 Joined: 04/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 501 Location: USA
|
I have started to automate my M track layout with CS3+ and focused on use of contact tracks instead of (finnicky) toggle tracks. The latter sometimes get stuck and wagons with lighting sliders complicate the trigger. I have not tried reed switches on my layout. I discovered after many crashes that the standard m track contact rail (5105 and 5104) has an isolated length that is less than the wheel distance of my modern trains (like ICE). Sometimes it senses occupancy, sometimes not. I can use a contact extension track and two 1/2 railroad crossing trigger tracks, but that is a lot of specialty track for one sensing segment (and hard to find, and expensive). Is there a clever way to make one's own contact segments with M rail? I experimented with cutting rail, but it remains grounded to the metal base regardless. Some cutting and soldering is fine. Thoughts, Marklin peeps?  |
|
 1 user liked this useful post by BenP
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 3,964 Location: Michigan, Troy
|
M track tends to do that on certain wagons, and it isn't really reccomended for new digital contact track use because of potential shorting, but they don't condemn using it either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 501 Location: USA
|
Originally Posted by: BenP  I have started to automate my M track layout with CS3+ and focused on use of contact tracks instead of (finnicky) toggle tracks. The latter sometimes get stuck and wagons with lighting sliders complicate the trigger. I have not tried reed switches on my layout.
I discovered after many crashes that the standard m track contact rail (5105 and 5104) has an isolated length that is less than the wheel distance of my modern trains (like ICE). Sometimes it senses occupancy, sometimes not. I can use a contact extension track and two 1/2 railroad crossing trigger tracks, but that is a lot of specialty track for one sensing segment (and hard to find, and expensive).
Is there a clever way to make one's own contact segments with M rail? I experimented with cutting rail, but it remains grounded to the metal base regardless.
Some cutting and soldering is fine. Thoughts, Marklin peeps?
One crazy approach is to use two M-to-C tracks and interrupt the rail on one side. Downside is giving in to plastic. Upside is no shorts from metal base. Pricewise about the same $15-20 solution. (yup, answering my own query as my 'research' continues)  |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BenP
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 15/11/2018(UTC) Posts: 434 Location: Uusimaa, Helsinki
|
I have made a couple dozen contact tracks using the method reported on Stummiforum with a couple of modifications. This approach has the benefit that I now have also parallel radius contact tracks (5200) which Märklin never offered. However, the length of the isolated part of the track still remains short, so the issue you note is still in place. In my case, this does not matter because Rocrail works correctly even with very short isolated sections. I have noted that keeping the wheels of the cars clean helps in registering the occupancy. I think I wrote a short piece on this topic on this forum, but I cannot locate it any longer. My comments on Stummiforum mention the changes I adopted. |
- Martti M.
Era III analog & digital (Rocrail, CAN Digital Bahn, Gleisbox/MS2, K83/K84), C & M tracks, some Spur 1 |
1 user liked this useful post by Martti Mäntylä
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 501 Location: USA
|
Originally Posted by: Martti Mäntylä I have made a couple dozen contact tracks using the method reported on Stummiforum with a couple of modifications. This approach has the benefit that I now have also parallel radius contact tracks (5200) which Märklin never offered. However, the length of the isolated part of the track still remains short, so the issue you note is still in place. In my case, this does not matter because Rocrail works correctly even with very short isolated sections. I have noted that keeping the wheels of the cars clean helps in registering the occupancy. I think I wrote a short piece on this topic on this forum, but I cannot locate it any longer. My comments on Stummiforum mention the changes I adopted. Went straight to the shop to try this. Wow, shrink tube for isolation works great; see pics. I can make the sensing track any length with this method. I just added marklin stock interrupt for testing, but will modify 2 straights to make my own. Great solution, Martti!   |
|
3 users liked this useful post by BenP
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 04/02/2011(UTC) Posts: 3,583 Location: Paris, France
|
Hi Martti Originally Posted by: Martti Mäntylä However, the length of the isolated part of the track still remains short, so the issue you note is still in place. In my case, this does not matter because Rocrail works correctly even with very short isolated sections. Thanks a lot for this information. I find this trick simply genial. On the other hand, I suppose you can do this on a complete rail section (without cutting the rail). This will allow you to have a long detection section just like with C or K track. The rest of the trick is unchanged. Simply 1 recommend to install a narrow adhésive tape under the joiner to avoid accidental contact with the metal ballast. Also in this case the ballst drilling and wire soldering may be skipped on all rails except one I must confess I have not tried it (I use C track) but I really believe this is easy to make. Cheers Jean |
|
3 users liked this useful post by JohnjeanB
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC) Posts: 9,607 Location: Australia
|
|
Adrian Australia flag by abFlags.com |
3 users liked this useful post by xxup
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 17/04/2003(UTC) Posts: 997 Location: Netherlands
|
I use current detection exclusively now, but in earlier days I made contact track by cutting the rail segment including the base, see this post. Best regards, Gregor
|
1 user liked this useful post by Gregor
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/02/2011(UTC) Posts: 3,583 Location: Paris, France
|
Hi Adrian Originally Posted by: xxup The alternative to cutting 5200 series track is to use current sensing s88 units link the Viessmann 5233 Current sensing is OK for 2 rails operation (you have no choice AND you may have resistive axles - graphite allowing you to detect ALL cars). In 3 rails, it is a disaster: the system sees ONLY the current consuming cars (With a slider). How many cars / wagons have a slider, not to mention the noise all these make. This means that in 3 rails, detecting cars with an extra rail makes hell a lot of difference I think. Any car is detected unlike with with current sensing. Just my opinion. Cheers Jean |
|
2 users liked this useful post by JohnjeanB
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC) Posts: 9,607 Location: Australia
|
That is very true, but we are talking about sensing the position of a complete train and not indivdual wagons for the purpose of things like switching routes. The other thing is that the current sensing is only needed on 5200 curves, the straight sections that attach to those curves can and do still use contact tracks and conventional s88 units. |
AdrianAustralia flag by abFlags.com |
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 30/08/2002(UTC) Posts: 1,289
|
Originally Posted by: xxup That is very true, but we are talking about sensing the position of a complete train and not indivdual wagons for the purpose of things like switching routes. The other thing is that the current sensing is only needed on 5200 curves, the straight sections that attach to those curves can and do still use contact tracks and conventional s88 units. I used current sensing using an LDT s88 unit, on my previous M track layout. It worked very well. Now, Märklin has an s88 unit at a reasonable price: https://www.maerklin.de/...ts/details/article/60882 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 25/08/2004(UTC) Posts: 332 Location: Madrid,
|
Hi all,
I use the Train Controller, with this program os posible to configure a memora in a contact detector to avoid flickering ro to maintain the contact detector in on for a certain time. I supposse that is posible algo in other programs.
Best regards |
|
1 user liked this useful post by amartinezv
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 501 Location: USA
|
Originally Posted by: xxup Thx for the alternative suggestion of using current instead if mass sensing. However, I believe this requires s88 DC modules, whereas i have l88+s88 ac modules on my M track layout. Making my own contact tracks has solved the length limit. Connecting two homemade contact tracks does take soldering of a feedback wire and cutting a small space below one connector to avoid metal base contact (just like stock m contact tracks have). I'll eventually try computer based automation (rocrail?), but for now stick with CS3 software control. |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BenP
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
