 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Railroads / June 2010HO Code 100 or Code 83
I'm a beginner and starting my HO 5' by 9' layout. I've been doing a lot of research on this, that, and the other. One of the things is should I use Code 83 or 100? I see all sorts of things about what and why it is but not what is recommended. Does it matter? Thanks in advance for any help. > should I use Code 83 or 100? Code 83 scales out to modern Class 1 mainline rail. Code 100 is more like N-scale track, way too high, even in HO it's oversize unless you're modeling one of the heaviest parts of the Pennsy; Code 83 or Code 70 for older / branchline layouts are better choices. e-- Steve > I'm a beginner and starting my HO 5' by 9' layout. I've been doing a > lot of research on this, that, and the other. One of the things is > should I use Code 83 or 100? I see all sorts of things about what and > why it is but not what is recommended. Does it matter? Thanks in > advance for any help. Two issues: a) Scale fidelity/appearance. Code 83 is about right for most mainline rail (code 70 covers most of the rest.) Code 100 is too large. However, with judicious painting of the rail, the ties, and the ballast, even Code 100 will look good. Kalmbach has a book on how to lay realistic track. Buy or borrow it, it will tell you all you need to know under this heading. b) Strength/durability. Code 83 flex track is weaker than code 100, mostly because the little plastic clips that hold the rail are smaller. Also, the finer rail bends more easily, so unintended kinking is more likely. Thus, code 83 is a tad trickier to lay smoothly. Related issue: Flex track vs. sectional track. Code 83 and 100 come in both forms. Operationally, flex track is better because it forms a natural easement or spiral between straight and curved track, which not only makes a train look better as it enters the curve, but also reduces side-ways thrust on trucks and couplers, thus making for fewer derailments, other things being equal. But flex track is trickier to lay. The brands don't vary much in quality or appearance, but do vary in ease of use. Atlas and Peco flex track is easy to bend, Micro-Engineering is much stiffer. Haven't used Walthers or Shinohara lately, so can't comment om those. Sectional tracks comes plain, or with preformed plastic ballast. All kinds of turnouts are available. Track from different manufacturers is compatible, but you may have to use shims at joints to align rails. For a beginner, I would recommend code 100 because it is more robust. However, if more realistic appearance matters to you, code 83 is a probably better starting point. The final appearance depends hugely on your skills with paint. Unasked advice: the trackbed is crucial. Must be sturdy, smooth, and without twists or bumps. HTH wolf k. > For a beginner, I would recommend code 100 because it is more robust. > However, if more realistic appearance matters to you, code 83 is a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Unasked advice: the trackbed is crucial. Must be sturdy, smooth, and > without twists or bumps.> HTH > wolf k. Thanks guys... the most important issue in track laying is of course derailments. To that end I am using Atlas Tru-track in the tunnels and that is code 83. I expect that to be flawless but the rest of the layout will be a mix of sectional and flex. The local hobbyshop only carries code 100 because "That's what my customers want." I have some adaptors to take track from 83 to 100 and the 100 sounds like just maybe less problems with derailments. But, I do like the looks of the 83 so I'll have to experiment and mull this over before committing. On 6/14/2010 12:57 PM None spake thus: >> For a beginner, I would recommend code 100 because it is more robust. >> However, if more realistic appearance matters to you, code 83 is a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > maybe less problems with derailments. But, I do like the looks of the > 83 so I'll have to experiment and mull this over before committing. My own preference would be to err on the side of realistic looks, therefore to use code 83 (or even smaller sizes). What Wolf told you about the pitfalls of laying track is true, but that doesn't mean that you can't lay down some really nice-looking scale-size track that you can run on without derailments. You just need to be extra careful.  SignatureThe fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com) Put it this way, if you use code 83, nobody will ever question your decision. If you use code 100, people will ask why. It's as simple as that. Roger Traviss Home of the late GER http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/ I wouldn't use any section al track for the conectivity issues. Each and every joint means another place to lose power between two sections. I'd be using code83 as it is more realistic. Wear on large layouts is a bit higher ut you're not going to be running trains 8 hours a day for many years so that isn't an issue. Realiability of the track in reference to derailments, etc. is the same as the railhead is all that is important to the train wheels. when you lay your track, the important things are that the reail ends matc,h, especially on the inside corner of the railhead. In addition, there should be no kinking in either the vertical or horizontal direction which will, again, promote derailments. Perfect rail laying means that you can't tell any deviation of the rails and they just look like you cut a slot in the top of the rail. Lastly, put a soldered tail on each rail and connect to the block power and you won't have any problems with trains stopping at a distant point. -- Bob May rmay at nethere.com http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net > I wouldn't use any section al track for the conectivity issues. Each and > every joint means another place to lose power between two sections. