Battery R/C

I've played around a little with it, homebrew, using NiCads and a cheap

board from an RC car in HO. I like it and will pursue it in the future.

You should go to the Free Rails group, where Woodie Greene has

been working on this for a long time. A lot of info there and Neil Stanton

is developing a good system.

Uwe

O scale current draw...

Dear Michael,

O scale definitely lends itself to R/C in terms of space available within the shell. however, for the same reasons that there are "O scale decoders", you may find that the current draw of the O scale mech exceeds what a cheapo R/C car circuit can provide...

Just something to keep in mind...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

RC Forum

The best RC forum for model trains is Freerails.com

 They have a full section on train RC and a active following

rich

NWSL Stanton Battery-powered Wireless DCC system for HO

Northwest Shortline was showing what I consider to be the first really practical HO-scale Battery-Powered wireless DCC system at the National Train Show in Sacramento, CA last week.

Above is a photo of the system. They use a 3V lithium battery and then step up the voltage to 12V - the combination saves space over a much larger 12V battery. The system includes a wireless DCC throttle (not shown) and so there's also a receiver board for the system, along with a DCC decoder of your choice (this model shows an NCE D13SRJ decoder).

One of the keys to the system is the Stanton Power Trucks (previously known as the PDT power truck). The Stanton Power Trucks are DCC ready, coming with black, red, gray, and orange leads all set to wire to a decoder.

NWSL is coming out with a 6 wheel truck version of the Stanton drive this fall, which when combined with the Battery Powered Wireless DCC throttle system, makes for one of the first really practical commercial battery powered DCC systems.

The system shown above is for an Interurban car, and is built to leave the windows area with a clear view so the car has no obvious mechanism obscuring the view. This system will also fit inside an HO diesel loco hood (with room to spare) if you use the Stanton trucks to power the loco. There should also be plenty of room for sound speakers if you want to add sound to your loco.

NWSL said you can just power yard tracks and passing sidings, and otherwise leave all the complex trackwork dead. The NWSL battery system automatically recharges the battery from the track power, so they recommend you simply power the simple trackwork where equipment typically just sits when not running.

All-in-all, a pretty cool system. MRH will be following the developments of this system as it comes to market and will be keeping you informed on how it works.

!!!!!!!

Holy crap, Joe!!  IT'S HERE!!!!!!

I was discussing something of this order back on the Atlas boards back...2008?  Man, did it get a nice shower of slings and arrows!!!  But there it is...ha-hah!  But that's all it took - you have the electon tank [the battery; I was suggesting super caps], the circuitry to adapt the Tank to the operating voltage of the motor [the 12 volt circuitry], the decoder, and the Wireless module I said was absolutely vital to getting this thing to work in the first place...IT'S ALL THERE!!!

BRILLIANT!

I do believe this wireless module is vital throughout DCC systems, if only because it allows the decoder instructions uninhibited access to the decoder.  Granted, you have interference and the issues of "what to do about tunnels [well, add repeaters!] and such, but that's an engineering issue and engineering problems are designed to be solved!!!

This is a good Day!

All we have to do now is get that system adaptable to other motor combinations, and we have the wireless locomotive in DCC...say GOODBYE to dirty track stalls and stutters!!

It seems to me this would be a good solution for steam locos.

Most plastic steam engines are too light weight to pull very much on a grade.  It would seem that this could be a way to power the tender on a steam loco without having it look obvious.  The tender then becomes a helper for the steam engine to pull a train over the hill.

Battery R/C

I have been developing an R/C battery powered HO locomotive for over 3 years and am now building a prototype.  Because this may be of commercial quality, I can only advise I am using high efficiency motors, 2.4 GHz technology and LiFePO4 batteries. 

The features I plan to incorporate include:

* Switch control from the locomotive

* Basic steam and diesel sounds

* Fiber-optic lighting

* Dynamic battery charging

* On-board camera / transmitter

Features will be consecutively introduced.

Thanks, Dan

Battery R/C - update

This is to update all interested in battery powered, radio controlled trains.

Prototype completed and tested with excellent results. Highly recommend a 2.4 GHz transmitter with DSM2 modulation for trouble free operation. Also using off-the-shelf pre-charged NiMH batteries which provide very good run times at very low operating cost. Prototype engine was run on a large layout with no problems. I'm proceeding with a second prototype which is smaller based on a new receiver-speed controller on a 10x12 mm board. This will double run time or increase load pulling capacity. Bottom line, radio control for HO works!

Dan

Peeking under the hood

With the current thinking for Radio control, how many transmitter and/or throttles are needed?

For example. Say 8 trains are running and 5 operators are controlling them with hand held throttles. With some operators running two or more trains simultaneously where they have sufficient clear track.

