As far as I know everything is done over the CAN bus cable - the ethernet cable is not used in a master / slave setup with CS3 / CS3+'s.

So the answer to your questions are

#1 No
#2 The slave unit will not receive any information from the master
#3 No

BTW, Welcome to the forum.

The first reason why I asked is because of this youtube vid. I had some difficulties understanding what he said as my German is not that great. But it was clear that he also used an ethernet cable and a router device.

In order to synchronize things like loco lists and such, you would also have to send all the .bmp files of your locos. Ethernet has built-in file transfer protocol. So it seems logical to me that the ethernet link is used for atleast this purpose. And if you have that working over ethernet, why should you not have everything working over ethernet? The second reason of me asking, is that I know marklin and they tend to make worst possible decisions when it comes to their control equipment. So before I asked I already anticipated a negative anwser.


Not to offend you or anything, but how sure are you about this?



As I explained I cannot say that I am disappointed. I already expected that Marklin didn't think of scenarios where cooperating central stations would be >2m apart. It would be only logical to have a master/slave system working over ethernet because everybody could simply bridge large distances using ethernet cables. It would also be logical to have their canbus implemented using RJ45 of RJ12 cables instead of their current combination of 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 pole mini DIN connectors..



Thanks, but I am only here because Marklin's documentation is lacking and I had to ask this specific question. I will be most likely suspending my account soon. It was part of my research. I joined my current model railway club after the people their already wasted all their money on CS3s. If I would be present at that time I would have convinced the entire club to purchase one whole Roco Z21 and control both layouts with it in combination with an Xnet and Lnet bus. Would also have saved us an iTrain pro-license. I mean closed can-bus protocol, no Xnet, no Lnet, no alternative to S88, slow processors, poor touchscreens and an extremely poor user interface.

Anways.. back on course... I also discussed the coupling of the layouts on the iTrain forum. And for us it is best not to have the central stations in master-slave configuration based on the facts that we don't have to, we dont gain anything by doing it and when iTrain is turned off both layouts can drive by hand without dependencies. Currently (and I have this working already) they are working as separate interfaces which are both controlled by one iTrain server while the other computer works as master-client.

To connect the two layouts electrically I am going to make a fail-safe system with a bi-stable relay. There will be one crossing sections and with a relay, this section can be connected to either 1 of the 2 Cs3 circuits without ever short-circuiting the two.

Anyways thank you for your answer, it is appreciated.

EDIT:
I have watched that video again. He already sets up the master slave connection before he uses the can bus cable. I also hear him explaining (this time) that the can cable is used to synchronize certain functions and to let the slave act as a synchronized booster for the master. This kinda what I thought but it is not clear which functions are synchronized. The manual on the other hand does say this:

So this indicates that the cable is in fact needed. So where is the ethernet connection for then? In other words, I think that nobody here knows the real answers because marklin does not explain how their stuff works.

Kind regards,

Bas

P.S.

This however is less appreciated as it lacks any constructive content and I even find it slightly condescending.

Clearly, you have either not read what I typed or you did not understand what I typed. And I also doubt if you actually know anything about ethernet or canbus and let alone know anything about how marklin does it's things. I am not going to spend my time testing something which may not not even work but which will most likely not work as. I thought it would be better to ask people who have already invented this wheel before me.

First being a newcommer I cannot possibly who know who are the experts here. And I also cannot tell if these experts, just work with marklin equipment alot or that are employed for marklin and actually worked on these systems.

Secondly I don't insult the guy and I dont question his knowledge. I merely ask how sure he precisely is. I am just being critical here.
From what he said, it was not 100% obvious to me that Bigdaddynz does not know all the ins and outs of the system.
And I could not blame him for it. Marklin has been very keen in keeping their stuff secret.
Thirdly

This is perhaps true. I did however not mean it in that way. It is just that I know more than enough of Marklin to get the stuff working at our club. I said this because it is extremely unlikely that I will actually have further marklin related questions in the future.