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay > http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net Thanks, I'll have a run of about 9' underground so I want tru-track on the curves but I will take a shot at 36" flextrack on the straight away. As to those terminal rail joiners, where can I buy them at discount... the cheapest I found was GoHobby for about $2.10. I have decided to commit to code 83... it does look better Will you be using DCC? If not, you might considering wiring/insulating your track using DCC specs. It'll be a little more work up front ... but would allow easy conversion should you upgrade later. hth, /Stetson > I'm a beginner and starting my HO 5' by 9' layout. I've been doing a > lot of research on this, that, and the other. One of the things is > should I use Code 83 or 100? I see all sorts of things about what and > why it is but not what is recommended. Does it matter? Thanks in > advance for any help. On Jun 15, 7:50 am, "Stetson J.B. Mentzer" <newsbot0...@zekedev.com> wrote: > Will you be using DCC? If not, you might considering wiring/insulating > your track using DCC specs. It'll be a little more work up front ... but > would allow easy conversion should you upgrade later. Yes, I intend to go DCC. I have been studying up on it but still a little over whelmed. This from a guy that studied ohm's law and was a ground radio maintenance tech in my four year hitch with my Uncle Sam. 1. How important are blocks with DCC? 2. How often should there be a connection on my 9x5 twice around? 3. Which brands are considered the best combo of price and function? 4. Are DCC turnouts more trouble then they're worth? Thx DCC is just a system of controlling the locos. it does other things but that is its primary function. Blocks become relatively unimportant as the whole system gets the signalling info for a particular loco. I'd still keep blocks as this will assist in locating shorts in the track when theyhaappen but you don't need to do as many as a DC system. The DCC turnouts are just turnouts that don't have a capability of shorting out the track power (important to DCC as the powergetting shorted kills off everything until the power gets back on and this may destroy the speed setting in a module) while DCC compativle trackwork won' allow the wheels to cause such a short. All of my trackwork is mostly DCC friendly as long as you stayt in the proper areas. Running a adversely thrown turnout will cause a short tho. Brands of turnouts are more the choice rather tahn the reliability of a DCC vs. a DC turnout. I'll note that I haven't seen a turnout that I'd put on my track without doing work on it but then again, I'm handlaying all of my track to the correct standards for the NMRA. -- Bob May rmay at nethere.com http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net In message <bc67c657-3c42-4509-ac57-5676967e683f@z25g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>, None <joeschmo.7@gmail.com> writes >On Jun 15, 7:50 am, "Stetson J.B. Mentzer" <newsbot0...@zekedev.com> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >1. How important are blocks with DCC? You don't have to worry about blocks with DCC. The main thing to remember is that you should have droppers on to your bus bar from every length of track. This will help avoid voltage drop and will give really good electrical contact and control. The only 'blocks' you may want to put in are for a couple of different bus sections which you can isolate to help find any problems if you get a short circuit >2. How often should there be a connection on my 9x5 twice around? Ideally every 3 feet or so which equates to one dropper for every yard of track. >3. Which brands are considered the best combo of price and function? There are many different answers to that question. Best suggestion I can make is that you try to find a few people near you who can show a few different types. Otherwise find out what the local club is using and use something similar. That way you can get help easily. >4. Are DCC turnouts more trouble then they're worth? No. It's definitely worth the extra trouble when you are laying them. The main problem comes with the frog polarity changeover. If you are using Tortoise motors it is a very simple matter to use the built in switch for this purpose or you can use a slide type switch to move the rail switch (point for use Brits) which will also change the polarity. You will need to electrically bond the stock and switch rails, cut the rails near the frog and make this one electrical connection, but the running quality is just that much better. It is also possible to put a simple micro switch under the baseboard if you are using a mechanical system to move the (rail) switch blades. Have a look at the system I've used on my portable layout, Lynneton Yard. Here are links to the photos showing the wiring. http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p56999867.html http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p52539180.html http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p52539179.html Hope this helps. SignatureMike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ None <joeschmo.7@gmail.com> wrote in news:bc67c657-3c42-4509-ac57- 5676967e683f@z25g2000vbk.googlegroups.com: > Yes, I intend to go DCC. I have been studying up on it but still a > little over whelmed. This from a guy that studied ohm's law and was a > ground radio maintenance tech in my four year hitch with my Uncle Sam. > > 1. How important are blocks with DCC? For signaling, power districts, and troubleshooting, they're essential. Double gap the rails, as you'll have to run feeders to both rails anyway. (See below.) You may even want to use some sort of connector to join the bus wires together near the gaps, so if there is a problem you can quickly and easily disconnect sections of the layout. (A switch will work fine.) > 2. How often should there be a connection on my 9x5 twice around? The Wiring for DCC website states that every rail should be soldered to something: Either a feeder or another rail. That's what I do and there's been no problems with it. (Other than breaking a few ties from the drill... Temporarily