I can imagine RC systems that could handle this with just 1 transmitter, or a system with 5 transmitters, or a system that needs 8 transmitters. 

So far we have recent posts from NWSL, TAM and Railflyer that I have seen plus this prototype. What is the answer in each (and any others I've missed?

Dear Andy, If I understand

Dear Andy,

If I understand the question correctly,
and basing the answers off available info:
(Have personally played with an NWSL S-cab system, haven't see the rest in person here in Aust yet)

Problem conditions:
- 8 individual locos/trains in motion
- 5 human operators
- exclusively wireless control
(even if the system in question is capable of recieving "normal DCC" commands thru the rails,
this is not being considered in this exercise)

Assumptions:
- there is always enough separation between trains to enable stress-free switching between locos by any given operator
- each operator requires at least 1 throttle to participate in the session
(no physical throttle-sharing between operators acceptable in this exercise)
- still relying on track power, battery power not a consideration for this exercise

Results:

TAM Valley
It is assumed/required that a functional DCC system is already owned/installed(?) by layout owner

Therefore:
- existing DCC Host system already in place
- existing 5x throttles + throttle-buss to match said DCC Host system already in place
(NB presumably existing wireless throttles such as ProCabR/DT400R could talk to their Host DCC unit)
- all 8 locos in question already have decoders of some form installed
(Note: as the existing throttles are still used under the new system, 
"Operator muscle memory" and familiarity should be maintained accross the migration).

Need to add
- min 1x TAM Valley radio transmission unit 
(piggybacks onto the DCC Track buss outputs from the existing DCC system Booster. Unsure of radio<> loco coverage limits/parameters???)
- 8x TAM Valley radio recievers (1 per loco)

NWSL
All existing Host Control systems become redundant except as raw power source at the rails
(turn on the DCC Booster to provide track volts, put the existing DCC throttles in a cupboard)

Need to add
- 5x NWSL handheld transmitter/throttle units (1 per operator)
- 8x NWSL Reciever+DCC decoder assemblies (1 per loco)

Ring Eng
All existing Host Control systems become redundant except as raw power source at the rails
(turn on the DCC Booster to provide track volts, put the existing DCC throttles in a cupboard)

Need to add
- 5x RE Touchscreen handheld transmitter/throttle units (1 per operator)
- 8x RE Reciever+DCC decoder assemblies (1 per loco)

RailFlyer (Zigbee wireless)
All existing Host Control systems become redundant except as raw power source at the rails
(turn on the DCC Booster to provide track volts, put the existing DCC throttles in a cupboard)

Need to add
- 5x RF Zigbee handheld transmitter/throttle tablet (1 per operator)
- 8x RF "MCU" reciever/motor-control assemblies (1 per loco)
(Unsure if the MCU is only intended for use with RF style "axle-hung" traction systems,
or is also capable of installing in and driving "normal" single-motor "Athearn style" mechs/locos)

Hope this helps...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Battery R/C - Comment

Andy, with several trains running and several operators, I think there should be one transmitter for each train. I like watching my trains run, not my cab control unit. With an R/C transmitter, I enjoy using a stick for speed control, acceleration, stopping and reversing without having to look down at my control unit. I can't speak for anyone else, or any other system, but this is very simple and feels best to me.   

My one-on-one opinion is based on how I envision operating the layout I'm planning. It will be a small to medium layout, with possibly one or two other operators. MUing should not be a problem, provided the engines and the electronics are the same. I have mostly different engines, so for now I will use only one transmitter and bind all the engine receivers to it, and only turn on the engine I want to run.  

So I favor one operator with one transmitter for one cab. One operator with two transmitters gets a little hairy, unless you are running in separate loops.   

Dan     

Very thorough answer - Thanks

I realize only the actual makers can confirm, but that seems what I would expect too.

So I was wondering what an automated train control system, say one of the higher level scripted options for JMRI, would need. Are we dealing with packet radio, where only one transmitter would be needed for all trains if a computer was driving it. Or would are there be frequency channels, where we need one channel open per moving train.

I have a Digitrax system currently, where initially I can use one or two less expensive plug-in throttles for testing, then go directly to an automated JMRI , without incurring the cost of any more wireless or traditional throttles, even though I may be automatically running a couple of dozen various street car trains and any manual over-rides from PC screen/keyboards.

A Cupboard Comment

This analysis goes to the heart of the problem. 

I chose an R/C system with an open architecture. My components are available anywhere and everywhere. There are hundreds of manufacturers and thousands of products, all of which can be bought from hobby shops, online stores or directly from the manufacturer.

And they all compete with each other.

