you grounded the chicken wire to the same ground as the base?
No, I grounded the chicken wire to earth ground via the metal boxes from the layout lighting. However there is only one earth ground, and the ground prong of the wall wart would register continuity with the chicken wire. It's OK. It's just a humongous ground plane. Some of the best signal on the layout is on the upper deck.
Attachments
Images (1)
Elliot,
Here's what I suggest. In order to trouble shoot the problem disconnect your different sections/blocks fed by the base.
Then add them back one at a time. Testing at each stage. If you add in a section and things stop working you have found a problem.
One thing I would try is disconnect your extension cord to your layout conduit system from the wall socket.
Then run a three core earthed extension cord from that socket to your base. Run a separate extension to power your transformer(s). Then try some test runs. Got to be worth a try.
Nick
I'd like to second the idea of testing with an extension cord right from the wall outlet, just to eliminate the possibility that there is something wrong in the conduit under the layout.
I do not know if it will have any effect or not, but it sounds like you ran only two conductors through the conduit, leaving the metal tube to carry the earth ground. It is possible that there is some sort of coating on the conduit or that it is made of some cheap alloy, that has a high resistance, and thus doesn't provide a solid ground throughout. I generally see three conductor wire used, even inside conduit with a green/bare copper wire connected inside each and every junction box. Again, just tossing ideas out there.
JGL
Big_Boy_4005 posted:No, I grounded the chicken wire to earth ground via the metal boxes from the layout lighting. However there is only one earth ground, and the ground prong of the wall wart would register continuity with the chicken wire. It's OK. It's just a humongous ground plane. Some of the best signal on the layout is on the upper deck.
Seems like the signal would be better on the lower level under the wire.
Given all you've said about the layout, I still think the ground isn't the issue, but rather the large amount of track offers a significant capacitance to the ground from the outside rails. This has the tendency to attenuate the TMCC signal.
Elliot,
At this point I do believe you need some of Dale's magic, can't wait till he brings his testing equipment over to your layout and lets you know what is really going on. This has definitely been an informative thread on your big TMCC/Legcy layout!
PCRR/Dave
gunrunnerjohn posted:Given all you've said about the layout, I still think the ground isn't the issue, but rather the large amount of track offers a significant capacitance to the ground from the outside rails. This has the tendency to attenuate the TMCC signal.
Have we ascertained the voltage level of the Legacy base output...even though it works ok for a small layout or one 40 inch of track?
I went back but could not find what size is your layout?
bigdodgetrain posted:I went back but could not find what size is your layout?
This will probably help:
A little train nut humor . Everyone go to Big boys house and hold our hands over the engines as they run.... Fixed. (ok Fail )
BTW Nice layout and problem to have. 
Gregg posted:A little train nut humor . Everyone go to Big boys house and hold our hands over the engines as they run.... Fixed. (ok Fail )
It would give new meaning to the term "operating crew".
Let's address this morning's comments and ideas.
Nick, the systematic re-powering of the layout sections was actually next on my list. What happens when the base sees more layout and more trains? The extension cord test may not be possible due to the lack of cords of sufficient length. I'm not sure that would prove anything new, since I have now established some level of signal on the layout using the conduit based system. Losing that system is not really an option.
JGL, These photos actually prove that that is not an issue. The ground is good, and the conduit system is working correctly. If it wasn't, only one light would come on.
That is not the case.
There is also the matter of all my ground planes being tied to the conduit in one way or another. They are all working. Also, thank you for pointing Big Dodge in the right direction.
That said, it is probably best to just give the layout's vital statistics here, as they could be important to this discussion.
- The room is 1900 square feet
- The layout with all 3 levels is about 2200 square feet (yes it's bigger than the room)
- There are over 3000 feet of track
- There are just over 300 switches
Chuck, I would have thought that too, but the evidence doesn't seem to support that theory. I'm guessing that the decks are too far apart for the chicken wire below the upper to help signal on the lower. Dale's meter should be in today's mail, but it hasn't come yet. Mail comes shortly. I'll let you know the results.
John, I agree. I just want to exhaust these other possibilities before embarking on that amplifier. I do believe that is where we will end up. And pray that that ends it.
Dave, at this point, Dale is invited, but no plans to visit have been made. I just bought his signal strength meter. That's why this forum is so great. We can have this discussion, and even though it is specifically about my layout, the information shared may be useful to others and open to all.