solved that problem with a couple pieces of cork.) > 3. Which brands are considered the best combo of price and function? Digitrax and NCE are the two really popular ones. You'll have to answer the question about price and function yourself, but be sure to give the Digitrax Zephyr a good look. One thing to look at when you're choosing systems is the throttle. You'll be spending a bunch of time with it in your hand, so you need to make sure you can live with it. > 4. Are DCC turnouts more trouble then they're worth? Do you mean accessory decoders for DCC controlled turnouts, or DCC- Friendly turnouts? Accessory decoders are still rather expensive for my tastes, especially when you have to throw in a switch machine as well. However, I'd sure love to have a couple DCC controlled turnouts on the club layout. (Especially when I need to throw something on the other side of the penninsula and then return to the same side.) DCC-Friendly turnouts are easy. Just install them and you're good to go. What makes them different is how they route power through the turnout. In DC, it was possible for a momentary short to occur and you'd never notice. DCC circuit breakers react quickly to momentary shorts and that's what causes the problem. Generally, however, whatever works on DC works on DCC. > Thx Puckdropper SignatureNever teach your apprentice everything you know. >1. How important are blocks with DCC? Mixed. With the exception of reversing sections, you don't really need them, but they can be handy for diagnosing problems, or in setting up "power districts" where a short on one section doesn't shut the whole layout down until it's fixed. On the other hand, for signaling / occupancy detection you need sense blocks, which is an isolated section of one rail with a single power feed (which you hang the detector on). Designing the layout with blocks in mind is a good idea, even if you end up wiring them all to the same bus anyway. As a personal rule, I double gap on the two sided end of turnouts, because I might *someday* need to isolate or reverse there, and it's handy to have it built in all along, and I run lots of power feeds anyway. My sense blocks run about 3 feet back from a turnout, unless I'm forced to go shorter because of complicated switching. >2. How often should there be a connection on my 9x5 twice around? It depends on the wire gauge you use. I have a big-a.s power bus running below the track and following it more or less exactly, with feeders back to the track every, er, once in a while. I aim for every 3 feet but will get lazy and go as much as double that. At one time I had an entire 25 foot chunk of upper deck that, due to a brain fart, went for a year with a single power feed to the whole thing, and I only discovered it later because I was wiring in a turnout and couldn't figure out where the power was coming from. I've since taken to keeping my wiring schematics in better shape, and know where every break and feed on the layout is. >3. Which brands are considered the best combo of price and function? I'm a big fan of digitrax for the base station, decoders, and handhelds, and team digital for turnout automation and track detection. Others will have drastically different opinions, and not be wrong. I like digitrax because it's inexpensive, easy to set up once you get the basic idea (their manuals are Not So Good), and there's a local store where I can easily get more if I need them NOW. >4. Are DCC turnouts more trouble then they're worth? Not in the least. They are a beautiful thing, especially if you tie it back to a computer running decoderPro (jmri.sourceforge.net; I use a locobuffer II to connect my layout to the computer). With that and some track detection, you can use the computer to throw turnouts for you if you're moving into a switch, for example. I use peco insulfrog turnouts and their twin coil switch machines, and they're nearly bulletproof, with no modifications required for DCC (powered frogs are more complicated). The team digital SMD8 can control 8 of these turnouts at once. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. Thanks a lot guys. You've given me a ton of things to think about. Primarily, soldering rails together and wiring the frogs. Almost overwhelming but not insurmountable. Much more work than I had imagined. I hope I live long enough to finish laying and wiring the track. The Wiring for DCC site will be real helpful. So are Mike's pics. I guess I won't be using wire nuts after all. Any recommendations for wire guage? I was thinking 18 for the buss and 22 from the bus to the track. On 6/15/2010 3:34 PM None spake thus: > Any recommendations for wire guage? I was thinking 18 for the buss and > 22 from the bus to the track. It's bus, not buss (that's a kiss), and I'd go much larger, say 12. Wire is relatively cheap so why skimp and cause potential problems down the road? SignatureThe fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com) >It's bus, not buss (that's a kiss), and I'd go much larger, say 12. Wire >is relatively cheap so why skimp and cause potential problems down the road? When you're being pedantic, it helps to be correct. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. > On 6/15/2010 3:34 PM None spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > is relatively cheap so why skimp and cause potential problems down the > road? UK spelling. ;-) wolf k. > On 6/15/2010 3:34 PM None spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > It's bus, not buss (that's a kiss), and I'd go much larger, say 12. Wire > is relatively cheap so why skimp and cause potential problems down the road? Yes I know, see the second appearance of "bus". I just added an extra "s" to the first to see if you would notice. Yes the 12 is thicker and therefore more electrons can race down the wire without rubbing against the walls, The resistance caused my the walls makes for friction and if you ever rubbed two sticks together you know friction will cause it to heat up. I shall follow your advice. >Any recommendations for wire guage? I was thinking 18 for the buss and >22 from the bus to the track. I use stranded house wiring for the buss, because I already had a bunch of it laying around. 12 gauge I think. For the track feeders, I have a spool of solid (not stranded) wire that's used for doorbells. I don't remember the exact gauge, I would guess it's #18. It's a good size because it holds it's shape when bent. I usually simply wrap the feeders around the buss by stripping off 2 inches of wire - makes it easy to yank a feed if there's a problem. If you use thinner wire, it can get annoying to solder to the track, and you may have to solder to the feeder too. Don't think a low wattage soldering iron will be better for soldering rail. 150 watts is best because it will locally heat up the track section for a quick bond before melting off half the ties. Lower wattage means that the whole rail gets hot, and it takes longer. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. > I use stranded house wiring for the buss, because I already had a > bunch of it laying around. 12 gauge I think. For the track feeders, I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > can get annoying to solder to the track, and you may have to solder to > the feeder too. While wrapping the feeder around the bus might work in the short term, over time the connection can come loose. It's best to solder it. If you use the correct gauges of wire, I don't see any reason good quality insulation displacement connectors (like the 3M Scotchlok) couldn't be used. It'd save soldering under the layout, but give you a reliable connection for some time to come. (Problems have been reported on various websites with the cheaper connectors, so spend the extra pennies and get the good ones.) > Don't think a low wattage soldering iron will be better for soldering > rail. 150 watts is best because it will locally heat up the track > section for a quick bond before melting off half the ties. Lower > wattage means that the whole rail gets hot, and it takes longer. * A 30W iron is fine. The key is using flux to promote heat transfer only where you want it. The area with flux heats faster and wicks solder away from a hot iron. A little container of flux costs less than $10 and lasts quite a long time. Tin the feeders, apply flux to both rail and feeder, and make sure there's solder on the iron. Hold feeder in place, apply iron, and wait a second. It'll hiss and the solder will transfer. Remove iron, and the feeder has been soldered with no melting of ties. It does take some practice, and having a finer soldering iron tip helps, especially when soldering to code 83 track. Puckdropper SignatureNever teach your apprentice everything you know. >While wrapping the feeder around the bus might work in the short term, >over time the connection can come loose. It's best to solder it. Meh. Works fine for me, and has for years. >If you use the correct gauges of wire, I don't see any reason good >quality insulation displacement connectors (like the 3M Scotchlok) >couldn't be used. It'd save soldering under the layout, but give you a >reliable connection for some time to come. (Problems have been reported >on various websites with the cheaper connectors, so spend the extra >pennies and get the good ones.) I like displacement connectors a lot, and I use them occasionally on splices, but they're a bit pricey to be used all over the place, and they're very, very permanent. It just takes a moment to slice some insulation off of the buss lines and wrap on the feeder. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. <snip> > Don't think a low wattage soldering iron will be better for soldering rail. > 150 watts is best because it will locally heat up the track section for a > quick bond before melting off half the ties. Lower wattage means that the > whole rail gets hot, and it takes longer. * I agree completely. Many try to use far to low a wattage, thinking they're "protecting" the items being solderd from excessive heat. NOT true. Just the opposite in many cases. I've done, and taught, technical soldering (electrical, electronic, and structural) to many students for many years. For most work you need SUBSTANTIAL heat applied QUICKLY, with excellent heat transfer (CLEAN metal, proper flux). This is often best achieved with a substantial copper tip on the iron, that has STORED heat. It can thus transfer far more heat, briefly, than the continuous rated output of the iron. The tip can then "recharge" before the next item is soldered. As you state, such procedure actually transfers far LESS total heat than using a low wattage iron, and 'frying' the parts. Properly done, soldering, especially electrical soldering, is almost like spot welding. First, clean and prepare the parts to be soldered, (perhaps) apply a small amount of appropriate flux, and make sure the soldering iron tip is clean (should look nice an shiney, like it was silver plated). Then apply the heat, and THEN apply the solder. It should just require a brief "pssst", and you're done. If it takes more than a couple seconds, you're doing something wrong. Such rapid soldering is especially neccessary when dealing with sensitive semicondutor devices. It's also useful for avoiding melting plastic ties in trackwork, and similar situations. The above problems illustrate the big weakness of soldering GUNS, their tips just don't store enough heat to make a quick soldering job possible. They're certainly convenient, and fine for rough work where excessive heating is not a big problem (heavy electrical (not electronic) joints, and light structural soldering For most work, decent small soldering iron is the best, and most versatile, soldering tool. Some of the bigger "pencil" irons are fine, especially the ones with exchangeable tips and soldering (heat) elements. Then you can match the tool to the job. For most heavier work in model railroading, like soldering rail joints, I use perhaps a 37 Watt element and a nice BIG chisle tip to store heat. When NOT actually soldering, unplug the iron, or