Please clarify your question. Are you asking how many DS64s you need to run 8 different routes, EACH of which will throw 27 switches? Or are you saying that all 27 switches will be operated by one or more of the routes?
1 DS64 can control 8 routes and each route can control 8 switches. 1 of those switches can trigger another route on a different DS64, but it cannot trigger another route on the same DS64.
The DS64 does not have to be actually operating any switches in order to use the route function.
Each of the 8 routes would contain no more than 8 of the 27 turnouts and probably only about 3 or 4. Thanks for the info. It’s starting to make sense now. I appreciate it.
Absolutely, and the need for this ability is critical for answering the rest of your post. The quick answer is if you have no more than 8 routes, and no one of them has more than 8 turnouts in it, then one DS64 would be enough, maybe, and I’ll explain the maybe. Each route has up to 8 “cells”, with each cell having an address and a throw or close command. The first cell is the trigger for the route, so the turnout and position in the first cell cannot be set without triggering the route. As long as any route that has 8 turnouts has at least one turnout that does not have to be controlled seperately, then a single DS64 can handle it(think of a yard ladder, would you ever need to throw the last turnout in a yard ladder if the rest of the yard was not alligned for it?). If every turnout in a route has to be controllable seperately without triggering the route, then you are limited to 7 turnouts in a route in a single DS64(in this case, you would use a “phantom turnout”, that is an address that is not actually being used by a turnout, as the trigger for the route). I think it is important to point out that as long as there is at least one turnout in the route that you do not need seperate control of, then you can make that turnout the trigger and you can control 8 turnouts in a route. It is also important to point out that, for example, if “turnout 123 close” is a route trigger, then “turnout 123 throw” will not trigger that route, and can trigger a seperate route.
You can also do this as I mentioned with JMRI. If you already have a computer interface (Locobuffer or PR-3) then JMRI is free, and you cna implement routes very easily with the Panel Pro component of JMRI, using the LS-150’s as the turnout control. Each turnout has an address already set, you don’t change that. What routes are, more or less, are ‘dummy’ turnout addresses that oeprate one or more real addresses. Or they can be nested where one route triggers another route plus a single address or two. At any rate, this is compeltely doable in JMRI with no additioanl hardware (again assumign you have a computer interface for your Zephyr or DB150). You don’t even need a DT400 throttle to access them, the Zephyr keypad can operate switch addresses. So you can Close #5, and what it actually does is close #10,11, and 14, and open #12 and 13. No DS-64’s, No DCS100 command station upgrade. You can further configure a virtual control panel on the computer screen where you cna click the button and do the same thing as using the throttle to trigger the routes.
The switch commands do not go directly out of the DS64 to the track outputs. The DS64 is not a booster. It sends the commands to Loconet and then they are passed through the booster and to the track. The DS64 can receive commands via either method, if you have the track inputs connected to the DS64 and are not using local power only and OptSw14 is set for factory default.
Thanks for clearing that up. That is what I meant(when I said “track outputs” I meant the track outputs on the command station and/or booster), but after reading your post and then re-reading mine, I can see where my description can be confusing.
My goal was to clear this up for anyone reding this. I knew what you meant. I had to reread the entire thread twice to pickup all of the details including that has has Lenz150s with a Zeyphr system. If this had been a non-Loconet arrange, the proposed solution wouldn’t have worked.