# How do I wire this?



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

Could anybody help me out with wiring regarding placement of rail breaks and power feeds. Any help much appreciated. HO with Peco Code 83 live frog turnouts throughout.


----------



## T-Man (May 16, 2008)

I see 5 lanes. 4 are just spurs from number one. NUmbe4 spur goes into number 5, you need a break between 4 and 5,
1 and 2 continue off screen. 2 can be isolated but may not be needed. 3 is a return spur to 2, so that could be isolated at both ends if you choose. If you do 3 should be separated from 4. 4 is very short.

I just looked at the bottom and went up from there.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

There is nothing in the track section that you show in
the photo that would indicate the need to have any
isolated sections. The right rail would be 'positive'
(if DC) in each track. However, tracks connected and
not shown in the photo could show a need for
isolated sections. Any specific suggestions would
be dependent on seeing the entire layout.

Don


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

That's the extent of the layout, there is nothing further out of this view.
On the RH side there are two turnouts facing each other, I would surely need isolated joiners between those?


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

If these are electro-frog Peco then every frog needs to be isolated because they will change polarity. The easiest way is to add a plastic insulated joiner to the ends of rail that cross the frog itself. 
With Electro-frog turnouts, each frog section gets a variable feeder (not black, not red). Everywhere else would get standard feeders in between turnouts; black on left, red on right. The single feeder powering each frog will receive power from a turnout machine (i.e. Peco solenoid) and will carry either + or - power to the frog based on the position of the point rails. So the Peco solenoids would have standard feeders coming in, but only one wire feeding the frog (insulated) rails.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

hmmm, this section of track seems to serve no purpose. I doubt there is enough clearance to park a 40' boxcar.


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

OilValleyRy said:


> If these are electro-frog Peco then every frog needs to be isolated because they will change polarity. The easiest way is to add a plastic insulated joiner to the ends of rail that cross the frog itself.
> With Electro-frog turnouts, each frog section gets a variable feeder (not black, not red). Everywhere else would get standard feeders in between turnouts; black on left, red on right. The single feeder powering each frog will receive power from a turnout machine (i.e. Peco solenoid) and will carry either + or - power to the frog based on the position of the point rails. So the Peco solenoids would have standard feeders coming in, but only one wire feeding the frog (insulated) rails.


Thanks. I’ll be using Tam Valley singlet point motors with a separate power supply press button fascia. My command station is Z21. Peco say you can use electro frog turnouts straight from the box. I think I need to use an insulated joiner after each V and also on each rail where turnouts face each other?


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

As Ohiovalley has pointed out, Electrofrog
turnouts MUST have insulated joiners in
EVERY FROG rail. This is to prevent short
circuits since Electrofrogs change the polarity
of the FROG rails when the points move.
You would still wire all right rails with the
same phase (polarity).

Don


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

I agree with Dennis. There's nothing wrong with the concept, or plan, for a runaround track there, or for RIP, or for passing or storage, whatever....but it needs utility, even on one's layout. It should be long enough for at least two cars, I would say, although up to six or seven would be ideal if you have the space. I needs to have room for a purpose of some kind, but without having the static rolling stock fouling or being too close to passing items on the tracks on either side. As it looks now, it has about zero utility.

When wiring, look for conflicts in either phase or polarity at each junction, or at each joint. Most often, where tracks meet after a 180 deg turn you'll run into conflict, but OhioValley is correct that some types of turnouts need special consideration over the common insulated frog 'DCC-friendly' variety. When I wire my tracks, I use the walls. They're my reference points. The rail closest to the wall on my 'around the room' track loop get one colour code of feeders, and the 'inside' rail gets another colour. Whichever part of the loop I'm wiring, the closest wall parallel to the tracks gets the colours of feeder wires oriented that way. Works for me, anyway.


----------



## Rob11966 (7 mo ago)

Famous last words but.... I don't think you can go wrong if you put two insulated joiners on each side of the frog (as per attached diagram) and feeders on every straight piece of track.
Rob


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

I have limited room and I was probably trying to squeeze too much in, plus I am using turnouts which are too long, sharper radius ones would have been better, maybe Setrak, but those are only available in the heavier gauge rail. I already had some so I added to them.
So as it stands and bearing in mind your comments regarding the runaround how could I improve things in your opinion?
I would add that the lead track has been missed off at the bottom and that would lead to a fiddle yard. I’ll be using smaller four axle switchers like S2/4 and SW1/9. I also have some small two axle German locos I can use.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

Cycleops said:


> I have limited room and I was probably trying to squeeze too much in, plus I am using turnouts which are too long, sharper radius ones would have been better, maybe Setrak, but those are only available in the heavier gauge rail. I already had some so I added to them.
> So as it stands and bearing in mind your comments regarding the runaround how could I improve things in your opinion?
> I would add that the lead track has been missed off at the bottom and that would lead to a fiddle yard. I’ll be using smaller four axle switchers like S2/4 and SW1/9. I also have some small two axle German locos I can use.