reduce the voltage to it (a lamp dimmer works fine with a pre-resistance type soldering element (the most common type). You do NOT want to overheat the copper tip, or it will rapidly oxidize and be worthless. The tip should stay nice and shiney, and NOT become dull gray, black, brown, or crusted. Periodically re-"tin" it with fresh molten solder and maybe a little flux. Wiping it on a wet cloth or sponge is also effective in removing accumulated dirt or oxidation. For heavier structural work you may need up to a 300 Watt iron with a MASSIVE tip. In such cases you should be considering a torch instead. Also very nice for structural work is a resistance soldering device. But that's a whole 'nother story. And NEVER use a corrosive (usually zinc chloride) flux for electrical/electronic work. It's the "kiss of death" for your electronics and wire. Maybe not NOW, but a year or more in the future. Rosin fluxes are the safest for most model railroading applications. Dan Mitchell Lab Services supervisor Physics & Engineering Univ. of Michigan - Flint ========================= > And NEVER use a corrosive (usually zinc chloride) flux for > electrical/electronic work. It's the "kiss of death" for your > electronics and wire. Maybe not NOW, but a year or more in the future. > Rosin fluxes are the safest for most model railroading applications. Any thoughts on type of solder? None <joeschmo.7@gmail.com> wrote in news:73be6552-1576-435e-a927- 96bf5176d2f5@j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com: >> And NEVER use a corrosive (usually zinc chloride) flux for >> electrical/electronic work. It's the "kiss of death" for your >> electronics and wire. Maybe not NOW, but a year or more in the future. >> Rosin fluxes are the safest for most model railroading applications. > > Any thoughts on type of solder? 60/40 (tin/lead) rosin core is the standard. Otherwise you'll have to mess with the lead free stuff. Just make sure it's rosin core or "electrical" solder. Puckdropper SignatureNever teach your apprentice everything you know. On 6/16/2010 2:35 PM Puckdropper spake thus: > None <joeschmo.7@gmail.com> wrote in news:73be6552-1576-435e-a927- > 96bf5176d2f5@j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > with the lead free stuff. Just make sure it's rosin core or "electrical" > solder. Agree on the type of solder. Of course, don't ever use plumbing-type solder (acid core). If I could bend this topic just a little bit, a question for our cousins over there on the east side of the pond: Do the new EU rules (RoHS) banning lead solder apply even to consumer sales? Can you not buy tin/lead solder at the hardware store or hobby shop? If so, you have my deepest sympathies. All I've heard about that lead-free crap is horror stories. (And I'm a big advocate of keeping lead out of the environment, but ...) SignatureThe fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com) >On 6/16/2010 2:35 PM Puckdropper spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >horror stories. (And I'm a big advocate of keeping lead out of the >environment, but ...) It is very difficult to find. A little while ago I bought a large reel of solder only to find that it was that useless lead free stuff and I was having the devil's own job to even get the soldering iron bit to tin with it. Luckily I live not too far from an 'Aladdin's Cave' store, named Squires, in Bognor Regis, which carries just about everything you need for all sorts of modelling and was able to get some proper lead/tin solder (only 40/60) which has proved far superior. I now keep the two reels of solder far apart on only use the lead free on soldering large wires to the bus bars on my loft layout. Elf'n'safety cause a lot of problems. SignatureMike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ what temp does that stuff melt at? I would suspect that it will work with some of the water based wetting agents. -- Bob May rmay at nethere.com http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net > what temp does that stuff melt at? I would suspect that it will work with > some of the water based wetting agents. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay > http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net NOT following the current branch of this thread, but related ... Melting Temperatures of common Tin-Lead solders, arranged in decreasing order: Melting temperatures: 0/100 … 621° F (pure Lead) 30/70 … 491° F 40/60 … 460° F 100/0 … 449° F (pure Tin) 50/50 … 421° F 60/40 … 374° F 63/37 … 361° F "Eutectic" It is interesting to note that some of the alloys melt at lower temperatures than either of their component metals! This is common for many alloys. For a given alloy, usually the lowest melting point mix is called "Eutectic", it's a state when ALL components of the alloy melt at the same time (temperature). With OTHER alloys (mixtures), components will melt at slightly different temperatures, causing a sort-of "putty" or "granular" state in the melt. This CAN sometimes be useful in structural soldering. As stated previously, the common 60/40 Tin Lead solder is the most useful for most electronic uses ... note that it's NEARLY the "eutectic" mix. Other specialty solders have melting temperatures as low as 190 degrees F., a temperature below that of boiling water, and high-temp solders (usually copper-bearing) may exceed 1000 degrees F. melting temperature, though many call soldering at such copper-melt temperatures "brazing". It's not fundamentally different, but much stronger. One limitation, of course, is that the materials being brazed must be able to stand the heat. All these specialty solders also have matching fluxes. The most readily available (in the USA) silver-bearing solder is "Stay-Bright", a tin-silver solder with a melting point of 430° F, about the same as the plumbing grade tin-lead solders, and attainable with a common soldering iron. Higher silver content makes a stronger solder, but considerably increases the melting temperature. These normally require use of a torch. All kinds