# Power Boost for DC Double Reverse Loop



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

I want to add 20 AWG feeders to the two sets of 20 AWG wires (*green a*nd *orange* for sake of discussion) that supply power to a double reverse loop (a figure eight that's connected in the center via a crossover track) on my 4' x 6' HO layout in order to increase the electrical reliability along two short stretches of track within the loops. The loop operation works just fine, but along those two sections of track, the locos noticeably slow down.

Q: Is this even possible to do, electrically speaking? That is, to boost the electrical reliability within the reverse loops themselves?

Initially, I thought of connecting the feeders to the bus wires that provide an electrical boost to the mainline tracks, but that seemed to be contrary to - well - the laws of electricity and common sense.

I have no way to provide a visual schematic or diagram, so will have to explain my setup here as best as I can (while seeking your indulgence, of course!).

I first connected a feeder wire to one of the two green reverse loop wires beneath the table via a suitcase connector. Each *green *reverse loop wire is soldered to a _left _rail of opposing track in each loop; and each *orange *wire is soldered to the _right _rail of opposing track in each loop (visualize the figure eight lying laterally, as in east to west).

I then soldered the other end of that green feeder to the corresponding left rail of track in that same loop. Not sure if this were the correct method, I stopped there and tried running a loco around the loop, but it only sputtered and grunted and barely moved.

Thinking I needed to complete that circuit, I connected the second green feeder to the other green reverse loop wire beneath the table and just touched the other end of it to the corresponding left rail of the track in the other loop. The result was the same, so I disconnected both feeders and stopped there.

Obviously, this is not the way to go. So, is what I'm trying to do electrically possible? And if so, just how should I wire the green and orange feeders in order to increase electrically reliability within the two loops?

I appreciate any suggestions you may have.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

My brain could not figure out your system without a diagram. But, I see two possible causes of the slow-down.

(1) 20 gauge wire is too small for power supply lines. You should use at least 16 gauge. I use 14 gauge because it was easier for me to find. Short sections of 20 gauge wire going from the feeder wires to the track are no problem.

(2) The track section where the locos slow down may be receiving less current due to poor connections between track segments -- especially if they are not soldered. Try adding an additional feeder to the center of the slow area from the main power supply lines. If that does not fix the problem, try cleaning that section of track.


----------



## mjrfd99 (Jan 5, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> My brain could not figure out your system without a diagram. But, I see two possible causes of the slow-down.
> 
> (1) 20 gauge wire is too small for power supply lines. You should use at least 16 gauge. I use 14 gauge because it was easier for me to find. Short sections of 20 gauge wire going from the feeder wires to the track are no problem.
> 
> (2) The track section where the locos slow down may be receiving less current due to poor connections between track segments -- especially if they are not soldered. Try adding an additional feeder to the center of the slow area from the main power supply lines. If that does not fix the problem, try cleaning that section of track.


Agree, the only 2 cents I can offer beyond that is a mistake I made starting HO, since its a loop could the trucks be binding on a tight curve? The six axle SD's didn't go around 15 in curves I bought.


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

If this is a 5x9 or 4x8 layout, or even twice that size, 20 gauge wire is fine for all your wiring. If this is a DC only layout, then I doubt you have a reverse loop involved as you would need DPDT switches controlling everything, a true figure 8 is not a reverse loop. I do agree with MtRR75 concern about binding trucks in tight circles.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

You can test the track voltage with a multimeter
set to DC if that is your power system. AC if
you are running DCC. Remove
the locos, turn up your power pack speed control
to about midway. Touch the probes at the first
point where you have track drops. Note the voltage.
Do this every 3 feet or so around the layout. If
the track voltage remains the same all around
the layout the problem is not the need for more
drops. You may need to clean the track. Or,
as mentioned, the train slows due to wheel to rail 
friction around the curves, especially if you 
have a tight radius.

However if you get a reading of, say 8 volts at the
first point, then less at the next point you
have lost good electrical conductivity somewhere
between the 2 points. Possibly a loose joiner or
corrosion. 