One final thought, and this would be a little embarrassing if were true. The wire I used to connect the layout to the bases has a ring lug crimped onto it. I did this because the spade lug I was using, kept coming loose from the post on the TMCC base. When I went to connect it to the Legacy base, I had to drill out the ring to accept the larger post. However, the design of the Legacy post expects you to insert the wire into a hole through it. What if the ring didn't make contact with the post?
In my most recent successful tests, I clipped a test lead to the ring and the post, and things worked. <shrugs shoulders>
Attachments
Images (2)
Big_Boy_4005 posted:Gregg posted:A little train nut humor . Everyone go to Big boys house and hold our hands over the engines as they run.... Fixed. (ok Fail )
It would give new meaning to the term "operating crew".
Let's address this morning's comments and ideas.
Nick, the systematic re-powering of the layout sections was actually next on my list. What happens when the base sees more layout and more trains? The extension cord test may not be possible due to the lack of cords of sufficient length. I'm not sure that would prove anything new, since I have now established some level of signal on the layout using the conduit based system. Losing that system is not really an option.
JGL, These photos actually prove that that is not an issue. The ground is good, and the conduit system is working correctly. If it wasn't, only one light would come on.
That is not the case.
There is also the matter of all my ground planes being tied to the conduit in one way or another. They are all working. Also, thank you for pointing Big Dodge in the right direction.
That said, it is probably best to just give the layout's vital statistics here, as they could be important to this discussion.
- The room is 1900 square feet
- The layout with all 3 levels is about 2200 square feet (yes it's bigger than the room)
- There are over 3000 feet of track
- There are just over 300 switches
Chuck, I would have thought that too, but the evidence doesn't seem to support that theory. I'm guessing that the decks are too far apart for the chicken wire below the upper to help signal on the lower. Dale's meter should be in today's mail, but it hasn't come yet. Mail comes shortly. I'll let you know the results.
John, I agree. I just want to exhaust these other possibilities before embarking on that amplifier. I do believe that is where we will end up. And pray that that ends it.
Dave, at this point, Dale is invited, but no plans to visit have been made. I just bought his signal strength meter. That's why this forum is so great. We can have this discussion, and even though it is specifically about my layout, the information shared may be useful to others and open to all.
One final thought, and this would be a little embarrassing if were true. The wire I used to connect the layout to the bases has a ring lug crimped onto it. I did this because the spade lug I was using, kept coming loose from the post on the TMCC base. When I went to connect it to the Legacy base, I had to drill out the ring to accept the larger post. However, the design of the Legacy post expects you to insert the wire into a hole through it. What if the ring didn't make contact with the post?
In my most recent successful tests, I clipped a test lead to the ring and the post, and things worked. <shrugs shoulders>
I've seen 6 way posts with too much plastic height surrounding the metal base. Which prevented the ring from touching the metal base.
Yeah Chuck, between that and the plastic nut that goes on it, there was a chance it just wasn't making contact. When I drilled out the ring to make it fit the Legacy base post, I tried to pick the closest size that would be big enough. Hard to imagine that it wasn't touching somewhere, but it's possible. If some of these other tests pan out, I'll clip the ring off, tin the wire, and use the hole in the post as designed for the final connection.
Elliot, I hope it's a simple fix.
Wow 300 switches, 3000 feet of track!
I think you will need us all to come over and help.
I may need a bit of notice as since they got rid of Concorde the flight time is a bit excessive. 
Nick
OK guys, Dale's meter showed up yesterday. I just tried it out. The numbers on the TMCC base look pretty good. The Legacy base seemed to have nothing. I can't imagine how I got it to work at all, based on those numbers.
As I mentioned recently, I was wondering if the the ring lug used to connect the layout wasn't making contact with the post on the Legacy base. I'm now convinced that this is not the case, however, there may still be an issue with the post and an intermittent connection to the electronics inside.
The entire post was coming unscrewed from the base. I fiddled with it, trying to get it screwed on tight, and as I did, I noticed some near normal values flash by on the meter. When I finally got it screwed in all the way, the readings were back to near zero. I finally think this thing is ready for a "vacation" at Lionel.