of solders with widely varying properties are available for soldering 'difficult" materials, like stainless steel. Sometimes a variety of solders with different melting points are useful for assembling complex structures. Start with the higher melting point solder to assemble subcomponents, then use the lower temperature solders to assemble these ... thus avoiding un-soldering previous joints. Dan Mitchell ============ >The most readily available (in the USA) silver-bearing solder is >"Stay-Bright", a tin-silver solder with a melting point of 430° F, about >the same as the plumbing grade tin-lead solders, and attainable with a >common soldering iron. I like this stuff a lot, but mostly for electronics work and not sticking feeders on rail. For the latter I have a big fat roll of rosin core lead solder because it seems to melt the fastest. Probably because of the lower melting point. >Sometimes a variety of solders with different melting points are useful >for assembling complex structures. Start with the higher melting point >solder to assemble subcomponents, then use the lower temperature solders >to assemble these ... thus avoiding un-soldering previous joints. I've only done one kit that was put together via soldering (a rather cool tin building), and silver solder and a small torch worked great for it. Lead solder makes me a little nervous when you have to use high heat, because if you get too hot, you get lead vapor and it's mad hatter time. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. On 6/22/2010 8:36 AM PV spake thus: > Lead solder makes me a little nervous when you have to use high heat, > because if you get too hot, you get lead vapor and it's mad hatter time. * Not sure you need to worry much, since the boiling point of lead is 3182° F. Does an ordinary torch get things that hot? SignatureThe fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring, with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags. - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com) >Not sure you need to worry much, since the boiling point of lead is >3182° F. Does an ordinary torch get things that hot? You get lead vapor well below that temperature. I want to say 700 or so fahrenheit. Also - I was wrong about the mad hatter thing, that's mercury. But lead vapor is plenty bad too. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. > But lead vapor is plenty bad too. * Only if you get high on it. >> But lead vapor is plenty bad too. * > > Only if you get high on it. You can't get high on lead. It's too heavy! SignatureFrank Rosenbaum Please note the new email address: farosenbaum@optimum.net Please Support the following train shows: Kalamazoo Model Railroad Historical Society, MI.: www.kmrhs.org Gratiot Valley Railroad Club, MI: www.gvrr.org On Jun 23, 5:50 pm, "Frank A. Rosenbaum" <farosenb...@optimum.net> wrote: > >> But lead vapor is plenty bad too. * > > > Only if you get high on it. > > You can't get high on lead. It's too heavy! Didn't you ever hear of Led Zepplin? On Jun 24, 12:50 pm, Special Agent Melvin Purvis <videoc...@aol.com> wrote: > > You can't get high on lead. It's too heavy! > > Didn't you ever hear of Led Zepplin? Yup. But kindly note that they wrote "Stairway to Heaven" only after trying to fly the thing and discovering that one would be better off walking. > I've only done one kit that was put together via soldering (a rather cool > tin building), and silver solder and a small torch worked great for it. > Lead solder makes me a little nervous when you have to use high heat, > because if you get too hot, you get lead vapor and it's mad hatter time. * The dangers inherent in using lead-based solders is, like so many other dangers, somewhat exaggerated. Yes it exists, but to be affected you need extensive exposure over a long term, like coal mine workers that get black lung disease or insulation workers that worked constantly with asbestos insulation. I have spent decades as an electronics technician soldering on circuit boards doing repairs. Before all of the big hoopla about lead-based solder there were even times when I stuck a piece of solder in my mouth to free my hands for a moment. I've had my body's lead content checked on a few occasions as part of a physical exam and it has always been within normal limits. SignatureRick Jones Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me "One of the most interesting things in politics is that we always worry about censorship from the right because that's the standard formula, but suddenly it's barreling in from the left, too, from the campuses in the East and the intellectuals via political correctness. I think when you go out of your way to protect so-called minorities and disaffected people by altering the language used about them, by calling people 'differently abled' or whatever sh.t it is, you're saying they're not strong enough to handle anything on their own. The left thinks it's protecting people, but it's actually insulting them, whether they're handicapped people or blacks or lesbians. But the bottom line message is still the same, whether from the left or right: 'You can't handle life unless we, the white, paternalistic, educated, wealthy community, help you by altering the game plan.' And that's just f.cked." -George Carlin > Lead solder makes me a little nervous when you have to use high heat, > because if you get too hot, you get lead vapor and it's mad hatter time. * > -- > * PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something > like corkscrews. Considering the juxtaposition of the two lines above, I think you can probably stop worrying. It's obviously far too late. (;-P ~Pete Ype, but what is the melting temp of hte no lead solders? All of those listed are leaded solders. -- Bob May rmay at nethere.com http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net >>And NEVER use a corrosive (usually zinc chloride) flux for >>electrical/electronic work. It's the "kiss of death" for your >>electronics and wire. Maybe not NOW, but a year or more in the future. >>Rosin