Before I plunk down a lot of money for switch machines, does anyone have any recommendations for which type of powered switch machine I should invest in? I have seen both the Tortoise and Rix and switch machines in my Walthers catalog. Even though I do plan on using DCC on my layout, I don’t think I can justify the added expense of Circuitron’s new Smail DCC enabled switch motors.
There are so many answers to this. Tortoise work well but take some doing to set up. I would never run them with DCC. I have tried some Humpyard Purvayance switch levers and they work well and are easier to set up, but are mechanical. They do look rather cool. I have gone to Caboose where ever I can easily reach them. Some of the best I have ever seen are made with dowels and nobs activating a DPDT switch which in turn activates the turnout and powers the frog. For operations this is handy. Lets see what others say, but this is not an easy question to decide and, as you say, it can cost.
If you want motorized without the high price of the Tortoise, consider servos. The very same servos used in RC airplanes. Tam Valley Depot has 3 different controllers, one that controls 8 servos without any DCC connection, one that does 4 servos and is also a DCC decoder (you can also use pushbuttons for manual control), and one that does a single servo and is also a DCC decoder and has manual pushbuttons. There’s economy of scale witht he larger ones, but even the single servo controller WITH the servo costs less than a Tortoise.
There are some other suppliers of controllers, both DCC and not DCC, and servos can be had for cheap - I just picked up a 4 pack for $13.95 on eBay.
Plus for those odd places where the turnout ends up near some benchwork support, there is a near infinite selection of linkages and bellcranks int he model airplane section of the hobby shop to hook up whatever sort of contraption you need. There are also 3 position servo controllers than can drive semaphore signals.
–Randy
Probably the simplest to control are twin-coil types, such as Atlas, RIX or the old Kemtron/KTM type that frequently show up on E-Bay. They don’t care if you power them with AC, DC or through a DCC decoder, and lend themselver to pushbutton or hot probe control from several locations.
The down side is that they are not DCC-friendly. They take a single pulse of fairly high power to operate, wich means that a high-capacity decoder is necessary. On the other hand, I have never understood why anyone would control ‘points’ from the same controller needed to control the train - especially on a layout with a hundred sets of points. (I have problems enough remembering a few telephone numbers.)
Tortoise motors are not power hogs, but, since their position is polarity-dependent they need DC for operation. Wiring them for control from the usual three places (CTC panel, zone panel and immediately adjacent control) could prove adventurous.
Randy’s suggestion to use model aircraft servos is interesting. I have no idea what their power needs are, but the price seems reasonable - unless you have to add a relay to the circuit to provide contacts for signals, panel indicators and hot-frog power.
I use manual control for points which wouldn’t be powered in prototype practice - including some which would have been parts of a mechanical interlocking. I mount the (electrical) switch(es) in niches in the fascia and extend mechanical control to the points with an Anderson link connected with fishing line. My twin-coil machines are mounted in similar locations and connected in the same manner. This minimizes the, “Crawling under the layout,” factor, since all wiring can be done sitting on a chair in the aisleway.
Just my [2c]. Other modelers have other opinions, equally valid.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in
Well, we are talking “playing” and “pretending” here, correct? So, if we pretend that the controller is the engineer, why can we not also pretend that the controller represents the brakeman/conductor that steps off the train to throw the switch? This works for me just as well as imagining that my little engineer, wishing to have a switch thrown, conjures up a magical spirit who’s giant hand reaches down from the sky and flops over the Caboose Industries handthrow.
The other issue of remembering numbers is not insurmountable. A little numbered stake in the ground near the switch takes care of that.
I agree with Art on the Humpyard mechanical levers. They are not as expensive as the switch motors and after installing one or two their installation goes easily. They also hold the turnout solidly in either position with a minimum of initial adjustment. Perhaps I’m a bit phobic about things electrical but why bother with electrical connections when a simple mechanical lever will do the job? There is also the appearance of those levers- much more realistic than a push button. They have added to the pleasure of operating my diminutive RR- a minor tweak but one I’ve enjoyed. Botton line, they are almost idiot proof (which is why they work so well for me). Roy
Tortoise are my Switch machine of choice and if your buying in quantity the cost comes down some what. I have no problem using them at all with DCC as I have a couple of stationary decoders to operate some of them and some are operated by toggle switches on the fascia. I will agree though that Tam Valley Depot has some very impressive stuff. I’ve been meaning to place an order for a demo unit. His stuff has one big advantage over any other switch machine is that those servos are a heck of a lot smaller then a Tortoise I am not 100%certain but I believe via his controllers you can operate accessories like signal, and crossing gates etc.