In the meantime, I have no problem getting by on TMCC. I've been doing that forever, no big deal. Even with just TMCC, the track signal debugging can proceed.
Here's a question: When the TMCC and Legacy bases are both in use via the "Y" cable, is it possible that only the TMCC base is doing the work and the signal is just passing through? This might explain some of the results if that was possible. If it's not, then the Legacy base was working at some capacity, but far from full. Or, maybe I just got lucky and hit a sweet spot during the test.
I did one other test, an earth ground network quality test. I just measured the resistance of the conduit over about a 100' length. It measured .3Ω. That's probably close enough to zero to say that any ground plane wires tied to it will have about the same potential. Ie, it's a 100' terminal strip and I can tie to it anywhere with confidence.
This is what the terminal looks like inside my Legacy Base. If the ring lug is disconnected from the board or the terminal's shank, you won't have a good signal.
Attachments
Images (2)
Assuming your Y cable is correctly built and labeled, the TMCC Base passes the normal serial-output signal from the CAB-1 to the Legacy Base on one of the Legacy Base's 4 I/O channels. The processor in the Legacy Base incorporates that information with any data that is coming from the CAB-2 and anything else on the other three I/O channels and generates a composite "Track" signal.
Thanks for the peek inside Dale. This seems like a fairly simple thing to check, but I'm not sure if that would void the warranty (if I even still have one after all this time). I'm thinking it's worth a look before I send it away.
The TMCC base read 1570 no load, and 633 layout connected. I assume those values are OK.
That's interesting. It means that as previously observed, the Legacy base was working at some level, as demonstrated in the second video with the test track and the Cab-1 controlling the engine, and later with the engine on the layout in the final configuration.
Elliot,
Lionel have been really good when it comes to warantee on Legacy sets. They appear to have extended the warantee indefinitely.
Makes sense as if your controllers broken you won't be buying new engines.
Nick
If you take it apart, leave it upside down and you won't have to fiddle with the stuff that falls out. But put some sticky tape on the little button on the bottom so it won't fall into the works. I think the post is a double nut, first tighten the post to the case and then tighten the nut to hold the ring for conduction.
So far the warranty for the Legacy base and Cab2 seems to be lifetime but you need your invoice copy and you have to send the base and Cab2 in together. Since your base is 3 years old, there is an update for the charging circuit that needs to be done as well.
Chuck, that being the case, with charger update, maybe it's just better to let them do everything. An invoice may be hard to come by, I picked it up NEW off the bay. However, I believe I registered it. So if I did, they should have it on record.
While they're at it, will they load the latest software? If not, I'm planning on moving my computer to the center of the room next to the bases, so I can plug in the bases and the C/MRI. I can load it.
I don't know if they will update the software...maybe if you include the request in your warranty communications...and put a note taped to the unit outlining what the problem and request an update.
Elliot,
My Legacy base is a Cab 1L. One of the features is the ability to adjust the signal operating frequency in case there is a competing signal in the area like WiFi. From your Dale-o-meter measurements it sounds like a defect but I was wondering if something like frequency adjustment is part of your Legacy base.
S
Scott, the frequency adjustment you speak of has nothing to do with the track signal. The TMCC/Legacy track signal frequency is fixed at 455khz, and it not changeable. The frequency adjustment for Legacy or the BASE1L is for the remote to base communications, that happens in the 2.4ghz frequency band.
I had the Legacy Base signal output lug nut come loose on the inside of the base. Of course it happened near the beginning of a club meet. My engines on a storage track in the back room took off like mad. Took me a few minuets to figure out what was going on. Took the bottom off the base and tightened it up adding a lock washer. Never a problem before and not a problem since. Easy fix but under heavy duress.
Dan
That's encouraging to hear Dan. Since the charger issue isn't a real priority for me, and I forgot to contact Lionel today, maybe this is something I can do myself and not send it in. I'm sure I have the right lock washer in my mini hardware store. I was sort of dreading sending it anyway.
How about a home made Signal tester? Something like a coffee table about 4 feet long,2 feet wide, Maybe a foot or so high with a wire zig- zagged on the bottom with a wire lead and an alligator clip to clip on the earth ground. . Something really light that you could move around very easily and clip on to the wall outlet's earth ground. . Nothing fancy perhaps even made from a card board box.
Just place it over the engine instead of your hand.
