I could probably take the other one John. Let me know when available. 
Rod
BillYo414; I could easily imagine Bigboys, EM-2's, 9000's etc having some troubles with the curved route through these, but it's good they handle the straight-thru with relative ease. Encouraging.
Rod
Hi,
My diagram works but I have also had mechanical and shorting issues with mine. I really need a DS at the place where it is located; not enough room for any other setup without giving up some operational flexibility.
I may try another Ross DS since some others have had no issues, but that is costly. I do have the newer version of the Atlas DS but I will lose my nice broad curves to put it in.
Need to do something soon so I can finish the yard.
@CAPPilot posted:My diagram works but I have also had mechanical and shorting issues with mine. I really need a DS at the place where it is located; not enough room for any other setup without giving up some operational flexibility.
Sounds right, for a few months, I though they were the Cat's Meow. Then I started having random little problems, and it's just gotten worse over time.
I use only three of the four legs of the Ross Double Switch w/DZ2500 (DS) at this time.
When I first installed the DS, some post war freight cars and 2500 series passenger cars would derail once in a while. After a lot of head scratching, determined there was a slight bow in the DS. I found by using a laser that shot a line down the track, and could see the bow. I installed a few pieces of Gargraves ties to force the DS to be straight down my mainline, and derail went away.
See the pic below - the bow shown in red is highly exaggerated, and the black rectangles is where I added the blocking to force the mainline to be straight.
I have a JLC Big Boy and a Virginian Allegheney, and both have no problem mainlining or switching off to the one leg I have connected.
In a separate issue, the DZ2500 has two revisions (that I know of). You can tell which revision you have by looking at the bottom of the DZ2500, looking at the circuit board. There is a circular pad about 1/4" in diameter. If the pad is silvery/solder color, it is the older revision. If the pad is gold tone, it is the newer revision. I had about a dozen of the old, silvery pad DZ2500s, and many of these would not completely switch in one direction (always the same direction). The DZ2500 would occasionally seem to complete the switch, but then would back up a bit (guessing on gear tooth of the DZ2500s motor), allowing for possible derailment. Dennis Zander charged me $8 per switch for me to ship him the old revision DZ2500 with its controller, then he would send me new revision DZ2500s. The existence of these two different revisions was covered in an earlier post on this forum, but I didn't find with a quick search.
Attachments
Images (1)
@MED posted:I use only three of the four legs of the Ross Double Switch w/DZ2500 (DS) at this time.
When I first installed the DS, some post war freight cars and 2500 series passenger cars would derail once in a while. After a lot of head scratching, determined there was a slight bow in the DS. I found by using a laser that shot a line down the track, and could see the bow. I installed a few pieces of Gargraves ties to force the DS to be straight down my mainline, and derail went away.
MED thanks for sharing this insightful information; who would have guessed it? it seems there is a lot more about the RCS DSS than you would imagine. Question; in correcting the A-A route bow, what was the effect if any on the B-B route? I assume you also used a straight edge along the rail tops to assure the switch is completely level?
Also interesting about the revisions to the 2500. They are apparently not all created equal. Its good that Dennis will replace them with the revised version, even if there is a small handling charge involved. In my experience Dennis is very co-operative about replacing defective or failed product; this based on only a couple of instances, and neither were 2500's.
Rod
@Rod Stewart sorry I did not make clear the bow I had. The bow was NOT A to A as if you lifted one end of the DS and bent it up. The bow was side to side, as if you had the DS flat on the table, held one A in place, then pushed laterally on the other A. As I mentioned, I used a device I bought for woodworking that casts a straight laser line along a surface. I shot the laser line down the three rails from A to A, and could see the bow. The blocking I installed was to anchor the two A ends in place, then I pushed laterally mid-DS till rails were straight with laser line, then screwed down the last anchor to hold in place.
I only use one off the main at this time - it is connected to a Ross #4 switch (think I am correctly it is a #4 - same angle as the DS). Have no trouble with large or small engines with their rolling stock slowing traversing from an A leg to a B leg.
I did have to install my home built version of a circuit @gunrunnerjohn has posted a while back. The circuit uses the Yellow/Green wires from the DS's DZ2500s to control relays and feed power into some fixed rail sections, as these engines roller spacing is to short for the DS as manufactured. I found for one engine, I had to switch Power or Ground (using DPDT relays as @gunrunnerjohn included in his design) as I had one engine whose wheelbase also hit a dead zone in the way the DS is manufactured.
