# Layout wiring questions.



## Mikesok24 (Apr 3, 2015)

Hello all,

After recently rediscovering my father's old O gauge Lionel set, I came to the conclusion that I would like to set up a somewhat compact layout to fit on a 5'x3' area in my apartment. I like the idea of having a number of switches so that I can have some variety while operating my train. For power I was looking at just using DC as I have yet to decide how much I want to pursue N Scale or if I want to do more with O gauge. 

Below is my current layout design. Being used to the simplicity of O gauge wiring I didn't think about the polarity issues of two rail systems until after I got used to the idea of this layout. I've already revised it by eliminating the turnout from the top left of the figure 8, and I believe that was one way of solving the issue. However, I would like to put the plans for the layout up for others to see to see if there is a way to wire in the reversing loops using either switches or modules of some sort. 

Right now i'm just looking for a level layout that I can fit to a reinforced board that I can prop up somehow once I know for sure where I want it with little though to scenery. As I get more involved in this hobby that will likely change, but at this moment I'm more interested in the function rather than the form. 

Thank you in advance for any suggestions or help with my issue.

P.S. I'm sure my lazy attempt at a spur/yard monstrosity can be revised, so if anyone has any suggestions, I'd gladly hear them.


----------



## Owl (Oct 3, 2014)

Wow! That's an interesting layout! Almost like the Granite Gorge and Northern . You may get some ideas here for compact layouts http://www.cke1st.com/m_train2.htm

Unfortunately I'm not much help with wiring

Al


----------



## Viperjim1 (Mar 19, 2015)

*Layout wiring question*

I had seen an interesting article in model railroader I believe , if you have the layout set up take a train car paint 1 side 1 color and the other side another color and move it around your track and the 1 color should stay on let's say your inside rail closest to you and as you move it around the track that same color will still be on that rail and if you end up with the other color of the car on that rail you obviously have a reverse loop and then you have to wire it accordingly and as well as installing insulated rail joiners and possibly a reverse loop circuit , hope this wasn't to confusing.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Yep. That layout would be easy as 3 rail 0 gauge. How some ever,
for 2 rail DC or DCC it has all kinds of 'reverse loop' problems.

If you want to pursue that, or any other layout converted form 0 gauge,
draw it out using black for one rail and red for the other. You will
quickly see where there is a need for insulated joiners and isolated
sections for special consideration.

With DCC, the reverse loop controllers are automatic and present
no wiring problems. However for DC the complex wiring and awkward
operational needs may suggest that you redesign to
avoid the problems.

You may want to more closely check N Scale or buy a small N scale starter set 
and see if you really want that scale so you can make a final determination
of what scale you want to go with. Because, if you want a complicated layout,
such as the one shown, you will
definitely want to go DCC. It is easier to wire and if there
is a 'reverse' loop it can be switched automatically making it
invisible when operating your trains.

If you go with HO you would need twice (+ or -) the size layout for
the same layout.

Don


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Mike 

I just went back and reread your initial post.

Yes, removing that turnout upper left of the figure
eight does eliminate the polarity problems. You then
have a simple oval with the 8 in the middle.

There is no way to reverse the direction of a train
thus there is no reverse loop or polarity problems.

If you wanted to keep the original design,
there are reverse loop controllers that automatically
match polarity when you are using DCC. For DC
layouts the wiring and switches become somewhat
complex and so is the actual operation. You have
to throw the polarity matching switches as you throw the turnouts
and continuous running is not possible without it
through the reversing' sections.

Also, look to see where you could
add more spurs for industries, big and small.
You can have more than one on a spur. In fact,
that adds to your switching operations.

Don


----------



## Mikesok24 (Apr 3, 2015)

Al - I looked up that Granite Gorge and Northern and I'm definitely going to have to catalog that one for future growth. Thanks for the ideas!

Viperjim - I don't yet have a physical layout yet, but I have tried something similar using pen and paper. If I put any number of switchouts on opposing ends of the loop I have problems, I guess my question is more of a general how-to regarding wiring of the loops.

Don - I appreciate the input. After posting this, I went back and started tearing apart the layouts I've saved to see where I can add more activity. I sort of understand the basics of isolating sections of the reverse loop and switching the polarity of the remaining track that the train rejoins, I'm just curious as to weather I need to use manual switching or if there is a way to wire up the auto reversing loops w/ DC power. 

I'm certainly interested in N Scale, and I have a Bachmann starter loop (although I'm designing the new layout using Kato Unitrack). It doesn't have the same noisy simplicity that I like about the old O-Gauge trains I have, but the ability to pack so much more into the same area is why I started persuing N Scale. I do believe this will grow into a real hobby for me, but I'm a little hesitant to think about DCC. Might have something to do with my affinity for O Gauge. 