Dan   

JMRI, and related

Sensing your inquiry is directed at me, please be advised I am not smart enough to answer your question. Such nebulous nomenclature is what scared me away in the first place! 

But seriously, so far as I know, receivers and transmitters are "connected" to each other via a process called binding. Once this is accomplished, the receiver will only accept commands from the transmitter it is bound to. Inserting a computer into this relationship would require hardware and software I am not familiar with. However, as I look deeper into the subject of telemetry working in conjunction with radio control, there may be a way to use telemetric feedback to affect automation.

As an example, motor RPM, or engine speed, can now be viewed on a transmitter's screen. This could be converted to a computer input signal to modify or conform to a desired speed parameter for another engine. How this is implemented I would not know, but I suspect it can be done.

Dan               

Radio Systems and JMRI automation?

Dear Andy,

As I understand it (and I stand to be corrected!)
- each system handles multiple commands, transmitting all commands over a given nominated radio frequency.
- All recievers listening to the nominated frequency "hear" all of the commands, 
- and it's up to the unit with the correct address to respond to commands intended for it.
(The term "packet radio" is entirely appropriate. There is no slightly-offset frequency assignments such as used to be the case with RC cars and planes, swapping of crystals, and "frequency pennants hanging off the transmitter antenna to indicate who's controlling which car/plane/boat"  ). 

As far as "getting JMRI to control/automate the system",
I would suggest that the Tam Valley system would appear to be the "simplest to deploy" match for the stated mission.

 Assuming you already have

- a DCC system with it's own "human/manual throttles"
- a matching/suitable interface to a PC such that JMRI can already "send commands" to/via said DCC rig
(IE you already have your JMRI-automated-commands> DCC hardware and software configurations sorted and working)

then by bolting a (minimum) single Tam Valley transmitter onto the "Track Out" of your existing DCC booster,
(either on it's own, or in parallel with the existing "Track Buss" feed to the physical rails)

you are instantly transmitting each and every DCC command to any suitably-equipped loco within wireless earshot.

(IE you've kept the "brain" bit that you've already spent time and effort configuring,
INC detector and other feedback "Inputs", and the JMRI> DCC system "Output" hardware

and simply added a "second transmission medium" for the existing JMRI+DCC system to broadcast it's commands...)

Or, at least that's how it looks from here...

(Of course, despite deploying a Radio Control system for loco control,
IE the _Outputs_ from Control --> loco
 
we haven't eliminated the need for detectors, and associated wiring, required for the JMRI automation to have any form of "feedback" to control and trigger it's automation moves from...
IE the _Inputs_  from layout --> JMRI/DCC

think about that, it's a big consideration...  )

Hope this helps...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

AristoCraft Train Engineer for O scale

AristoCraft has developed an R/C battery system for G scale that will fit O scale.  G scale has been using R/C battery systems for many years, so there is plenty of experience and hardware options to draw on.

I have used radios and batteries developed for the race car and airplane hobbies.  These hobbies are years ahead of the model railroad hobbies... except for sound systems.  Mainly, the car and airplane hobbies have developed a source for radios, batteries, chargers, and brush-less (AC) motors; available in hobby shops.

Sound systems are still a problem as there are no sound systems that will simulate working power and brakes together.  For the realistic realm of Proto 1:48 it would be appropriate to investigate sound systems to find one that will actually perform and sound like the real thing.  Being in HO, I have not explored the large scale sound systems to see if any will simulate working power and brakes together. 

Battery technology is constantly advancing in the RC world

I fly RC airplanes and helicopters and I can tell you that battery technology has grown by leaps and bounds over the past few years. Thanks to Lipo batteries we are able to fly electric powered models that were not even practical a few short years ago.  At the rate the battery technology has advanced and matured, I see battery powered HO becoming more and more feasible with every passing day. The RC radio technology is there too. Spread Spectrum makes the old idea of "channels" obsolete.

Robotics is advancing, but I'm still using a regular vacuum .

The RC Flyers NEED batteries, so they have to use (and like) whatever is out there. That doesn't make them a universal panacea for places where there is line power (almost free) for the taking.

Most RC flyers don't have to keep 20-30 locomotives on charge just in case some one wants to operate them "on demand".

Radio Control for model trains is definitely "completely functional" and reasonably economic. But that doesn't mean R/C battery technology s are at the same "complete functional and always usable" state.

My point was....

That until the last several years, battery operated HO trains were not even remotely feasible. But because of rapid advances in battery technology, partially driven by the RC hobby, now they are. We are not talking heavy low capacity slow to recharge Nicads here.