As you might guess, I spent a lot of time trying to figure out problems with running through the DS. Because the DS is withing 6 inches of the edge of my table, and its four feet down, I do not run at high speeds through the main A to A (I can run with some speed, about 1/2 speed on the CAB2 for my Big Boy), and creep through A to B to #4 switch - in fact I was surprised the Big Boy actually transversed without a problem.
Sorry, but I did not keep any pictures of any work on the "old" DZ2500 problem. To find the problem, I would through the switch, then gently push sideways on the points. Again, only failed in one direction - DZ2500 always move towards Red LED, or always move towards Green LED, but don't remember which. When "failed" pushing sideways would reveal a gap large enough for a wheel flange to pass through. Failed about 40% of the time. I used tape below the arm and marked the position of the arm for a "worked" switching and a "failed" switching, and carefully watched as the arm moved, and was able to detect and verify the switching failed when the arm moved fully, then seemed to back up a bit.
MED; sorry for the confusion; I DID understand that it was a side to side bow that was causing the problem. I was also interested in whether there might also be an up/down deflection. But I was pretty sure you would have checked that out also. I am sure you had to spend a ton of time fine tuning to get it just right and operational. 
The problem with the 2500's relaxing and allowing the points to shift; was that with the earlier rev 2500's? You mentioned earlier that you had Dennis upgrade them to a later rev, that I assume is holding the points in position better?
Did you wind up using two relays to switch the grounded rails as well as the hot rails; each triggered by one of the 2500's? I think that is how it would have to be done using grj's replacement relay board. The good news is that the latter have DPDT relays so that both hot and ground rails can be alternately powered depending on the relay position. Each relay board would be triggered by one of the two 2500's; though I have not worked out the wiring hookup yet.
The message I am getting is that there is a lot more to the care and feeding of these DSS's than meets the eye! They are pretty neat though, especially when behaving! I am also quite impressed that a BigBoy can make it, through the diverging route even. Who would have guessed that could happen?
Rod
@Rod Stewart it is the "old" DZ2500 that I had the problem of failed switching with. Again, on the bottom of the DZ2500, there was a large dot approximately 1/4" in diameter - silvery/solder color "old", gold tone "new". I have not had the failed switching problem with the newer version.
BTW - I encountered the DZ2500 failed switching problem on a standard switch with a single turnout. Once I knew the problem and had communicated via email a lot with Dennis Zander of Z stuff for trains, Dennis told me about the color of the dot indicator and about exchanging for new version at $8 per DZ2500. If you are buying now, I would check for the gold tone dot, but I doubt the old version is used in production any more.
Yes, I used two DPDT relays to accomplish power/ground switching to certain fixed rail sections of the DS. If I remember, @gunrunnerjohn circuit board uses a DPDT relay, and you would need to use two of these circuit boards for the DS.
@MED posted:@Rod Stewart it is the "old" DZ2500 that I had the problem of failed switching with. Again, on the bottom of the DZ2500, there was a large dot approximately 1/4" in diameter - silvery/solder color "old", gold tone "new". I have not had the failed switching problem with the newer version.
First time I heard about the gold dot! I'm thinking maybe that's some of my problem, I pulled out my spares, I have five with silver dots, one with a gold dot!
@MED posted:Dennis told me about the color of the dot indicator and about exchanging for new version at $8 per DZ2500. If you are buying now, I would check for the gold tone dot, but I doubt the old version is used in production any more.
Clearly, I need to do this Monday!
the newer ones are the gold dot 2500Cs.
as I said in previous thread above.
I controlled these like two turnouts; using two 2500C switch machines with two 1008s to switch the rails power.
And they do have to flat no bends.
@AlanRail posted:the newer ones are the gold dot 2500Cs.
as I said in previous thread above.
I controlled these like two turnouts; using two 2500C switch machines with two 1008s to switch the rails power.
And they do have to flat no bends.
Alan, my layout platform was laser leveled and it also perfectly flat, I still have issues with the DSS.
I just fired off an email to Dennis to arrange for a trade-in off all the stuff in my spare parts plus the broken switch machines that are waiting. When I get those, I'll swap them out and upgrade another batch. Maybe the gold dot ones will fix some of the other DZ-2500 issues I'm having.
@Rod Stewart I think Ross/Gargraves/Atlas style track requires some extra attention because it's not extremely rigid. For example, I had a weird derailment two weeks ago. I reversed my Big Boy so it was going counter clockwise around the layout. I had completed many laps at high speed going clockwise so I confidently cranked up the speed...tender came off the rails. Turns out I didn't have the curved sections pushed together. I had an 0-80 connected to an 0-84. The rigid wheel base of the tender had enough room from 0-84 to 0-80 but not the other way around. I pushed the sections together so each rail touched, and the problem went away.