I am simply tasked with connecting 2 separate CS3/iTrain controlled layouts and it seems that the entire internet does not seem to know precisely how the master-slave is handled. It is not known of all related parts which are handled via ethernet and which are handled via canbus. I atleast could not find the answers online.

Kind regards,

Bas

I know that as well. But I want to know how it works. It could have been that marklin implemented this cable as a sort fail-safe to prevent users from accidently hooking up the output signals of 2 central station 3+ without a synchronization and blowing up €1600 worth of electronics.


I would like to know why the marklin company released a video on youtube in which they connect 2 central stations to a router for the master-slave system. I believe you that that this can also work without ethernet. But if loco or point instructions would also be sent via the ethernet connection, one could do without the cable. But this is where this entire thread is about. So that is why I care about the ethernet cable.


Please calm down. I mean well here. I already said that I do not know anybody here. I cannot possibly know who is an expert here and what people consider to be expert here. The one and only thing that I knew of mr Clapcott at the time here is that he posted an ignorant and unconstructive post as reply to my OP. And with that he 'suggested' rather clearly to me that he either did not read or did not understand that what I typed. He started to be negative towards me and not the other way around.


I believe you that he is all brilliant and all, but his post implied the exact opposite. And I simply do not like being insulted being directly or indirectly. I am not trying to cause an argument, I am not 'trying to win' an argument. I just want to know what marklin does under the hood.

I might actually configure one of our Cs3 as slave and try out what does work. They are already connected to the same router. But I already know that we don't need it, it gains me little. But perhaps I may discover something usefulls for others which may or may not be of interest.

---

I have a side question btw. If you already own a Cs2, why do you still want the Cs3? I have driven trains with both, and IMO the Cs3 was even worse for controlling. I must add that our loco list was a mess. So I had really a hard time with finding a loco if I wanted to take control. I suppose if you organize that, it can be 'acceptable'.

The cs2 irritated me with the slow loading of the train page and you had to search through too little symbols. I just wanted to select trains and not look them up. + I do not really like that you have to look at the screen all the time in order to see what you are doing. With the cs2 you also have to turn the knob 3 full revolutions to reach 100% speed. A colleage from the club informed me that a central station 2 cannot use the same control panels as a Cs3 as the graphics are implemented differently. The cs3 irritated me mostly with the fact that the screen always lags behind my fingermovements

I find the things way to expensive for what they can do. To buy a second Cs to control turnouts is an expensive solution. You can also use s88 contacts and make yourself a physical control panel for points. To buy a 2nd CS for 2 extra red knobs also seem needlessly expensive. If you drive with a computer interface you already don't use 80% of it's capabilities. You can also get a tams redbox for ~€200 and use the remaing €600,- for second hand multimaus devices and you get to use Xpressnet switch panels and such. It also has S88 interface.

I discarded my Cs2 in favour of a white z21 start with a roco lokmaus 2. costed me under €120. I still have the CS and sometimes I use it to program decoders with.

I am not judging you or anything, I am honestly curious to why others like Central stations so bad. I often see that the average marklin user simply does not know any better than buying marklin control items. Like I was many years ago. Now I have seen the light of XpressNet and all the wonderful and cheap things that come with it. And how easy it is to use arduino's with XpressNet (with Philip Ghatow's libraroes).. I never want to go back.

But if central stations increase your qualitiy of live you should definately buy them!

Kind regards,

Bas

Ok, so maybe one simple answer to your original post, is that the CAN bus does carry all the data across, eg if I make a change of a loco speed in one controller and then pull up the same loco on the second controller, the changes will be reflected there, same for accessories I believe ( been a little while since I did it as my layout is not accessible at present).

As I understand it Märklin intended the CAN bus to be the interface between the units for all data. I currently have a 15 metre CAN cable that I have used to connect a cs2 and cs3+

If you want the two CS3 units to be synchronised you need to use the CAN bus.