I can say with 100% certainty to stay away form twin coil type switch machines as they will burnout and melt. There sin’t anyone who has ever used an Atlas switch machine who can argue that point.
Hump yard’s stuff is nice for manual throws as well as Fast Tracks offers a manual switch machine called the BullFrog it’s relatively inexpensive and looks well made.
http://www.handlaidtrack.com/bullfrog-manual-turnout-control-assembled-p-8577.php
I prefer the tortoise on DC. Easy to wire for multiple location control, very reliable, aux contacts. Can even be wired to run automatically but that requires some electronics design work.
Karl
I can say with equal certainty that the problem wasn’t the machine, it was a control switch that stuck in the POWER ON position.
I have never smoked a KTM twin-coil, and I doubt that I’ll ever smoke one of my RIX machines. The hot probe control CAN"T stick with power on, and my panels, being close to vertical, won’t allow the probe to accidentally close a circuit. People who have capacitive discharge circuits for their twin-coil switch machines will find that the machines won’t smoke even if those failure-prone Atlas switch controls stick - there’s not enough current flow through the charging resistor once the capacitor has fired its charge.
Your blanket statement is like saying that you’re sure the clutch is shot, when the actual problem is a stripped pinion gear in the differential. You have to troubleshoot the whole circuit, not just replace the part that failed.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with twin-coil and manual point movers)
Twin-coil and solenoid machines never worked for me in the early '60s. Recycled rotary telephone-industry switches worked well thereafter, but that was over forty years ago. Since then, I’ve come to favor Tortoise machines for electrical switch machines, and never looked back.
Mark
Hi from Belgium,
I think the best way to operate turnouts, if you want a switchmachine is using slowmotion motors like Tortoise or Switchmaster.
Tortoise offer already build in electrical switch contacts but need some adjustements, Switchmaster offer only a motor but adjustement is easy. Both are stalling motors which mean you don’t cut the power after the travel of the throwbar so the motor keep a pressure on the points; they are powerful.
Even if switch coil machine are inexpensive they are from an another age and are asking for a lot of current to correctly operate but sure it’s my taste. They use particular DCC controls.
Some handthrowing system exist from the scratchbuild one to the ready made advanced one. They could be inexpensive but you can’t make a dcc control.
I beleive we have a lot to learn in the future from the servo’s rc motor control because they are small and inexpensive; the controller allow you to fine tunning the move of the throwbar.
All slow motion motors and the small servos could easily be controled by DCC; all the big manufacturers of DCC offer decoders which can drive them.
Anyway powering turnouts in quantities whith motors is expensive, so take a look at all the advertissing about them; there is a lot of different offer price. Take also a look at Ebay.
If you order bulk pack of motors you can buy them at a more affordable price.
Here some link to manufacturer and home made handthrow.
www.handlaidtrack.com The bull frog, a laser made handthrow
www.builders-in-scale.com The Switchmaster motor, in fact the Hankraft display motor, which is avaible directly by Hankcraft i
That was my big concern, so I’m using Ken Stapleton’s circuit for twin coil machines. Produces a single pulse to throw the switch, and even provides for a constant LED light to let the operator know which way the switch is thrown. It’s taken me more time in building the circuits and installing them, but I’m hoping will prevent me burning out any Atlas switches.
Thank you for all of the feedback so far. I had never really considered manual switch throws, nor did I realize how many different types are in the MarketPlace now. If anyone from MRR magazine reads these posts, as a subscriber, I would like to see them prepare an article covering electronic and manual switch throws, something akin to the excellent article they did recently about HO Scale couplers.
