Ross #6 Switch Short

Yep, I’ve had to do that on several Ross switches. Ross needs to eliminate those two spikes.

It is great that you discovered this variant.   I imagine you contacted Steve at Ross right away even before you alerted us so he could catch anything in process, right?

What was Steve's response?

I have a number of locomotives that short going through some of the Ross switches, it all seems to stem from the extension they put on the middle rail that gets too close to the outside rail.  It appears the only cure will be to grind some of this rail away to give more space for the wheels.  Several MTH locomotives are pretty likely to short on these switches as is my Lionel JLC Challenger and many older 3rd Rail steamers.  Just wondering if anyone else has had this issue?

I have had a similar situation with some ross switches.   I have tried two methods of trying to fix the problem.  One get some clear  nail polish and put a few layers on the area of the short.  A quick fix is to get some tape, either black or clear and cover the area with the tape.

Marty

Gunrunner - I had the opposite issue with my switch. That "outer rail" just above your callout has no continuity to the neutral leg, so for me it is an electrically dead spot. I was going to jumper that section then realized it would probably create a short just as you are describing. Those inner rails really do not need connectivity, as long as both outboard rails have neutral connectivity.  Wonder why my Ross is different from yours?  Even with my point in the position shown, that rail still has no conductivity - but that should not matter since the point would be thrown moving through the switch.

All of my switches were "Ross Ready", and all the center rails are connected at the factory.  There's obviously a reason for the shape and positioning of this rail or they wouldn't be putting it into the switch.

@Tom Tee posted:

It is great that you discovered this variant.   I imagine you contacted Steve at Ross right away even before you alerted us so he could catch anything in process, right?

What was Steve's response?

I don’t think Steve needs to respond. It’s just the nature of the beast. It’s not a constant problem. If you have chatter on the non detail function the two spikes are the first place to look. Removing them is not going to hurt the switch in any way.

@CAPPilot posted:

I installed a crossover using Ross #6 switches with the DZ-2500.  Before I installed it, I checked out the wiring and functions of the DZ-2500, including non-derailing and lead rail power, and everything worked well.  Because it is a crossover and both switches work together, I did not wire the non-derailing function for the crossover track.

Ron, just curious.  Why the long ugly yellow wires, can't you just drop those straight down?

They are color coded for specific functions so I don't mix up attaching the wires under the layout.  Also, I want to keep working under the layout to a minimum.

Switch non-derail:

Comm: purple (this one is blue, but changing)

Thru: yellow (2 wires, one connected to the other switch for crossover.  Will be one next time.)

Out: Green

Switch lead rails:

Thru: white

Out: gray

Hot: blue

I could go straight down but I solder the wires before installing, and just haven't worried about lining up holes.  These wires are small and will be covered by ballast when finished.  I really like those wire connectors; easy and quick.

The hardest part was installing the breakout board with the cut tubing as spacers.  I've done several switches this way, but these were harder to get at.  In the future I'm going to install them on a board and just glue the board to the table.  Below was an early test.  The board will be thinner and the BB will be next to the edge.

I solder the track power wires after installation, so those wires go straight down.  These are still noticeable since I solder them to the side of the rail, not the bottom like you do.  Again, once ballasted I don't noticed them.

The spacers were a PITA until I cracked the code.  I laid a bunch of them on the bench and super-glued the spacers to all of them, then took them under the layout.

Hi John,  now that you have troubleshooted most of your Ross switches what were most of the issues that you encountered and how did you fix them?  Several of us probably encounter the same issues and could use your advice.

@amtrack5899 posted:

Hi John,  now that you have troubleshooted most of your Ross switches what were most of the issues that you encountered and how did you fix them?  Several of us probably encounter the same issues and could use your advice.