I think the reason for what you see of Märklin users only buying the Märklin controller is a desire to have a plug and play solution with components that are all designed to work together, and for most the CS2/3 meets this requirement (not for me personally)

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Mike

I found something interesting in an online PDF of (suprisingly) marklin

Google translated to english:

@franciscohg Maybe that you can solve your issue now. You apparantly got the right advice of marklin, but perhaps they forgot to mention that you had to alter settings in the central station??

From what I read of it. Is that all CAN bus messages CAN also be transmitted via ethernet. I do want to try out the master slave system now. I am curious about the results. At this point I suspect that I can use it as controller and that S88 info will be relayed, but at this time I do not know whether the slave's booster will function. Though iTrain knows which train is on which circuit, the loco lists need to be synchronized and with current setup you would have to manually add the same loco to both central stations. And I fear how wrong this may go with mFx loco's.

This is why I don't just assume statements of somebody, not even of experienced people or people with a lot of posts. Nobody here, mr Clapcott included, seems to knew this. Marklin's customer service also has not responded at all. This is why I am critical, why I need to have some proof. Marklin's drawings with canbus cable were simply not enough evidence that certain things could work fine without the can cable. And this is where this thread is all about.

Last week I used a Viessman 5552 relay to make the electrical sluice between the 2 circuits. Absolute fail-safe operation. Now I have to electrically wire the bridge before I can actually send a train over it. So I definitely won't be using synchronized rail signals.

@igdaddynz, I don't know if this is of any interest of you. Like I mentioned, I got a roco WLAN maus working. I can control a train on 2 separate central stations. The maus has already proven to be a valuable asset. It is really useful to be able to control a train or turnout from every position. I am also going to bring my z21 to the railway club and see if I can get the same results using the XpressNet interface. This should work fine. There are also cheaper ways (~€40,-) of adding Xnet to Itrain.

What I want to say is:

Yes it can do pricisely that among much more. You can optionally also automate certain things and or use the computer to control turnout streets for instance. It is a rather expensive program. The standard version costs a whopping €209. But for that amount + a €40 for an X-net interface you do get to add XpressNet to your marklin layout there are also Loconet interfaces available. + you would have about €550 left to buy 2nd hand multimauses provided you won't be purchasing an €800 Cs3+. On exchanges you often can find these mauses for ~€50 or even less. I myself am using a 2nd hand roco lokmaus 2 for €22,-. It is an old primitive thing, but it works well.

So if want just the 2 red knobs you can go spend €800,- and you will have your 2 red knobs on a fixed position.

Or you buy iTrain, X-net interface, get an old laptop or other PC (also works on raspberry Pi) and lets say 2 multimauses and you get to hold these 2 red knobs (which are than black knobs ) in your hand and you will be able to plug them in everywhere on your layout using Xnet. And all this for halve the money.

Also I dont know if this is entirely true. But I thought that the control panels on central stations 2 and 3 are not entirely compatible because the graphics behind them differ.

@Mike

This argument is not entirely 'valid'. This is kinda true for every brand. Roco works well with Roco but Roco also works with Lenz or digitraxx or... name it. It is also true that marklin stuffs works well with other marklin stuffs, but it does not work with anything else. When I unboxed my z21, I connected it to the tracks, inserted the lokomaus2, entered address 8 and I could drive instantly. In a mobile or central station you still have to enter a loco in a loco list. + like bigdaddy pointed out. He already bought tonnes of marklin stuffs and now he is basically stuck with it. All the other brands on the other hand sell things which are interchangeable with oneanother. There are more brands selling multi protocol centrales with XpressNet and Loconet which are interchangable. And most can work with the same standard DCC boosters (which ofcourse also work with MM2). This means that you get to swap out your central for another if you want to. Once you have those overprized can bus boosters of marklin under your tracks, you don't get to walk away from your central stations anymore because you would also have to replace all your boosters.

Kind regards,

Bas

You're making an assumption there. Since Peter has referred to that CS2 CAN document on the forum a few times I suspect he probably does know that. You could always make a polite enquiry to find out!

