What kind of transformers for best Legacy and DCS operation?

Sort of been following your other posts on this subject.  I think your pure vs chopped sine wave answer has been addressed as not a problem (maybe not).  So, for your four additional lines you plan to add either two Z-4000s (180 watts on each of two channels) or one ZW-L (620 watts shared on four channels) would work.  You might be able to find a new ZW-L cheaper than two new Z-4000s, but there are some good deals on used Z-4000s out there.

You did not mention how you will control your trains.  If you plan to run command only, or command only on two or more loops, then either transformer is good.  I think an issue to consider is if you plan to run conventional on all six loops loop.  Either transformer would work if you run conventional through either the TIU or a Legacy base (a PowerMaster circuit is already on each ZW-L channel), by using the handheld controller.  However, if you prefer the easy use of a transformer handle to control your conventional trains on all loops, then getting two Z-4000s would be better.

https://ogrforum.com/t...nel-180-brick-to-dcs

bigdodgetrain posted:

https://ogrforum.com/t...nel-180-brick-to-dcs

Using PH180 bricks is an excellent option if running command only or conventional through the TIU.  The bricks at a forum sponsor's site is $75, or $300 for four to control your four additional loops.  Even if you plan to use Legacy to control your conventional trains, the cost is still low since the Legacy PowerMaster is also only $75, bringing the total to $600 for four loops.  If you do not need 180 watts per loop, you can run two or more TIU channels off one PH180 saving even more.

It looks like you will be adding tracks over time.  An additional advantage of the PH180 (or PH180 + LPM) is you can buy only what you need as you expand your layout.

Downside:  No handles for conventional control if that is what you want.

(Disclaimer: I use PH180s and PowerMasters on my layout, which I run almost always under command control.  I do run conventional every once in a long while using the Cab2.  This setup works well for me.)

Thanks Ron - I run all command operations.

Paul,

    I run DCS & Legacy, even on the same tracks, no problem what so ever, build using the Block Method with the 12 track join discipline, make sure all your transformers are in Phase, and your layout will run perfectly.  I have 3 Z4K Transformers, 3 old ZW's and 2 KW's that I use to power my different Christmas layouts, depending on their size at the time.  One big advantage with the Z4K Transformer is the Remote Commander Side Receiver, that can be added to the Z4K, to open up all kinds of different running options from the Hand Held Remote Control.  I really like the ZW-L for both the massive power and the programmable channels, the cost however is a big deterrent, especially when you can pick up a used Z4K or even 2 of them for much less money, than one ZW-L.  I will eventually own the ZW-L also, when I can find one used at a reasonable price.  The trick is to purchase the Z4K Transformers, in like new condition for about 1/2 the cost of new.  I acquired 2 of my Z4K Transformers in this manner, do a little horse trading and purchase the power you want at a reasonable cost.

PCRR/Dave

Dave, is the Remote Command receiver just for conventional operation?

Does anyone know if the ZW-L hosts banana plugs like the Z-4000?

Paul,

    What the Z4K Remote Commander Side Receiver actually does is allow remote control operation of Conventional & P1 Engines via your DCS Hand Held Remote Control (HHRC) right with your P2/P3 or TMCC/Legacy Command Control Engines, even on the same track, if you so desire.  The side receiver allows the older Conventional Engines to operate smoother and with better slower speed control, than ever before, using the TR Z4K mode.  Engineered so you can actually run all your different Engines, old and new, right from the same DCS HHRC, IMO a very serious running option.  Conventional, P1, P2, P3 & TMCC/ Legacy all from one HHRC, now that is serious modern RC Engineering, with a + or - Engineering Tolerance that is just unbelievable for Toy Train Remote Control.  

PCRR/Dave

Paul Kallus posted:

Thanks Ron - I run all command operations.

Paul,

I apologize if this was mentioned on another post and I missed it.

For command only, I would go with the PH180 direct to the TIU as shown in the link above.  Solid pure sign wave performer, very fast CB.

Thanks again guys.

I finished reading George Brown's review of the ZW-L in Run's 263 and 264. While all his command engines performed well, he had some problems with older engines and dropped some subtle hints about subjecting them to the "stress of contemporary pulsed AC power." I really don't understand the difference between pure sine and chopped - which I take the latter as "pulsed." See run 264 for the review.

For command only operation (DCS and/or Legacy) I certainly agree with the others above on the PH-180's. That is all I use, great device. It doesn't get any better than these for pure power at any price, IMO.

Running all command, I can't think of a better power source than the PH180's.  They are more cost effective and have better built in circuit  protection than any other option out there (ZW-L has equal/better circuit protection, but at twice the cost).  

As far as pure vs chopped sine wave, at full throttle there is no practical difference.  While scientifically speaking it is still not a "pure" sine wave, it is close enough as not to matter when full voltage is applied.  In a "chopped" wave, the power is turned on and off in time with the frequency of the AC wave, "chopping" some portion of each wave off from the leading edge.  This effectively reduces the amount of energy available to power things.  for things like motors, light bulbs, and electromagnetic e-units, this works fine.  With electronics, however, the voltage can be read wrong, especially if the circuit was designed expecting a pure sine wave of varying voltage.  When the throttle is all the way up, the full wave is allowed to pass through on every cycle.  As with other PWM (pulse width modulation) systems, a true 100% on time isn't usually possible for the electronics to do, but with a sine wave the tiny bit of distortion for the .1% of the wave that is missing is going to be less than the regular noise on any transformer.  

(In the image the filled in sections show the part of the wave that is "turned on", The start of each wave "chopped" off.)

I've mentioned this in several posts, and am still not absolutely certain, but no one has yet corrected me or mentioned a case where it isn't true;  PS2/3 DCS command locomotives will run fine on chopped wave transformers.  it is only PS1 and some other QSI electronics that have problems.  

The short of it is, for command control, there is no difference in a pure sine wave transformer and a chopped wave one.  It only matters for conventional control, and then only for early electronic systems that are confused by the chopped waveform.  

My running theory is that these systems use a very simple method to read the track voltage, to figure out about how fast the engine is moving, that will see full voltage any time the throttle is more than half way up on a chopped wave transformer and this mucks things up.  

JGL

Hey Paul,

I have the ZW-L.  I run command locs and also conventional locs.  I have not had any problems.  In fact, the old pulmor engines run better and also get better low speed performance.  When you set the voltage to max on a ZW-L channel, you almost eliminate the chopped sign wave.  If you have the funds, you can't go wrong with the ZW-L.  Its a work horse with plenty of power.  Since you have Legacy, you will have full control of the ZW-L with the remote.  You can even reset the electronic circuit breaker on the ZW-L from the remote.  The only thing you cannot reset is the manual circuit breaker.  The ZW-L has two circuit breakers for each channel.  I really like that feature.

Since you are close by, contact me if you would like to come over.  You can check out ZW-L in person to see if you want that or another Z-4000.

Thanks Joe for the offer. I'll send an e-mail.

fyi, I happened to find Run 265 and it contains George Brown's part III review of the ZW-L and goes into details why Lionel chose to use the chopped sine wave. It seems the reason centers on its ability to provide ample power to engines running in conventional mode.