overhead is a no-no??

I believe this is due to the amount of electrical noise generated with this method of current collection? - More modern decoders may well negate this, of course.

There again, it may be the fact that both track, and overhead, power were allowed for by the LGB system??
 
Agreed Phil, I have heard the same (about DCC not working well with catenary power feed) from different sources. I did mean to try it at one stage when I had some overhead locos, but as you still need clean track for the return, and DCC gives you control over multiple locos on the same track, there didn't seem much point except as an intellectual exercise, as it had no practical advantage over dummy catenary.

On the other hand Melbournesparks approach to using overhead power for RC is an excellent piece of miniature engineering in planning and execution. Well done!
 
All own this is above my pay grade, but it sounds like a good way to run your trams.
 
Interesting thread, I must admit DCC sounds, and obviously is, fantastic. The major drawback of course is the cost. It certainly ain't cheap in anyone's book. Radio control seems a fine way of running trains and has the added benefit of not having to worry too much about track cleaning or wiring problems.
 
Modern decoders are fine with overhead, and power interruptions.

For low speed and low current (2 amp), you can buy a complete NCE PowerCab system (you can add wireless) for $160 US... it can be done cheaply with some restrictions.

But not trying to convince anyone, just interested in the thought process and the basis for making the decisions.

Greg
 
i must admit i want to convert all my locos to battery/track power and radio control,,,

might go down the revolution route for my electric locos,,,,, looks pretty good to me

although would have gone airwire but its not really available in the uk
 
Again, not to argue, but perhaps correct some data that I think is not right.

Don't know who you are talking about for a "dcc specific" power supply, but you can get a nice regulated 24v supply at about 10 amps for $30 here in the US, look up meanwell power supplies.

I do agree, of course adding a DCC system, i.e. command station and throttle is more expensive than using your existing wireless transmitter, of course.

But DCC has come a long way, keep alive capacitors will allow the loco to get through the dead sections just in the SAME way as your capacitors running your RC system, although you are indeed correct in the very specific case of the R/C system having a lower quiescent current of the receiver, although in DCC the caps will allow the loco to keep moving at the last commanded speed. I would kind of rate these 2 equal, different but sort of equal value.

And clearly battery power allows running on a non powered layout.

So with your specific priorities (which weren't in your original 6 and what prompted my reply) I can see your choice.

Just wanted to hear your reasoning, and thank you for responding.

Regards, Greg

Apologies I'm unfamiliar with DCC terminology, the command station is what I was referring to. It seemed from what I could gather you have to plan ahead a bit with DCC, some command stations support only a limited number of throttles and maximum current. Whereas because the RC equipment is entirely independent of each other you can pretty much expand infinitely, as long as you have power to run it. Even if people come and visit and bring their trains, I'm going to meet practical constraints to do with the number of crossing loops and operators long before technical ones.

With the keep alive capacitors and DCC vs RC, normally these function the same way. But there's a certain very specific circumstance where having your train stay under your control, instead of continue at last known speed is a distinct advantage. When running into a lightly used siding (to couple to some wagons for instance) the most likely time to become insulated is after coming to a stop. If a DCC controlled tram or motor car is stopped and insulated it's dead in the water, since there's no way for the control signal to reach it. With RC, you still have control and enough charge in the capacitors to couple up, reverse direction and set back onto a clean bit of track. I've wired all the lighting to bypass the capacitors, so if you see the saloon lighting flicker off you know you're on a dirty bit of track (just like real life!) and can move slightly until it comes on again.

This is an interesting discussion now I start thinking about it, there's actually quite a lot of really specific ways one particular traction system can be distinct benefit one way or another. Another thing that influenced my choice in some way was that a lot of my rollingstock is heavily modified or scratchbuilt, so I wouldn't gain any advantage from the standard wiring and DCC sockets a lot of manufactures fit, I'd be soldering wires anyway. As it is it takes me a few hours to fit the radio gear to each piece of rollingstock, but if you had a fleet with standard sockets fitting the equipment would be really quick.

I also don't have sound systems, for which I think there's a bit less support for RC. Because most of my rollingstock is electric it pretty much already makes the right sounds, and the radios have a push button activated accessory function that can be used for a horn or a bell.

For operating outside in the garden, a hand held wireless throttle is a distinct advantage. The radio transmitters are intrinsically wireless obviously, but DCC wireless throttles seem to generally be a more costly extra? The other night I was running for the first time in a while, just walking around with the first tram flicking leaves off the track in the light of the headlights. It's easy to hold and operate the small transmitters entirely in one hand, which is great for a hands on type operation where you're always changing points and swinging trolley poles.

IMG_8460small.jpg


Modern decoders are fine with overhead, and power interruptions.

For low speed and low current (2 amp), you can buy a complete NCE PowerCab system (you can add wireless) for $160 US... it can be done cheaply with some restrictions.

Unfortunately the same system is more like $280 here, everything rail related is expensive in Australia. :(

But not trying to convince anyone, just interested in the thought process and the basis for making the decisions.

Greg

That's alright, it's a good thing to think about. Finding ways to solve your own unique local problems is part of the fun, and similar to what happens with real world railways and tramways sometimes. There's been more than a few real world operations that have expected technology that works for someone else to work for them too, and found it didn't. Admittedly I also tend to be fairly technically conservative as well, so I was already leaning towards expanding an already familiar technology rather than branching out into something new.

I certainly don't claim this system is necessarily suitable for other people, rather it was a choice made in response to some very specific circumstances. Probably an interesting lesson there for choosing a traction system, think carefully about what your specific requirements are! How important various features are to you can have a big impact.
 
For what it is worth I feel that you have gone down a very good route. Trams as you say already make the correct noises being erm well electric trams albeit at a smaller scale. As for sound you have cracked the important ones, many other sounds in DCC will be irrelevant and somewhat annoying being at times tricky to call or shut off. The horn and bell you have covered though I may have though a Compressor Noise being called may be of use, perhaps wheel squeel as well if you can incorporate more than 2 sounds. Good luck with your experiments and fitting into some of your smaller kit, always love to read about your line.
JonD
 
Last edited:
Conversion of the fleet has been proceeding, with most of the currently serviceable electric rollingstock now fitted with RC equipment.

IMG_9003small.jpg

The installation on the toastrack tram was a little more cramped, but luckily everything fitted in under the floor. The big resistor is for limiting the inrush current on the traction capacitors. The radio receiver and motor controller is in between the motors, next to a relay that forms a crude low voltage cutout for the radio. This drops out once the traction capacitors discharge below about 6v, preventing (hopefully!) problems with the radio loosing it's programming from a gradually declining voltage. This tram also got new wheels and motors to replace the original bachmann motor block. It was one of the better running units as far as tram motor blocks go, but the wheels had become so worn they barely conducted electricity anymore! Much better now with some nice stainless steel wheels from Zenner.
 
I converted a cheap 6 channel RC set from Hobby king to my own 6 single channel RC set up. The TX will bind with 99 Rx and as I only need stop start and speed per tram its turned out to be a good solution and lets me drive 5 trams at once though you need the dexterity of Reginald Dixson to do it....
 

Attachments

  • DSCF2091 (Medium).JPG
    DSCF2091 (Medium).JPG
    258 KB · Views: 0
After a few accidents with battery powered RC I now limit myself to no more than two locos running at a time. Even with only three running I always seem to slow the wrong one down
 
After a few accidents with battery powered RC I now limit myself to no more than two locos running at a time. Even with only three running I always seem to slow the wrong one down

I can do you a single box Tx, with three individual speed controls, if you like Chris?
PhilP.
 
Back
Top Bottom