I guess it's like a sluice on a river. One gate opens, ship goes in, water level goes up or down, other gate opens and ship goes out.
A sluice track will get power from one side while the train drives in, will then be without power (both gates closed), and will then get power from the other side while the train drives out.
Safer than a centre-rail rocker.
The protocol mfx may be a bad choice for that type of operation.

I learned long ago that good intentions are not always enough. The tone in written words can easily be misinterpreted...


Yes, yes you are right. I made a wrong assumption based on the information I had at that time.

As mr C's comment lacked any form of actual help or good intentions. I misinterpreted the overal vibe as negative. Therefor I was convinced I was being trolled/insulted and he made me believe he did not read my question or did not know anything about it. Precisely like I typed. Or how kiwiAlan put it:
.

About assumptions.. these

are apparently also wrong assumptions. But I most certainly don't hold it against you, after al these assumptions were also made on logic.

This

is simply true. I do completely agree with you that the documents offered by marklin indeed imply this.

@kiwiAlan My comment may have been a spark which set of oil in fire. But try to imagine if mr C would have typed:
.
If he would have typed that instead of:

this. Than there also would not be a fire in the first place. So I am not the only spark. Besides I tried putting it out, and now you are just adding more needlessly oil on the fire.

I read mr C's comment as:

And now everybody is mad at me for making a wrong assumption. Well sorry mate. I jjust cannot stand being trolled or insulted...

Btw... as you, captain hindsight

is now pointing out, mr C clearly knew the answers. Btw bigdaddy did also not know, so perhaps it may be that it is slightly less known as you might think. I googled this problem for days without finding that one outdated document.

Knowing this, I can now also interpreter

As:


Do you honestly think it strange why I was holy convinced that the comment was not ment to be helpful?
And do you think that this comment is a strong indication that mr C knows everything about the subject?

I know that you can sometimes better teach a man to fish than to give him a fish when he is hungry. But for questions this does not apply. I know how to perform google searches and read manuals...



I am getting the feeling that your are either deliberately misinterpreting everything I am saying and only focus on the negativity.. or you did not read everything. I am guessing it is the latter. In the first post I explained clearly. I never talked of no switch.

In the first post:

And later on I used the phrase 'sluice' and told I am using a Viesmann 5552 relay to achieve this.

I of course may be misinterpreting this. But

I explained in great detail how I was going to solve it. I explained myself that I already knew that the can cable is used for rail synchronisation. You are now repeating what I said.

Myself:

I find it difficult to receive such comments. You obviously don't read what I typed, than you repeat everything I said earlier. And you did not hold back on the direct and implied insults. You call me a know-it-al because? I explained that there is an option to add X-net to a marklin system? I thought it would be a useful thing to point out. And you say that I don't do my homework.

We do not even have these boosters? We already have those overpriced black things with attached can-bus cable. So why start about this? You are burning me for making a false assumption towards mr C (which in my defence had valid reasons as I explained) and now you do the exact same thing and than sum. Just because you are mad at me?


Why this? Just why? I have not even received any actual advice which I could dismiss other than to use the can cable which turned out not to be correct advice in retrospect.

Before you become mad at me, which I believe you already were. Try to understand what I just said. You are making the discussion far worse than it already was. And I did not even want a discussion. I only wanted the answer were mr C is apparently sitting on. You are actually behaving far worse than I did. I explained myself three times now why I typed to mr C what I typed. And I have pointed out that you did not read everything as you have repeated almost my exact words. Followed by implications that I am the one who does not know what he is doing. You say to us:

How can you know if I am damaging our systems if you do not even know what it is I am doing?


Can we now please leave it al behind. We have problems to solve and trains to drive.


Please indulge all of us. And don't do it for me. Perhaps you can save bigdaddy a couple of 100 bucks. What is, according to you, the cheapest possible way to add X-net to all our marklin systems?

I myself thought of sort of arduino bridge between marklin's can-bus and X-net but it is at the bottem on my to do list and I expect to run in to limitations or other problems like a 10 loco slot max and such. But this point I could not tell to be honest.