fluxes are the safest for most model railroading applications. > > Any thoughts on type of solder? Any decent electronic solder will serve for model railroad uses. Any electronics supply should have these. Alpha and Kester are popular brands. These are usually a 60/40 type (60% tin - 40% lead) ... this has good "wetting" qualities, a low melting point, and is reasonably ductile. Most will have a rosin core, and are largely self-fluxing. A higher lead solder is stronger and has a higher melting point, and is cheaper (Tin is expensive!). Such used to be common for plumbing work, but lead is now banned from THAT application. Higher tin solders are more ductile, but more expensive. The added cost is not warranted for most applications. Additional flux may be needed for some applications ... this is available in small bottles as an alcohol-rosin solution. A good product, but harder to find is a soldering "paste" made from rosin, alcohol, and ground up solder. It's an all-in-one product. It's not suitable for all uses,a nd is often better for small structural rather than electrical purposes. Still, it can be handy. and avoid all OTHER soldering pastes .. almost all are a grease-based zinc chloride product and are CORROSIVE ... even some labels "No Corrode". In extreme cases these may be useful for structural soldering of dirty metal. That's almost an oxymoron ... ALWAYS try to clean the metal before soldering. Such acid-based solder fluxes ARE used in some structural soldering, but all residue must be cleaned off and/or neutralized after the job is finished. Actually, the rosin fluxes used in much electronic work are also an acid in their molten form when heated, however, they are almost inert when cooled and solidified. It's usually not even necessary to remove the residue, though it may LOOK messy. A little alcohol or other solvent can remove such if desired. There are some critical applications where even this mild flux is not desired, but that's not a problem with most any model railroad use. There are also a LOT of specialty solders. Low melting point solders use Bismuth or Indium, and are used to solder heat sensitive materials. Higher melting point solders are usually stronger, and will join more difficult materials, assuming they can withstand the heat. The next notch up from common solders are "silver-bearing solders" like "Stay Bright". These contain a small amount of silver (5%?), are really useful, are stronger and more ductile than Tin-Lead solders, will 'stick' to more things, and can still be worked with a soldering iron. Still higher melting point solders need a torch (even a common Propane torch is often inadequate). They are often called "hard" solders. One family of these are "Silver Brazes". Many require red-heat to even melt, and require odd and often toxic fluxes (fluorides are one family). These solders typically include silver, cadmium, and copper. The fumes may be toxic. They are FAR stronger than ordinary solders, and will join many things that can't be otherwse soldered ... like cast iron. Dan Mitchell ============ I'll note that a drop of white glue between rails where isolation is desired will kepe the rails apart yet not cause any derailment problems. as long sas the glue isn't so large as to imping on the sides of the rail. -- Bob May rmay at nethere.com http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net >Any thoughts on type of solder? Rosin core - use no other type. Personally I use silver solder because I like the way it looks, but lead solder is perfectly fine too. If you're soldering to rail, use solder paste on the joint before heating, it helps a LOT. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. > I agree completely. Many try to use far to low a wattage, thinking > they're "protecting" the items being solderd from excessive heat. NOT > true. Just the opposite in many cases. > > I've done, and taught, technical soldering (electrical, electronic, and > structural) to many students for many years. (snip) > Dan Mitchell > Lab Services supervisor > Physics & Engineering > Univ. of Michigan - Flint > ========================= What a great post! Thank you, Dan! ~Pete >>I agree completely. Many try to use far to low a wattage, thinking >>they're "protecting" the items being solderd from excessive heat. NOT [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > ~Pete You are welcome! Dan Mitchell ============ >What a great post! > >Thank you, Dan! Seconded. This has been one of the better threads in the group in a while, excepting your cool photo essays. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. Actually, you don't want to be oldering the rails together! The ends of the raisl should havee a small gap in them so that they can expand and contract with the temps in your room. Don't forget that the roadbed is also expanding and shrinking with both temp AND humidity so the two won't be going anywhere near each other for expansion rate. Insstead, you drop a wire from the bottom of the rail through the roadbed to the big wires underneath. You can use a finer wire like 26ga. (phone wires) for this job. Also, when you solder wires onto a rail after the track is insalled, do it on the far side from the viewer so you don't see it. A good solder job on the inside of hte rail will mean that the joint doesn't get into the flange area of the track. -- Bob May rmay at nethere.com http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net > Actually, you don't want to be oldering the rails together! The ends of the > raisl should havee a small gap in them so that they can expand and contract [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay > http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net Mostly, I agree. However, SHORT sections of rail can be soldered together as needed. I'd avoid any runs longer than ten feet. I certainly agree that soldering truly long sections of rail together is asking for problems. It will likely either buckle or pull apart, eventually (the prototype has similar problems with