Lipo batteries can be charged quickly, and have a great power to weight ratio.  Power to weight is not so important with trains as it is with flying craft but the advances made in that area  have also resulted in batteries with a lot of capacity in relation to their physical size.  If you don't think the battery technology is close at hand for  trains that are in a "complete functional and always usable state" then you are uninformed about what's available. If the technology is not already here, it's very close.

That being said, I'm perfectly fine running my trains with DCC off track power.  I don't worry over power pickup problems or track cleaning issues, I use NO-OX. I was just commenting that the battery tech is there because I'm familiar with it due to my RC flying hobby.

Michael

And my point was . .

For a layout that is modern passenger oriented, batteries are not "ready" in my case, and may never be, especially in the economic aspects. I have many 8-12  car commuter and subway electric sets, waiting to be motorized, with no separate locomotives, just all underfloor trucks, and large windows all along the length, with full interiors and interior LED lighting that should usually be always on.

It 's bad enough that I have to find room for just all the motors below decks. Adding the space and cost of enough batteries to run and light the train for hours would really defeat the object.  And then figuring out how to have them always ready charged. . . . while in the meantime, there is 18V AC @5 A power right under the wheels at the throw of a switch. . .

Around the corner...

I feel obliged to throw some goodies on the table relative to the discussion on batteries. 

There is a quiet revolution taking place in the rechargeable battery industry. Under development, using thin film technology, is a small, high powered, light weight rechargeable lithium-based battery that uses a dry solid polymer electrolyte. The technology will allow high speed production, lower battery cost and the highest energy density of any battery made today. Combined with long shelf life and greatly extended cycle life, these batteries will make it possible to extend run times and/or increase load carrying capacity based on utilizing the same space and today's batteries.

But for now, to power my passenger train, I use eight hybrid AAA NiMH batteries in a series-parallel arrangement mounted on an AMD-103 chassis. I also use a Swiss precision motor for low current draw and a small combo receiver-speed controller. I use one LED for forward and rear lighting when going forward and another for reverse operation with forward and rear lighting. They are used in conjunction with fiber optic strands to obtain front and rear lighting. I estimate, under normal load, I can operate up to 8 hours. My cars use SMD (surface mounted diodes) strip lighting with two AAA batteries per car for power.

If, and when, I build a special locomotive chassis, I will substitute AA batteries, which will give me an estimated 20 hours of run time under normal load. Of course, recharging while running on designated sections of track, or at train stations, or between sessions, is a plus. When the budget allows, I plan to build a second engine for increasing load carrying capacity or extending run times. Since the batteries are not expensive and readily available in stores, I keep a pre-charged second set to swap out with the first set after I'm through running, or before starting the next operating session. This works fine for me.

The moral of this story is that everyone has to make a decision based on their needs and the best information available at the time. No system is better than another system...it's just our perception that drives us to that conclusion...which is the way it should be. 

Dan       

DC internal

Hi, How may I get hold of Woodie Greene. I'm new here on this forum but been buildin for 30 +yrs and will never go back to track power. Battery rc is ideal and I want in on the latest most practical stuff.  Help please,   Kindly,Jake

DC Internal

You'll find Woodie at freerails.com

Dan

Bleeding-Edge Adopter = Trailblazer?

Dear Jake,

Woodie Greene and his RC controlled Mogollon NG shays reside over on FreeRails

http://www.freerails.com/view_forum.php?id=45

One of the interesting things about "asking the trailblazers" in any given discipline is that their "testbeds" are often focussed on the prototypes _they_ want to work with. IE many of the FreeRails RC guys are using NG outline "testbeds" because NG is what they are into. (Sidenote: I'd also note that many of the "trailblazers" in many facets of our MRR hobby are NGers, maybe because they are already heading into "scratchbuild" and "mend and make do" forms of modelling, and are thus open to trying new/off-the-wall ideas?)

Where I'm going with this is, the guys on FreeRails represent probably the most practically-experienced group of RC train-control bods around. However, if the fact that their experiences and examples are largely NG doesn't "feel right", and you're looking for "SG HO RC modellers" to talk to, the fact is that there simply aren't all that many in such a "newly-popular" subsection of the "train control system" world. (A quick search of the MRH forums reveals many modellers asking "can _any_ actual users of the commercial RC systems tell us what they are like to use?", but very few saying "I _am_ using the new system, and here's my experience...". That _could_ be construed as a snapshot view of the RC situation at the moment...)

Ergo, if you're keen to see some proof of current-spec RC control systems in use, as they specifically apply (only) to the context of multi-unit-consist HO SG situations and related layout design/operations, 

then best to be prepared to "push some new dirt" yourself...
(You aren't looking for a trail to follow which was created by some previous trailblazer in this field,
you _are_ one of the trailblazers!)

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr