Hi all,
I have what may be a basic question, but I can't find the answer anywhere. If I run a post-war ZW transformer through a Powermaster (for surge protection and eventually Command Control expansion), can I control track voltage and run conventional locomotives from the ZW or would I need a Command Control system right from the start?
Thanks.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
You would set the ZW at max as a power source and control the powermaster with the controller.
At this point, what I really want the powermaster to do for me is to be voltage protection, as I don't own a Command Control. So, given the fact that I can't vary the voltage from the ZW through the powermaster, would you suggest I just by a powerhouse lockon instead?
Yes. I believe it has a fast electronic breaker in it.
Personally, I'd dispense with the PowerMaster and use a quality circuit breaker in front of the ZW.
Personally, I'd dispense with the PowerMaster and use a quality circuit breaker in front of the ZW.
The Lockon would qualify for that, right?
I am happy to skip the Powerhouse lockon (as they are hard to find) and uses a high quality breaker. Can you make any recommendations?
The Powermaster and CAB 1 were the first components of the TMCC system to appear on the market, in late '95. Basically an extension of the transformer, the operator now had wireless handheld control of the layout, anywhere around it. The Command Base and full command control arrived about a year later. For twenty years, I have been using ZW's and Powermasters (5) to control a rather extensive layout. The PM's are connected to the layout in a traditional manner (lockons). They work very well, but they should not be used as circuit breakers. I have in-line fuses, of the quick blow variety, protecting each of the Powermasters. In any event, as suggested, you should have a "quality" breaker of some kind in front of the PM and ZW. It is also wise to be able to have a quick shut off of power to the layout, in the event of a surge of some kind, the most common cause being a derailment.
Here's a thread about the TMCC lockon and it results in a suggestion to use the PSX-AX. I do have knowledge of those and they are as fast as any breaker and flexible to convential requirements. I have the PSX-1AC I think.
https://ogrforum.com/t...01#41271595904109101
The knock on the TMCC Direct Lockon is that it kills the DCS signal. I used to have them and some TMCC locomotives would trip them as they came by the track power connection for reasons that I could never understand. A 10uf NP cap fixed that, but that shouldn't be necessary.
The PSX-AX is a good solution.
Thanks all. I ordered the PSX breaker.
...If I run a post-war ZW transformer through a Powermaster (for surge protection and eventually Command Control expansion)
You can't/shouldn't rely on the PM for surge protection, in fact the PowerMaster is in need of surge protection itself. A BiPolar TVS diode is recommended.
Except for track power control, a PM is not really needed for TMCC. I have found that the PM circuit breaker(whether the 135 or (135/180) version) however, is quite effective without being too sensitive for a typical load of up to ~ 7(10) amps.
I am with the others above on the PSX-AC, which also has surge protection built in as well as a very fast breaker (and quite a few other nifty features). I use them on my layout as well. IMO, the PSX-AC is about as good as it gets.
I received the PS1-AC and plan on connecting it to my PW-ZW. However, I think I am going to need additional power to run my layout. If I purchase a 180 transformer brick, do I need to electrically isolate the sections of track that it is powering or can I run its power to the same terminal block as my ZW (with a separate PS1-AC for the brick)?
You need to isolate them all. Each track and transformer output should be kept separate, electrically isolated from each other. If you also want to use a PSX-AC with the PH-180 you will need a separate one. The PH-180s have excellent breakers that trip very fast. They are right up there with the PSX-ACs. The PSX is a little faster, but to be fair, it also has a setting of around 8 amps and the PH-180 is 10 amps I believe so there is a slight difference. Many folks here are using the PH-180s with good results without a PSX-AC. The PH-180 is a new, modern and much different device than your old ZW.
I had one additional thought brought on by your last question above, if you are using multiple handle outputs of the ZW, they should be isolated as well. They should also have their own PSX-AC for each output that is connected to any electronic command control trains.
All I have is PH-180s with a PSX-AC for each one, so I am not familiar with ZW's or Powermasters. All I have is a DCS and a Legacy 990 system, no conventional, all command control. My setup is possibly overkill, but all my PSX-ACs still cost less than replacing the electronics in just one single engine. So, if they save an engine, I am money ahead.
TVS diodes are also still good things to add in addition to everything else. They are very inexpensive and easily added.
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