excessively long sections of welded rail). This can lead to kinking, "gauge" issues, and bad electrical connections. I've seen it happen on model layouts MANY times. It's not really the rail that's causing the poblem, but the benchwork and roadbed which expands/contacts FAR more than the rail (especially where humidy changes a lot seasonally). On the other hand, very short sections of rail sometime "float" about a bit TOO much, without restraint. The rail WILL shift lengthwise with train motion and expansion-contraction. All the gaps may migrate to one area, leaving several tight joints and one big gap. Thus, SOME soldering of rails together may be desired. UN-soldered rail joints should NOT be depended on as electrical connections. Each SECTION of rail, whether one rail, or a soldered section, should have a power feeder. The alternative is to solder a "drop" feeder to EVERY rail section (not really a bad idea, but a lot of work). Dan Mitchell ============ > On Jun 15, 7:50 am, "Stetson J.B. Mentzer"<newsbot0...@zekedev.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > 1. How important are blocks with DCC? The only necessary electrical blocks are reversing tracks, ie, sections of track in which the _train_ reverses direction (from "East" to "West", or from clockwise to counterclockwise),ie, return loops or wyes. You can control these manually or automatically. It's useful on large layouts to have "power districts", electrical blocks intended to reduce loads on busses, ease trouble shooting, and prevent a short from shutting down the entire system. Signalling blocks are another issue. These are operational blocks, and may be electrical blocks also, depending on implementation. > 2. How often should there be a connection on my 9x5 twice around? Same as for DC: every 8-10 ft of track, or every physical section of track. This reduces the effect of the rail's (and rail-joiner's) resistance. Turnpouts may be a problem: they should be constructed and wired to ensure a continuous electrical path on both rails. > 3. Which brands are considered the best combo of price and function? That's a personal question. ;) Old-timers will recommend Digitraxx and NCE. But MRC is also good. Wireless highly recommended. > 4. Are DCC turnouts more trouble then they're worth? On a small layout such as yours, IMO yes. Logically, a turnout is just a device connected to a controller, ie, in terms of DCC electronics it is the equivalent of a locomotive: it has an address, and you send control signals to it. So you either carry a second controller, switch between loco and turnout control, use a control panel, or use a computer running some dispatcher software. If you use a control panel, you don't need DCC. OTOH, DCC makes it easier to simplify (and automate) route selection,linking turnouts and signals, and such. Generally speaking, DCC turnout control works best on layouts large enough to justify a Dispatcher role. Then again, on a small layout, manual control may be easiest, and is certainly cheapest. In any case, I recommend a separate power and control circuit for turnouts (and signals, if used). Same for layout lighting, BTW. HTH wolf k. greywolf@ruddy.moss writes: >If you use a control panel, you don't need DCC. OTOH, DCC makes it You can use a control panel with DCC. Items like the SIC24 from team digital work quite well for that, and then your control panel needs only a loconet wire leading out of it, instead of a billion feeds to each of your switches. I don't have an active control panel, but we built three light boards that hang over the layout, with the track schematic on them and LEDs showing turnout position. The SIC24s behind the boards watch the turnout commands (including those automatically sent by decoderPro events), and change themselves to follow the commanded turnout position. it's very handy, and there's only a power feed and a single loconet cable to run the whole thing. It's also fun to watch the lights change as the train moves over the layout and encounters switches that need to be set for it to proceed. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. None <joeschmo.7@gmail.com> wrote in news:bc67c657-3c42-4509-ac57- 5676967e683f@z25g2000vbk.googlegroups.com: *snip* > 3. Which brands are considered the best combo of price and function? *snip* Just wanted to add that decoders are pretty well interchangable. The most important things with decoders are physical size and current rating. You can also ignore the "Z/N/HO" scale designation pretty safely with most brands. (Watch out for S, O, and G scale decoders, they aren't as readily interchangable with the Z/N/HO decoders.) Puckdropper SignatureNever teach your apprentice everything you know. >Just wanted to add that decoders are pretty well interchangable. The most >important things with decoders are physical size and current rating. You >can also ignore the "Z/N/HO" scale designation pretty safely with most >brands. (Watch out for S, O, and G scale decoders, they aren't as readily >interchangable with the Z/N/HO decoders.) One thing to watch out for are old decoders on ebay that don't do 128 speed steps. 14 is way too few, and 28 isn't all that great either. * Signature* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews. > I'm a beginner and starting my HO 5' by 9' layout. I've been doing a > lot of research on this, that, and the other. One of the things is > should I use Code 83 or 100? I see all sorts of things about what and > why it is but not what is recommended. Does it matter? Thanks in > advance for any help. It all depends on what you are modelling as far as I am concerned. Code 83 is equal to approximately 105lb rail in the prototype and Code 100 is a little more than 155lb rail which is what some of the big roads are using on their mains these days. I am using Code 83 in my yards, sidings and spurs and Code 90 (no longer available it appears) and Code 100 on my mainline. Paul Paul Crozier Smith pjcrozier-smith@shaw.ca or paul@crozier-smith.ca |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.