Well, the real "signal tester" has been made, it's an R2LC with a meter on the unused signal strength pin of the receiver. Here's one rendition of such a car, I think this is the one that the NJ-HR guys use.
Attachments
Question...What the difference between the Legacy base and TMCC base track wise? (not remote to base ) Same type of signal?
GRJ, measuring the AC voltage form the signal pin will give you your signal strength? What would a strong signal be?
Yeah John, I need one of those too. I've even got a donor board in mind. I have that discussion marked so I can go back to it. Pin 13 converts the signal strength to voltage, then read the meter?
Let's see if I can get this base fixed today, put that thing to rest once and for all.
Finally, this has been a fantastic discussion of TMCC and Legacy. I know I've learned a lot, and dispelled a few myths along the way with all the tests. As I've said repeatedly, the upper deck signal isn't a problem. The lower deck signal used to be better, but now it is spotty. So, what changed? Answer, the chicken wire or maybe just the whole upper deck in general.
We are dealing with AM radio here, and we all know what happens when we go under a bridge or into a tunnel in our car. Even though the the chicken wire is connected to earth ground, it is not enhancing the signal, it is killing it in spots, and most of those spots are fairly deep under the upper deck. I'm just going to have to reintroduce the signal in the form of some ground plane wires.
Thoughts on my latest theory? Let me hear 'em guys!
Matt Makens posted:GRJ, measuring the AC voltage form the signal pin will give you your signal strength? What would a strong signal be?
I think its value comes as more of a comparison tool, testing levels of bad locations against those of known good ones. Absolute values probably depend on your base's output and can vary.
I am far from being an expert on this. One thought, How about contacting someone at NJ High Railers or another big 3 rail club maybe out your neck of the woods? Someone must have a solution for a large layout and signal issues.
Well, Ive said it before, if I was building a layout that large 3 rail or not, I would have used DCC. It is proven to run layouts that large.
George, there are no 3 rail clubs in this area. I'm aware of the NJ club and their successes in this arena and have the contact info for them. The solutions are definitely out there, it's really more a matter of choosing the right ones and implementing them. Deep down, I'm not worried. I'm confident that I can make this work. I will succeed where Tommy Z could not and switched to DCS as a result. Not an option!
Matt Makens posted:Well, Ive said it before, if I was building a layout that large 3 rail or not, I would have used DCC. It is proven to run layouts that large.
Convert all those engines? You've got to be kidding. I've come too far to turn back now. Maybe on my next layout. Or better yet on yours.
Big_Boy_4005 posted:Matt Makens posted:Well, Ive said it before, if I was building a layout that large 3 rail or not, I would have used DCC. It is proven to run layouts that large.
Convert all those engines? You've got to be kidding. I've come too far to turn back now. Maybe on my next layout.
DCC is great but that would be insane if you have 50-100 engines+ to convert. DCS might be the way to go. Also how about contacting Mike Reagan at Lionel or a tech guy at Lionel, USA.
The car comes from the NJ-HR club, and they used it to sort out their signal issues. I recall them saying when the signal was in the 40's, everything was great. When the signal dropped down past about 30 and lower, the wheels started to fall off. Bob De Guarde or Chris Lord at the NJ-HR are the folks to talk to, they were intimately involved in sorting out the signal issues there.
No George, DCS is a non-starter in my world. Again, it would mean convert the fleet, but beyond that, it doesn't do what I want to do. I have always hated its proprietary system since it was first introduced, and swore never to buy it. In spite of how nice MTH engines look, unless I can get them cheaply enough and convert them, you won't find them in my world.
To do what I want to do, I NEED THE CODES to run the trains. TMCC has always been open, and now Legacy is too. JMRI has the TMCC codes already incorporated into it, just like the DCC codes. I'm not sure if they've gotten Legacy in, but for what I'm doing simple speed control is the only function I need. My end goal is to have the computer be able to run mainline trains in a live action simulation. Nothing pre-programmed, just reacting to signals as if a human was controlling the train.
When it comes to talking directly to Lionel about my signal issues, the NJ club has already done that legwork. Chris Lord has graciously shared their findings here on the forum. I have read that material a few times, and again have the topic marked so I can go back to it. You won't find me participating in a wide range of topics here, but if it has to do with TMCC signal, I'm all over it, even if I'm just listening.