Well, a significant issue was the oddly shaped center rail with the dog-leg pointing to the outside rail.  I had to grind a bunch of these down to that the wheels didn't clip them and short out.  I also found a few of the rail stakes would sometimes clip the flanges and cause the same issue.  I still have a couple of engines that won't go past these, the worst offender is the MTH 2500 HP Transfer Engine, it has six wheel trucks, and the floating "dummy" wheels are shorting as they go past these points, even after grinding them down.

Two of the switches had switch rails that hadn't been ground with the proper taper and would derail many locomotives on the "out" path if they weren't going very slow through the switch.  The rail was just blunt on the end, and not the knife-thin taper you're used to seeing there.  I had to warm up the Dremel with a Cratex abrasive wheel and fix those.

By far the biggest issue has been the DZ-2500 switch machines, if I had it to do over again, I wouldn't go this route!  Trying to get all of them adjusted so they work all of the time has been a battle.

I believe the primary issue is the stiffness of the springs. The tiny switch motor just doesn't have the power to fight against the spring tension.  For a number of the switches, there was no way to "center" the switch machine so that both paths worked, it would always stall on one side.  If I adjusted it so that side barely made it, the other side required too much force and the switch machine stalls on that side.  Catch-22!  I got a few light springs from Z-Stuff that worked well in these cases, but those are no more.  I've been "modifying" the stiffer springs using the same Cratex wheel and taking some material off them to weaken them, that works, but of the removal isn't even, they have a weak spot that is a problem.

I assume the spring stiffness is trial and error.  Did you remove material off the outside of both hubs or just one hub of the spring? Just curious so I don’t reinvent the wheel.

I just removed material on the sides of the two loops, I tried to make the removal even across the whole spring.   A couple I got thin spots, that caused issues with the spring and I had to discard those.

Remove material between the arrows, if you remove it evenly, they work pretty much like the light springs I got from Z-Stuff.

Excuse my ignorance but when you say the sides of the two loops do you mean the area around the  2 outer circumference or the 3 flat spots in between the hubs?

I just took a little material off the sides of the spring between the arrows.  I didn't make thin spots, I took material off all the wire between the two arrows.

GRG - I understand what you did with the springs.

If you removed material from the bent sections I could understand how you could reduce the spring force. However at the connecting sections - those would be either under compression or tension due to spring force applied. Its not clear to me how removing material at those spots makes any difference except make the connection weaker.  I am just a simple minded engineer who occasionally needs things explained to him. BTW I prefer the 1000 to the 2500 mainly because I can throw a switch manually with the 1000 but no way with the 2500 unless powered. I think the 2500s hang up more frequently as well.

The whole point of the exercise was to reduce the strength of the springs, i.e. make them weaker!  That way when the DZ-2500 runs the switch into the stops and wants to compress the spring a bit, it has enough strength to compress it enough to reach the end of the switch machine's travel.  There was never an issue of the force needed to move the points on the Ross switches, they move very easily.  The problem is the stock springs are too strong and the "slack" that is needed to allow the switch machine to complete it's travel isn't there.

Remember, the basic problem is the switch machine moves farther than the switch points, so there has to be somewhere to take up the excess travel.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Well, a significant issue was the oddly shaped center rail with the dog-leg pointing to the outside rail.  I had to grind a bunch of these down to that the wheels didn't clip them and short out.  I also found a few of the rail stakes would sometimes clip the flanges and cause the same issue.  I still have a couple of engines that won't go past these, the worst offender is the MTH 2500 HP Transfer Engine, it has six wheel trucks, and the floating "dummy" wheels are shorting as they go past these points, even after grinding them down.

Two of the switches had switch rails that hadn't been ground with the proper taper and would derail many locomotives on the "out" path if they weren't going very slow through the switch.  The rail was just blunt on the end, and not the knife-thin taper you're used to seeing there.  I had to warm up the Dremel with a Cratex abrasive wheel and fix those.

I wound up having to do the same thing.  They biggest offenders seem to be the Menard's cars.

Brendan

@Brendan posted:

I wound up having to do the same thing.  They biggest offenders seem to be the Menard's cars.