Don


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I agree that if you have a figure 8, then that's what you have, and not a "reverse loop" as we think of it (a loop of track where what starts out as the right rail becomes the left, as in a balloon of track connecting both legs of a turnout). I also agree that unless you have a huge layout (substantially bigger than the typical 4x8), voltage loss due to the small gauge wire is probably not the issue.

Hopefully, you have maintained true "left and right rail" polarity throughout. Disconnect all but one set of feeders and test the track. If this eliminates the problem, you created a short with your feeders. It should trip your power pack's breaker, but sometimes it doesn't. You can test the breaker by laying a quarter or steel washer across the rails. Your power pack's breaker should trip.

Make sure your track is very clean in the areas where you experience slowdowns, and make sure all your rail joiners are tight. Soldering would be better, but you can use a pair of alligator clips to temporarily jumper segments together, which will help isolate any poor connections.

And I would definitely look at the radius of your turns.


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

Gentlemen,

Please re-read the original post, as exactly what I described (giving a power boost to the reverse loops) _is_ the problem at-hand. The suggestions offered were already attended to during and subsequent to construction, as well as while testing and running the locos around the layout for quite some time. The sole exception I overlooked was checking the voltage within the loops (and it _is_ indeed a double reverse loop) with a multi-meter. I should have done that at first, so it will be my next step.

I should also note that it's only a 4' x 6' layout with 15" radius tracks in the loops the smallest on the layout. The locos run - and have for some time - quite well and smoothly throughout the loops and along the mainline. 

Also, since any distance in this 4' x 6' is quite short, then 20 AWG feeders (should I end up needing them after checking the voltage) will suffice. I _did_ use 16 AWG to add a power boost to the mainline.

As of last night, I also disconnected the two - obviously incorrectly connected - feeder wires in the loop that were the cause of the locos' chugging and sputtering. Without those feeders, they now operate as smoothly and dependably as before.

So, the bottom line questions (should I need to go that route after testing the loop voltage) are:

1. Is supplying a power boost to the double reverse loops electrically possible? I don't know why it wouldn't be, but...

and

2. Exactly _how_ do I do this with feeder wires without compromising the operation of the locos within the loops, causing a shortage, etc.? That is, the green feeder wires need to be connected to "X," and the orange feeders connected to "Y."

Thanks for your thoughts!


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

A little more info: What's the scale? Are you using DC or DCC? If DCC what are you using for the auto-reversers?


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

Lemonhawk said:


> A little more info: What's the scale? Are you using DC or DCC? If DCC what are you using for the auto-reversers?


LH -

I just added the layout's scale and size - a 4' x 6' HO - to my post. The power supply was already noted in the heading.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

It seems many of us are not clear just what your
layout design is. The result is conflicting ideas of what
to do.

I fully understand about not having Scarm or other
digital drawing capability, I don't do those either.

But you could draw out the layout on a piece of paper
using a good black pen. Then take a clear photo of
that and post it to this thread. That would be a big
help and gain the right responses.

Don


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

DonR said:


> It seems many of us are not clear just what your
> layout design is. The result is conflicting ideas of what
> to do.
> 
> ...


Don, 

Yes, I realize these complex (or even simple!) electrical wiring conundrums are sometimes difficult to follow without artwork. However, as I wrote, I have _no _way to provide it, including as you suggest.

So, I can only suggest picturing the infinity symbol: ∞, which replicates my figure eight (with a 19 degree cross track smack in the middle) laid out before you. 

Or alternatively, if you or other members would like, send me your mailing address in a PM, and I'll mail you a detailed hand-drawn picture of my layout with the relevant track, wiring and toggle switches so noted. I'll include a SASE to receive your feeder wire hookup suggestions by return mail. Oohh, it's so low tech, you gotta love it! 

Again, the only question I have is _where_ to connect both ends of the two respective feeder wires (+ and -).

I appreciate your help!