Back to my issue - one other determining factor that I see when it comes to chooses an electronic or manual switch throw is the protrusion from the fascia board. As I have a small layout (10’ 6" x 14’) and 2’ clearance between layout sections, I don’t want to have elbows knocking into fascia mounted switch controls. Given how I constructed the fascia endge of my layout, I cannot mount switch throw controls into recessed openings. With an electronic switch throw all I need to mount on the fascia is a small switch that should protrude no more than 3/4". What I cannot find on the web site of the manufacturers of the manual switch throws is any indication of hwo far out their push rods will extend from the fascia. Can anyone who uses these types of manual throws share with me how far out the push rods extend?
Switch control locations vis-a-vis fascia surface:
-
Manual control. The electrical switches that I hook up mechanically to the points are recessed, and accessed through a hole in the fascia that will accept fingers, but not much else.
-
Electrical control. The panels at fascia level are only a few degrees off vertical, and the studs of my hot probe system don’t protrude beyond the panel border. I also use a few rotary controls, which won’t move without the application of serious torque. The very few toggle switches (used for route control through spring switches) throw vertically. They are heavy-duty industrial units that WON’T move at the slightest touch.
-
Things which I have seen, but not used, include panels at the valence level overhead (not very practical for junior operators) and panels in drawers that are only pulled out to operate the controls thereon.
-
The ‘knob on a stick/wire’ manual controls usually project a fair distance (thickness of the knob plus 1/2 inch,) but there’s no rule that they can’t be recessed like my electrical switches. Likewise, those ‘look like 19th century armstrong lever’ manual throws are usually mounted on top of the layout or on a close-to-horizontal control panel or shelf. They, too, can be recessed.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
A hot probe system!!! Really? You’re serious? I haven’t heard of anyone using something like that for almost 40 years! I guess you are an “old schooler”!
I guess you can say that, although I can think of a couple of now-defunct clubs that had them more recently. What I really am is a firm believer in the KISS principle. What others use expensive (or inexpensive but flawed) proprietary parts for, I can duplicate with a couple of brass-headed machine screws, some wire and a couple of ten-for-a-buck diodes. Since, unlike my imagination, my budget is finite and limited, I always take the road less expensive. Hence point linkages made of old ball pen cartridges (until I run out,) bent paper clips, tiny screw eyes, worn-out 1/4-20 nuts and fishing line. The money I save is available for other things - like a six car brass EMU set that I have my eye on.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Not all mechanical throw devices are created equal. Humpyard’s levers can be mounted many different ways as shown on their web pages http://www.humpyard.com/ My layout is U-shaped with the control area at the bottom of the U on the inside. Turnouts to the left are controlled by a gang of those levers mounted topside to the left of the throttle and those on the right have their own gang of levers to the right. Take a look at them- they are not the typical push-pull knob. Roy
LooseClu - You bring up an interesting point that I had not considered before, that is where the controls for switch throws can be located. I had planned on keeping each control as close to its associated switch as possible. In the various layout photos published in MRR that I can remember, I have seen switch controls either located adjacent to their switch or on a single panel that also has a schematic of the track work that has been taped out. I had never considered having banks of switch controls as you have done. How do I prevent having to control a switch with my back to the switch or walking down to the bank of switched to flip one and then walk back to where “the action is”? How do you run an operating session with a bank of switch controls?
One thing I see I didn’t include in my post about fascia control locations - the location in relation to the points being controlled.
On a double garage filler meant to be operated by either a central (Master Panel) or distributed (Zone panel at each ‘town’) control system, or by train operator/crew moving along with their train, electric point motors can be operated from either panel or from immediately adjacent to the points. Manually operated points have their controls immediately adjacent to the points, since that’s where the operator has to be to spot cars accurately or position a locomotive under the coal chute or next to a water crane.
The, “Everything in the same place,” design described by LooseClu is fine for someone who wants to be a towerman controlling a large interlocking plant to allow trains to run through on the appropriate routes at the appropriate times. It leaves something to be desired for the way freight conductor or the industrial switching crew. I get the same result from my Master Panel, but more usually operate it as a CTC panel, controlling routing and signals, but not locomotives. The train crew on the spot handles manually controlled points.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - analog DC, MZL system)