Thanks all for the advice. Even though I have yet to start laying track, this is getting to be a blast.


----------



## Mikesok24 (Apr 3, 2015)

Well, after being away from the computer for a bit, I've come up with this. Still facing the same basic wiring challenges, but once I decide where I ant to isolate the sections, it should just be a matter of assembling it all and devising an operational procedure.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Now you've done it.

The reverse loop is back created when you changed the
simple figure 8. I'm thinking that the isolated section should
be from the upper left turnout to the upper tight turnout.

If you are going to stay DC this is what you would have
to do:

1. Connect the isolated section through a double pole
double throw switch. DPDT. This enables you to match the
polarity of the mainline.

2. Connect the Mainline, also, through a DPDT
switch. This enables you to match the
Mainline to the isolated section.

3. Both DPDT switches are fed by TRACK terminals on
the power pack.

Here is what you would have to do when running a train
through the isolated section. 

1. Set the Iso section to same polarity at Mainline.

3. After loco is fully in the iso section, throw the DPDT
switch to change the polarity of the Mainline to now
match that of the iso section.

Obviously there can be no other locos running on the
main while this is being done since that would change
their direction when you changed track polarity.

If you went DCC all that is automatic and invisible to
the operator. You could easily also operate more than one
train on that layout with each independently controlled.
even going in opposite directions. You could have a
train continuously running while you are doing
switching chores with another loco.

Don


----------



## Mikesok24 (Apr 3, 2015)

Ah, I Gotcha. At least at the moment I don't expect to be operating more than one train at a time, and switches are easy enough to solder together and I can hide all the wiring on the underside of the layout. Operation will become easier with familiarity. 

My biggest concern is with balancing the cost of the DCC with the size and complexity of the layout. Since I want to keep it somewhat smaller so I can put it against the wall when not in use I've put a 5' x 3' limit on the board. The available space for when I would be using it would be larger if I compromised on storage. If it were possible to collapse the layout to give it a smaller footprint that would be wonderful. 

As I think about it more and more, I realize I've got a little more ambition than sense, but I would like to get the most bang for my buck/space.


----------



## powersteamguy1790 (Mar 26, 2012)

You have too much track for a 3x5' space. Less is more.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Mike

I just drew out your layout using red for one rail and black for
the other. We do have a number of polarity conflicts. I'm
still experimenting with various sections to isolate.

To see what I'm talking about, draw your layout using a Red
color for one rail, and Black for the other (or whatever 2 colors
you might have). You'll see several polarity crunches.

At this point I'm thinking that by making the entire left 
end of the main oval as an isolated section, the remainder of
the layout can be considered as main including the partial
figure eight and all inner spurs. Insulated joiners would be just to the right of
the upper left turnout connecting the crossing to the oval, 
just below that same turnout connecting to the crossing, just to
the right of the lower left turnout connecting to the oval and just
above the left turnout connecting to the
crossing.

Check what I've done and see what layout modifications you
might want to make, if any.

Don


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

powersteamguy1790 said:


> You have too much track for a 3x5' space. Less is more.


I agree with this. Watching a tail chaser can be entertaining but it becomes boring quite quickly, what you need is operating interest which creates a "raison d'être" for your railroad. Your second plan is much better in this respect. Putting it in a setting with scenery is also important so leave room to put in these details. Running more than one train would also add more interest.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Layout design*

Mikesoc24;
After looking at both your Track plans, I like what you did in the second(revised) version. But I think you can make it "better" still, If you want.
There is a great tendency to design a layout somewhat in a "putting the cart before the horse" manner.
By that I mean starting with a rigid shape and then making the track fit into that shape. (usually as much track, and complexity as we can.) There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach, but we tend to end up with a layout that is all track and no space for much else. (like scenery and structures). That is a choice for the individual modeler to make. This forum is for advice, not commandments! :
This "pack it all in" approach is very common in 3 rail layouts, and 2 rail ones where the emphasis is on lots and lots of train action and little concern about ending up with something that resembles a real railroad, represented in miniature. Again this is a decision only you should make. 
You mentioned that you wanted to tilt the layout up on edge when not in use; and that the maximum size rectangle you could use was determined by that. What if you could make a longer mainline track, a more realistic look, and not have to tilt the railroad at all? Would that interest you?
If so you could measure the total space in the whole room, not just that one corner. That done you could build a shelf layout along one, two, or more walls. Since this is an apartment, presumably rented, you may think, " I can't do that. I t would mean drilling many holes in the wall." No you wouldn't. there are way of building such a layout without drilling the walls at all. The shelf could be kept narrow, except at the ends; where you might need to widen it to let your train turn around. This might mean you could leave it up all the time and still use the room for other activities.
Just something for you to consider. The choice is up to you.

 Good Luck with whatever approach you decide on.

Traction Fan


----------