----------



## JerryH (Nov 18, 2012)

That would indicate a figure 8 and not a pair of reverse loops. If it is a figure 8, connect the two wires to the rails close to the crossing. That one connection should be enough for your layout. Now if it is a pair of connected reverse loops then it is way more complex. So which of the below matches your track?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Empire Builder 76 said:


> Gentlemen,
> 
> Please re-read the original post, as exactly what I described (giving a power boost to the reverse loops) _is_ the problem at-hand. The suggestions offered were already attended to during and subsequent to construction, as well as while testing and running the locos around the layout for quite some time. The sole exception I overlooked was checking the voltage within the loops (and it _is_ indeed a double reverse loop) with a multi-meter. I should have done that at first, so it will be my next step.


Speaking as someone who read your original post multiple times and still didn't have it straight (still don't actually, as whether or not you have a reversing loop is critical to solving the puzzle), I'm thinking the rest of us don't see your initial post as quite the model of clarity or the compendium of information that you seem to think it was.

I also suggested that you disconnect all but one set of feeders, which by your own admission seems to have fixed the problem. So I'm not clear on why you think you need to add more feeders. I have run (and am running) far bigger layouts than that on a single pair of 20 AWG feeds from my command station. 

Most crossings have the two tracks isolated from one another so that they don't create a reversing loop. If yours AREN'T isolated for some reason, then the best solution is to isolate them. Look under the frogs for wires or jumpers.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Let me try this again. I think I have the track plan visualized correctly now.

The correct way to wire a DC layout with a reversing section is as follows.

(1) 2 wires (+ and -) run from the transformer to a terminal strip where they are split into two sets of wires.

(2) One set of wires (+ and -) goes to a DPDT switch that is wired to reverse the polarity of the current as needed. The + and – wires that leave the DPDT switch should service all of the track that is NOT part of the reversing section (which I will call Mainline for simplicity).

(3) The other set of wires (from step 1) goes to another DPDT switch that is also wired to reverse the polarity of the current. The + and – wires that leave this DPDT switch should service ONLY THE REVERSING SECTIONS

The wires that service the Mainline and those that service the Reversing sections should NEVER MEET. If they do, then you will get a short when the two DPDT switches are throw in opposite directions.

It sounds to me like your added wires went from Mainline track to Reversing Track – which is why your locos stopped running.

P.S. Better quality DC power supplies have circuitry to detect shorts and shut down the power to the track to protect your locos. Sometimes they have a warning light called “Overload” that comes on. If your transformer is not shutting down power (some cheaper ones don’t), you should upgrade your power supply to one that has this feature.


----------



## JerryH (Nov 18, 2012)

In the original post, the track was described as two loops connected by a 19 degree crossing which would be a figure eight. There was no mention of any turnouts which could have created a pair of reverse loops. The mention of extra wiring and "switches" is what makes the original description confusing. Until that is clarified, it is real difficult to address what is going on electrically.


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> Let me try this again. I think I have the track plan visualized correctly now.
> 
> The correct way to wire a DC layout with a reversing section is as follows.
> 
> ...



You nailed it 99%!! What you described is _exactly_ what I have. And my power pack does indeed have an "overload" light as well. 

But, the one feeder wire I _did_ install (and since removed - see below) was connected _only_ to the reverse loop wire and track, never to the mainline wire or tracks. Heck, even a psych major like me knew that!  

And, as I wrote earlier, the double reverse loop operation (straight out of an Atlas wiring book) is - and has been from the first day - working properly and as it should. 

The _only_ flaw - and it's relatively minor - and the only reason for my post is that the locos sometimes (though not always) slow down along a very short stretch (one track length) of those loops. Thus my question about how to connect feeder wires correctly within the reverse loops to resolve that minor flaw. That's it. Nothing more.

But I didn't do what I should have done at first - lazy me: check the voltage there with my multi-meter. So stay tuned! Pending those results, I may or may not need feeder wires, but I still very much want to learn how to wire them properly within the reversing loops. Can you help?