It sure is hard to concisely describe geometry with words 
I hope that made sense. I'm just trying to say that Gargraves/Ross/Atlas don't lock together at the ends so they can be prone to misalignment. I connected one leg of my DSS to the existing track, screwed down the remaining three legs, and then added more track. I wonder if they helped me maintain alignment and has been part of my success so far.
@BillYo414 posted:I connected one leg of my DSS to the existing track, screwed down the remaining three legs, and then added more track. I wonder if they helped me maintain alignment and has been part of my success so far.
Good input. That may very well be why your DSS seems quite rock solid. I am getting the sense that these guys are quite prone to problems caused by minor misalignment, bowing, whatever. Good trackwork is always a wise investment in time.
@MED posted:In a separate issue, the DZ2500 has two revisions (that I know of). You can tell which revision you have by looking at the bottom of the DZ2500, looking at the circuit board. There is a circular pad about 1/4" in diameter. If the pad is silvery/solder color, it is the older revision. If the pad is gold tone, it is the newer revision. I had about a dozen of the old, silvery pad DZ2500s, and many of these would not completely switch in one direction (always the same direction). The DZ2500 would occasionally seem to complete the switch, but then would back up a bit (guessing on gear tooth of the DZ2500s motor), allowing for possible derailment. Dennis Zander charged me $8 per switch for me to ship him the old revision DZ2500 with its controller, then he would send me new revision DZ2500s. The existence of these two different revisions was covered in an earlier post on this forum, but I didn't find with a quick search.
That ship has sailed, I just got an email back, he wants $25/ea for the swap! Basically, he's charging you the dealer price for the switch machines, so the "trade-in" is really just more sales. 
I think I read here that the difference between the DZ2500's is that the old silver dot one doesn't throw the switch all the way sometimes. So...what is the electrical difference that the gold dot has that makes it work reliably? Can the silver dot one be modified to become a gold dot version?
@cjack posted:I think I read here that the difference between the DZ2500's is that the old silver dot one doesn't throw the switch all the way sometimes. So...what is the electrical difference that the gold dot has that makes it work reliably? Can the silver dot one be modified to become a gold dot version?
I doubt it.
I believe the difference is in the bottom of the switch there is a sliding contact arrangement using the PCB for switching. The ones I have that contact surface is solder tinned. That should never be done if you're using the copper for contacts. Normally, a PCB with gold flash is used for contacts, which is probably what the gold dot pieces use. I suspect the tinned contacts were a mistake in manufacturing.
Don't mean to steer this thread awry, but threads like this make me think about a few things. I've been out of O gauge for a while now, but I did have a fully functional decent sized layout with all Ross track and switches, operating accessories and all. It was pretty sweet actually, I do miss it sometimes. Whole layout all original TMCC Cab1 controlled with all the original control boxes, the TPC3000, BPC3000, ASC3000, OTC3000, AMC3000, the ARC (my fav - that was fun to play with). I went all in on it when it first came out. I bought the boxes not from Lionel, but from another outfit, a cool guy named Lou was the boss over there and designer I believe of a lot of the TMCC technology. I think he and Neil Young worked together to get the TMCC system put together. Maybe not, but that is what I have always thought. I talked to Lou a few times when I had a question, super nice guy.
I had 12 single Ross switches and a double crossover with DZ 1500 switch machines controlled by ASCs. DZ1008 relays in a few switches to take out any dead spots.
Everything worked perfect for 15 years. I guess my point is, why did they have to make things more difficult than what seemed like the perfect system to me. I can’t say there weren’t moments of frustration, there was a learning curve, going downstairs at 2 am cuz I just figured it out! But once it got all dialed in it was flawless, at least for me it was. I bailed when it went it went to Legacy. I built layout for a guy with the original Legacy system and I just didn't like it, the Cab2 was cumbersome, the whole thing seemed to me like overkill. Then they want you to buy a whole new control system, no thanks. I am into prewar standard gauge now, I guess you could say the polar opposite. I think I got shocked haha.
I hope you guys figure the double slip out, I am sure you will, somebody must have somewhere, and I know you guys will be persistent. Meanwhile I'm going to try and see if I can get a pair of prewar std gauge switches operating. Wish me luck.
Back to your regularly scheduled program, over & out.
Cheers, W1,