Cycleops;

If this track plan is supposed to be a yard, then you might consider simplifying it by making it a straight, simple, yard ladder. This has all turnouts facing the same way. Either all left-hand turnouts, or all right-hand. With all the straight routes through all the turnouts lined up in a very straight line.
Why? In a yard, at some point, you will need to push a string of cars backward through the yard ladder. This is one of the most difficult things we expect cars to do, and it is a prime area for potential derailments.
The great advantage of a simple yard ladder is that to reach any one of the yard tracks, the string of pushed cars need only pass through one curved route of one turnout, regardless of which track is selected.
All the turnouts preceding the one for the selected track, will be aligned for their straight routes. This makes pushing a string of cars as easy as it can get. Good trackwork is still necessary of course, but you won't be expecting the cars to snake back & forth through any reverse curves, or indeed any curves at all, except the one into the selected track.

By the way, after thinking & saying for some time that Peco turnouts had two straight routes, I found out I was wrong. They do in fact ,have some curvature in their diverging route. Since you're cramped for space, are you able to get Peco "small" size turnouts? These are roughly equivalent to a # 4 turnout.

If the crossover shown has some vital operational purpose, then the best you can do is to is to use the highest frog number turnouts that will fit in your space, and try to get the two meeting (diverging) routes as close to a straight line as possible. (see photo. The crossover has two # 8 turnouts. The single turnout, at the lower right, is a # 5)
A crossover, made with most model turnouts*, contains a reverse curve. Make it as gentle as possible.

Another benefit of a simple ladder is simplified electrical wiring. Even when using traditional DC, the ladder can be fed with one pair of wires at the narrow end, just before the first turnout. With current-routing turnouts, that's all that is necessary, except when using turnouts with metal frogs. (like Electrofrogs)
If powered, these must change the polarity of the frog to match the selected route. Even if you choose not to power the frog, it still needs to be insulated with plastic rail joiners on both of the short rails coming out of the frog.

If you retain the crossover, then you are correct, insulate all four rails where the two back-to-back turnouts meet each other. These insulated joiners will be equally necessary when you are using DCC, unless you are using a turnout with an "isolated frog", which has built-in rail gaps in all four rails going to the frog. (Examples, Peco "Unifrog", new Walther's, and Micro Engineering turnouts + some others.)

Regards;

Traction Fan

* A crossover made with Atlas HO-scale "Snap Switches" contains a real doozy of a reverse curve with two short 18" radius tight curves, of opposite directions, meeting, head-on, in the middle.


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

Thanks Traction Fan, that's very helpful. I might give that a try, I'll knock out that turnout at the top and run straight track. I thought the runaround might be useful but it's really too short as many have said. Tighter radius turnouts would help but aren't available in code 83 as I guess Peco thought they might not look too prototypical.
I'd like to keep the kick back track on the right as I can put small industry there. I intend to put a grain silo on the top left, you can see it marked.
I could modify the turnouts and isolate the frog having it separately switched with a juicer but I don't know there's any real advantage in that apart from not relying on the connection between the blades and rail to ensure electrical conductivity. Anyone do this?
I'll post the changes when I've made them.


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

Good to see you back at it Cycleops.  

Magic


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

Heres the revised layout:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

Cycleops said:


> Thanks Traction Fan, that's very helpful. I might give that a try, I'll knock out that turnout at the top and run straight track. I thought the runaround might be useful but it's really too short as many have said. Tighter radius turnouts would help but aren't available in code 83 as I guess Peco thought they might not look too prototypical.
> I'd like to keep the kick back track on the right as I can put small industry there. I intend to put a grain silo on the top left, you can see it marked.
> I could modify the turnouts and isolate the frog having it separately switched with a juicer but I don't know there's any real advantage in that apart from not relying on the connection between the blades and rail to ensure electrical conductivity. Anyone do this?
> I'll post the changes when I've made them.


Cycleops;

If by "this" in your question, you mean powering an isolated frog, yes, I do that on my scratchbuilt N-scale code 55 turnouts. (See photo. The white wire powers the isolated frog)
Atlas commercial N-scale code 55 turnouts, and Micro Engineering, & Walthers, are also made this way, and its an option on Peco's "Unifrog" turnouts. If you want smaller turnouts, the different rail sizes needn't stop you. You can mix & match as needed, just shim the code 83 up to meet the top of the code 100. Painted & ballasted the .017" difference in rail height won't be obvious. Besides prototype rail isn't all one size either.

Traction Fan 🙂


----------