And, as I believe I mentioned yesterday, last night I removed the single feeder wire I did hook up to one of the reversing loops and track because the locos sputtered and vociferously "complained" when it was connected. I stopped there and didn't go any further for fear of doing damage to the locos.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Is this your layout more or less??

(I drew this up using 18"curves so the shape might look a little different).

The red sections are the reversing sections.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Empire Builder 76 said:


> I may or may not need feeder wires, but I still very much want to learn how to wire them properly within the reversing loops. Can you help?


Assuming that the track diagram that I drew is correct...., I have two questions.

(1) There are two ways to look at this layout.

(a) The first is shown in the post above. I made the figure 8 the "Mainline" and the two re, straight tracks the reversing sections. I went with this scenario because this is the way that you seemed to be describing your layout.

(b) The other way to look at the layout is to call the outer oval the "Mainline". Then the two crossing diagonal tracks become the reversing tracks.

There are no differences in the track plan between the two versions. But the two versions would be wired differently. Which version you go with depends on how you plan to run trains.

If you want to run a train around the figure 8 unattended, then go with version (a). In this case, you can run a train around the oval, but you will need to be constantly flipping the DPDT switches.

If you want to run a train around the oval unattended, then you go with version (b). In this case, you can run a train around the figure 8, but you will need to be constantly flipping the DPDT switches.

It's your layout, so your choice. But you can't have your cake and eat it, too -- unless, of course, you convert to DCC.

(2) Do you want to be able to run two trains simultaneously? Or are you only going to run one train at a time. This decision affects how you wire your layout. (FYI, running 3 or more trains simutaneously in DC gets quite complicated. But you don't really have room for 3 trains, so this is a moot point.)


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> Assuming that the track diagram that I drew is correct...., I have two questions.
> 
> (1) There are two ways to look at this layout.
> 
> ...


-------------------------------------------------------------
MtRR75, Thanks for the ongoing feedback - and the diagram!

From my original post, with italics added that will answer the questions you posed today and place the focus squarely on the question at-hand - and nothing else:

"I want to add 20 AWG feeders to the two sets of 20 AWG wires (*green *and *orange* for sake of discussion) that supply power to _a double reverse loop (__a figure eight that's connected in the center via a crossover track)_ on my _4' x 6'_ HO layout in order to increase the electrical reliability along two short stretches of track within the loops. _The loop operation works just fine_, but along those two sections of track, the locos noticeably slow down."[/COLOR]

and, the bottom-line question:

"...just _how should I wire the green and orange feeders_ in order to increase electrically reliability within the two loops?"

1. Your description "B" is closer to what I have (there are additional tracks within each of the two loops, but those are irrelevant to the question/problem at-hand. There is also the mainline outer oval track running around the loop sections - also irrelevant to my question). 

2. The slow down occurs only on a one-track stretch of each loop just "north" of the crossover, viewing it as you would a map.

3. For clarity, the *green* and *orange* wires that control the reverse loop operation (via a dedicated DPDT, center-off toggle switch) are soldered to their respective tracks in each loop just "south" of the crossover.

BTW, what program did you use to provide that schematic? Is it a freebie or involve a purchase? Easy or hard to learn (a relative question I know!)?


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Let’s see if I have this correct now.









(1) The red sections are the reversing track, which is isolated from the gray track.

(2) The wires that power the reversing track are attached to BOTH red tracks South of the crossover. (both + and – to each track)

(3) The area where trains slow down is on the red track to the North of the crossover.

How am I doing?

If this is correct, the problem may be in the crossover. Sometimes crossovers (and turnouts) are electronically faulty. If the crossover is NOT defective, it should be carrying the current from the Southwest track (below and left of the crossover) to the Northeast track (above and to the right of the crossover). The crossover should also carry the current from the Southeast track (below and right of the crossover) to the Northwest track (above and to the left of the crossover).