Mine were totally unshaped, so virtually anything would have a big "jolt" when they hit the rounded end.  At any speed, it would derail almost anything, including most locomotives.

Thanks John,  I appreciate the feedback. The weaker springs and trimming back the dog leg should solve the majority of my switch issues.

Scouting Dad, I agree I like the ability to manually throw the DZ1000 but the main reason I switched to the DZ2500 was due to there low profile.  The DZ1000 sit higher and some of the steam engine cow catchers will hit the housing. You can throw the DZ2500 switch by pushing the button on top of the switch.

Yep I understand the 1000s are taller and pose some problems. I have not had any issues with any of my stock or engines hitting them - of course where you put them and which direction trains run does matter.  Yes the 2500s will switch when powered, but they are dead and cannot be moved if you are working on your layout and trying to adjust the springs without power, let alone trying to see if there are any clearance issues with point movement. That said there are some pretty neat control configurations can be run off them and there are no little screws which can be overtightened so wires can't be attached to the motor. I ended up soldering those wires in on several "used" 1000 switch motors.

I splurged and bought the CSM2 breakout boards to connect the DZ-2500 switch machines.  Make it a lot easier to wire everything up neatly.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I have a number of locomotives that short going through some of the Ross switches, it all seems to stem from the extension they put on the middle rail that gets too close to the outside rail.  It appears the only cure will be to grind some of this rail away to give more space for the wheels.  Several MTH locomotives are pretty likely to short on these switches as is my Lionel JLC Challenger and many older 3rd Rail steamers.  Just wondering if anyone else has had this issue?

My MTH Premier 2-10-4s short in that area through an 072 Ross switch. I have an easy solution: cover the spot they short with a thin piece of electrical tape. I did that and haven't had an issue for years.

The side of the wheels normally clip those for me.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

The side of the wheels normally clip those for me.

Same issue with the 2-10-4s. lower side of the wheel hits that rail. I just covered it with electrical tape down to the spikes. Problem solved.

I'd do that, but my MTH 2500HP Transfer Engine hits about half the switches, I'd like a fix that won't wear out.

After following this post, I realized I have a couple of cars and engines which must be hitting the dog leg identified in the previous photos. I do not have a shorting issue, but these cars hit this section with a big thump. Makes no sense to me as these dog legs are flush with the rails. Something must be protruding below the plane of the rails, which I can't see. I find it hard to believe this is an issue with Ross switches for certain types of cars/engines. I'll consider creating a taper on a couple of the problematic legs. Not super excited about blowing metal shavings all over the layout doing this.

Actually, if they're doing the big "thump" on the out route, it may be a mis-shapen rail here.  I had two switches that those rails weren't ground  at all and just had a big rounded edge.  As you can see, the proper shape is ground down to a very thin entry point.  I took my Dremel with a Cratex abrasive polishing wheel to these to fix that issue.

Yes, you have to clean up all the metal filings after the fact, no way around that.  This is the very reason that I'm trying to run most of my stuff before any landscaping and ballast goes down, easy clean up of issues like this.

@ScoutingDad posted:

...I'll consider creating a taper on a couple of the problematic legs. Not super excited about blowing metal shavings all over the layout doing this.

Something I sometimes do to minimize dust and chips scattering when doing this type of work in an otherwise clean area.  Take a ~12" x 12 x 12" cardboard box and line it with a plastic bag taped to the box's edges.   Position the box on the chip discharge side of the tool close to the work piece.  In addition to the plastic bag being disposable with most of the debris, it cushions the chips so they are less likely to bounce back out.  You could also position other boxes or partitions around the work area to minimize the chips and dust scattering.  For even more shielding, one could fashion a shroud around the tool.  There are lots of examples of homemade abrasive tool shrouds online.  Depending on the practicality of using a vacuum while doing the work, this may also be helpful.  Sometimes having a helper hold the vac nozzle is beneficial.

I just lay rags over everything around the work area, take them out back and shake them when done.