I was talking about Cs3+ which are offered by marklin for €799,- today. I see that you could get them for ~€699 at Lippe's. Also I would not recommend buying a 2nd hand device for that amount of money. You can save alot perhaps but what if you don't have guarantees and it suddenly turns out that the S88 connection is defective? You will be set back 500~600€. With a multimaus you can say the same, but in worst case you would be set back €50 and not €600. Just my 2 cents ughh 200€


Yes, this precisely. In dutch a sluice is called sluis and a sluis is precisely what you described. We therefor use the word 'spanningssluis' which litterly translates to voltage sluice. This is that 'thing' that real railways use to handle the voltage differences between railways often found by border crossings. I decided to go for the phrase electrical sluice thinking it would be clear enough in combination with my first post's explanation. Google translate came with 'voltage lock'. As I am not English I was not entirely sure if that translation was better than mine. The German word for 'it' is 'Systemtrennstelle'. Google does not recognize this word. And there was no English wikipedia about the voltage sluices.


Yes it is. Besides misinterpreting intentions I am also prone to preach that all mFx decoders should have the mFx protocol disabled and that MM2 should be used instead. We often have problems with mFx decoders which switch from one central to the other alot.

The transition part is > 2.5 meters (longer than our longest train). The centre part's (or sluice's) insulations lie in the middle of 30cm contact rails. So a train has atleast 15cm of contact rail to trigger the relay before the middle sleeper reaches the insulation. The contact rails are directly connected to the the Viesmann coils. In this setup it does not matter if a train enters or leaves the sluice, the relay will always switch to that circuit to which the train is traveling to or from. 100% fool proof. The physical bridge itself will power the adjacent parts. If the bridge is not placed, the surround tracks will become powerless. I also added wooden arms with which I can physically the connections to the bridge. I lost one of my own loco's to a 1.4m fall.

There is one small detail that I did not mention. It is not really important. There are three people at the club, one of them being the president, who keeps yelling at me that both layouts also need to be able to work in stand-alone mode at all times but he wants this connection more than anybody. And not one of them is very familiar with the systems or technology for that matter. Were the choise up to me, I would sell both Cs3 devices and their boosters and power supplies, purchase one whole Z21 or a cheaper tams red box with easy to turn off/on boosters. And both layouts could be plugged in to one central with a switch separately. No dual loco lists, no railsignal synch problems, no master slave, no dependencies. But as we already have spend a good €2000 on it, we are forced to keep using them so now I simply try to make the best of it and add X-net in the process. Anyways because of these 3 people, the voltage sluice exists. One of the layouts uses just one booster. I wanted to relocate the booster to the other layout and lay really thick copper lines to transfer the power, but I cannot sell this idea and scream that both layouts are 100% independed at the same time .

Kind regards,

Bas

Thank you.

I must admit another thing. The creator of iTrain just informed me that you cannot (yet) use his program to let central stations react to an XpressNet device. So I also offered wrong advice. Sorry 'bout that. The manual implied this idea a little bit.



Anyways the good guy also told me that it could be done with Loconet, if I understood correctly. I am still waiting on a repons with verification and some more details. If that works in the best case scenario, I can either use Loconet for my projects or create an X-net to Loconet adapter myself. So far I have not found an other way to add XpressNet but this problem is for a different topic on a different Forum perhaps.

If all this fails, I am going to have a hard time pursuading certain people that we are better of with a tams red box. Or I simply give up X-net/L-net altogather. I already found a method to interact with the marklin can bus boosters .

Kind regards,

Bas

Marklin have confirmed that both CS3 and CS3+ have galvanic isolation.

https://www.marklin-user...-Upgrade-from-CS1-to-CS3 - See post #37

The 60174 and 60175 boosters have galvanic insulation, the 60173 do not. The 60173 can be sent to Märklin to get a replacement with galvanic insulation.

Officially a single device without galvanic insulation on the layout does not lead to any problems.

High voltages between outer rail and house ground while using modern Märklin switching-mode power-supplies have been reported several times before. So far the amps always were so low that there was no real risk.

Not just the old blue transformers that are dangerous