The two crossing tracks should NOT be connected electronically WITHIN THE CROSSOVER. They will be connected electronically if the power feed lines to the two tracks South of the crossover come from the same source.

All of this can be tested with a multimeter. I prefer to start by measuring the resistance – to verify that all of the connections are solid. If that checks out, power the track (no loco) and check the voltage of all 4 track sections that are attached to the crossover. They should be nearly identical.

You can test to see if the two tracks are isolated from each other by disconnecting the feed lines and testing the resistance.

P.S. I am a Mac person. The ONLY track planning software that I have found is Railmodeller. It did cost me something sometime ago, but I don’t remember how much. It has been upgraded since then and has more features and probably costs more now.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Empire

A couple members have posted track diagrams.
Is any one of them the same as your layout?

Don


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> Let’s see if I have this correct now.
> 
> View attachment 248889
> 
> ...


MtRR75,

You're on a roll. Please continue..........................


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

DonR said:


> Empire
> 
> A couple members have posted track diagrams.
> Is any one of them the same as your layout?
> ...


Don,

See my November 16 reply to MtRR75. His second diagram and the three-point description below it are accurate.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

EB

I finally understand your track plan. Mtrr seems to be on the way
to solving your problem.

Don


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

DonR said:


> EB
> 
> I finally understand your track plan. Mtrr seems to be on the way
> to solving your problem.
> ...


Don,

As you see it: 

1) What is the problem I've described? and 

2) What is it that I want to know how to do?

Thanks!


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Empire Builder 76 said:


> MtRR75,
> 
> You're on a roll. Please continue..........................


It seems to me that the next step is for you to use your multimeter to check out the crossover.

If you find that two endpoints that should be electronically attached are not, then you can solve the problem by adding a wire that jumps the current across the crossover.

If you find that two endpoints that should NOT be connected, are in fact connected, then you have a short inside the crossover. In that case, it is probably easier to replace the crossover.

The crossover may not be the problem. It could also be the connections between the track and the crossover.


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> It seems to me that the next step is for you to use your multimeter to check out the crossover.
> 
> If you find that two endpoints that should be electronically attached are not, then you can solve the problem by adding a wire that jumps the current across the crossover.
> 
> ...


MtRR75,

Before we proceed, would you please clarify for me your understanding of?:

1. The problem I want to resolve and where it is;

2. How I'm thinking of solving it; and

3. What I want to know

Thanks! See you at the depot!


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Empire Builder 76 said:


> Don,
> 
> As you see it:
> 
> ...


I've been following what MTrr has been posting
and he seems to be on the right track. If I started
again to join the conversation I'm afraid it would
be confusing. Best I remain quiet for a while.

Don


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Empire Builder 76 said:


> MtRR75,
> 
> Before we proceed, would you please clarify for me your understanding of?:
> 
> ...


For #1: See my post #20. If that is incorrect, please clarify for me.

For #2: It seems like you want to provide additional power (via a jumper wire) to the area where the trains slow down. Some of MY ideas on how you might be able to fi the problem (depending on what the diagnostic tests tell us) to fix are in my post #26.

For #3: I assume that your overall goal is to understand why trains slow down and what to do to fix it.


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> For #1: See my post #20. If that is incorrect, please clarify for me.
> 
> For #2: It seems like you want to provide additional power (via a jumper wire) to the area where the trains slow down. Some of MY ideas on how you might be able to fi the problem (depending on what the diagnostic tests tell us) to fix are in my post #26.
> 
> For #3: I assume that your overall goal is to understand why trains slow down and what to do to fix it.


MtRR75,

Re: your reply #1 above, the three points below in green from your post #20 are absolutely correct. Your analysis of my layout & wiring per your 2nd schematic greatly helps in visualizing my setup, which you've captured perfectly in those three points. 

All the rest in post #20 below them, however, is irrelevant.

*1) The red sections are the reversing track, which is isolated from the gray track.

2) The wires that power the reversing track are attached to BOTH red tracks South of the crossover. (both + and – to each track)

3) The area where trains slow down is on the red track to the North of the crossover.*

Re: your reply #2, only the first sentence is correct. The rest is irrelevant, as is most of post #26. No diagnosis of the problem is necessary because I already did that (see green #3, above) before making the original post. The cross track is not a factor. 

Re: reply #3 is not at all my objective.

From my original post, here are the _only _pertinent points and considerations (excerpted), highlighted in a quite handsome blue:

*1. "I want to add 20 AWG feeders to the two sets of 20 AWG wires...that supply power to a double reverse loop... in order to increase the electrical reliability along two short stretches of track within the loops."

2. "Q: Is this even possible to do, electrically speaking? That is, to boost the electrical reliability within the reverse loops themselves?"

3."...And if so, just how should I wire the...feeders in order to increase electrically reliability within the two loops?"*

In hindsight, I can see that describing my initial attempts at resolving the problem in my original post caused both a distraction and subsequent confusion. For that, I will flagellate myself with a wet noodle!

So, to add some additional thought, information and clarity to solving this mystery (assuming, that is, that it is indeed solvable - though I can't imagine it's not), two possible solutions have since come to mind:

A) Attach feeders wires (+ and - respectively) _directly _to the existing two sets of wires (+ green & - orange, per the original post) that control the double reverse loop operation via a dedicated DPDT, center-off toggle switch.

OR

B) Attach feeder wires to the tracks in question (just north of the cross track in both loops) _in parallel_ to their corresponding + and - tracks south of the cross track.

Whadya think?!


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Sorry about the long delay in responding. First our internet was down for a few days. Since then, I have been busy with Thanksgiving preparations and entertaining the guests (some are staying several days.) Hobbies always come last in life’s list of priorities.

Either option (A or B) should work. Below is a diagram of how I would wire option B. I made the two orange wires slightly different colors just for clarity – they are different wires but carry the same current. (Same for the green ones.) The black lines are not arrows, but tunnels where the wire goes under the track, but does not connect to it.









However, instead of wiring the SE track to the NW track (and the SW track to the NE track), as I have shown, you could wire the SE track to the NE track (and the SW track to the NW track. Either option should work 

But… The reason that I chose the wiring connections shown in my diagram is… My option allows you to separate the two reversing tracks and give each its own DPDT switch – something that you might decide to do in the future. Separating them would allow you to have one train stop at the crossover and wait for a second train to pass before proceeding.


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> Sorry about the long delay in responding. First our internet was down for a few days. Since then, I have been busy with Thanksgiving preparations and entertaining the guests (some are staying several days.) Hobbies always come last in life’s list of priorities.
> 
> Either option (A or B) should work. Below is a diagram of how I would wire option B. I made the two orange wires slightly different colors just for clarity – they are different wires but carry the same current. (Same for the green ones.) The black lines are not arrows, but tunnels where the wire goes under the track, but does not connect to it.
> 
> ...


MtRR75,

No problem at all on the wait. I knew you weren't going anywhere!

The artwork is perfect! I'll opt for option "B" since I have a one-cab operation, and a 4' 6' layout cannot accommodate two trains (of any significant, realistic length, that is). The choice of electrically separating the two loops and adding a second DPDT is good to know, however.

Many thanks for all your help!


----------



## Empire Builder 76 (Feb 11, 2016)

MtRR75 said:


> Sorry about the long delay in responding. First our internet was down for a few days. Since then, I have been busy with Thanksgiving preparations and entertaining the guests (some are staying several days.) Hobbies always come last in life’s list of priorities.
> 
> Either option (A or B) should work. Below is a diagram of how I would wire option B. I made the two orange wires slightly different colors just for clarity – they are different wires but carry the same current. (Same for the green ones.) The black lines are not arrows, but tunnels where the wire goes under the track, but does not connect to it.
> 
> ...


MtRR75,

Your wiring plan works just fine. The locos are much happier now since they no longer experience slow downs in those two spots!

Many thanks!


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Your welcome.


----------

