Lenz LS150, Kato Switches, JRMI Software, Planes,Trains, and Automobiles..

[surfingstephens]

Hello all,

I thought I would show how to set up the Lenz LS150 DCC to operate Kato Switches.   There are many different options to set up Kato switches on a DCC layout and this is just one of them.  I used the Lenz LS150 on my HO layout and they worked great for coil type Peco switches, but there were some slight modifications that are needed to use it with the Kato switches, so I thought I would write it up since I needed to add another one of these devices to my layout.

 

First the supplies.  Here you see the Lenz LS150.  One of the reasons I like this switch is it has the ability to handle 6 different switches and cost about 60 dollars.   The only additional thing  you will need to purchase is 12 diodes.   They sell these all over the place and the part number is IN4001.    Not sure if there are rules on this site about links, but here is one place you can get the Lenz and diodes.   http://www.litchfieldstation.com/xcart/product.php?productid=4280035&cat=&page=1  and the diodes are here  http://www.litchfieldstation.com/xcart/product.php?productid=410023&cat=&page=1.   There are many other places to find this stuff, and I don't have any connection to this site, just where I got them and I thought it would help to show you at least one place.

 

I will also say while some soldering skills are helpful, but you can do this without any soldering or tools other than just a small screwdriver.

[surfingstephens]

The first thing you need to do is install the diodes.  These guys act like one way valves for the + - flow on DC current.  I think I got that correct, because I know very  little about this stuff, but better I just show you how to do it than completely explain and understand the theory.    Another way to think of how it work is if you have a regular dc train on a track and you reverse the positive rail with the negative rail it goes the other direction, in this case the switch goes the other direction just like the train would.

 

As you can see, there are three wires for each switch.  That is great for a coil type switch which also has three wires, not so  great for a Kato switch with two wires only.   The picture tells the story, but you just put one diode in the first slot and the second diode in the third slot.  Each of them must "flow" opposite ways as you can tell by the little white bar on the diode itself.  Those two diodes then come together on the opposite end.  You could just take some stripped wire and coil it around the diode ends to have one short wire coming off of it if you do not want to solder.  Should work fine for you.

 

One of the great things about this LS150 is it has very complete directions on how to do all of this.  Those Germans are a concise bunch so the directions are very good.  I can say this because my wife is German, although she grew up in Southern California.

 

I put a short length of wire on because once you are under the table hooking this thing up, it make it easier just to twist the switch wire onto the green wire and feed the black wire directly into the middle connector.  

Edited November 17, 2013 by surfingstephens

[surfingstephens]

OK, it is time to hook it up and test it.   Couple of things to understand. This switch has two electrical inputs. 

     1.  The first input is from you track power.  This is the same wires that are used to operate and run your trains.  This is what allows the switch to receive the "signal" to throw a particular switch number. 

     2.  The second input is AC power.   This is from an old DC type transformer that also has an AC output on it for accessories.  This is what actually supplies the power to throw the switch.   This is great because you don't want the sharp electrical draw happening off of the power your trains run on.  By the way NOTE that my picture is WRONG, chuckle I was not paying attention and had it hooked up to the DC side.   Trust me, that does not work!!!  It needs to be hooked up to the AC side. 

    3.   See that the black wire hooks up to the black wire of the switch and the green wire is to the red of the switch.

    4.   I am  using a sprog III to control may layout and that little box runs the WHOLE thing.  It is the equivalent of a MRC, NCE, Digitrax command station.

 

 

In my layout I have two sets of red/black wire than run underneath the table.  One set is for my trains and track, the other set is hooked to the A/C power to run anything like lights, switches and other stuff that needs continuous power on my layout.  I could digress into star configurations, blocks, short circuit management etc, but let's not today.   Really, my under table wiring is simple and breaks a few "rules", but is sufficient for my needs and the size and complexity of my layout.  I have learned a lot over the years, and would probably do it differently now, but it is, what it is, and has not caused me headaches at all.

 

 

OK back to topic..

Edited November 18, 2013 by surfingstephens

[surfingstephens]

Last but not least, here is a video that explains and shows it in action.   

Edited November 17, 2013 by surfingstephens

[The Next Station Is...]

Thanks for your post - even for a non-DCC layout this is extremely helpful!

[Martijn Meerts]

There's actually enough space inside the shell to hide the diodes if you're silly like me and don't like the sight of components being visible (even though they're usually mounted under the table ;)) That does require some slight modifications to the circuit board, but nothing more than simply cutting some traces.

 

I've experimented with that on an LS150, added diodes to 1 of the outputs and it works fine. Of course, I've since decided to go with servo's instead for turnout control, which requires a whole different setup.. I could however try and find my LS150 and snap a picture of it.

[Vato]

Thanks for the post, very helpful 

[surfingstephens]

Thanks for the responses guys.   One of my frustrations in this hobby is people make all this really neat "stuff" to operate and run our trains, but there is very little detailed information how to install it and make it work and sometimes I am scratching my head thinking what the heck does this particular device actually "do"?  Chuckle.  

 

Just last night I got my JRMI software that is running on my laptop working by setting up a remote desktop from an IPAD.  So now I can sit anywhere I want in my train room and run all my trains and switches using an old IPAD and getting the advantages of the touch screen interface rather than a mouse and also complete mobility of moving around the room.   I am going to shoot a little video of that and of course using the Iphone as a throttle also if you want.   All fun stuff.   Really the more I think about it, the more I think a good touch screen running windows 8 will be the ideal solution for using JRMI.

 

I am also thinking, hmmm, all I need is a camera and I can run my trains from anywhere (in the world) using my ipad and a camera to watch the trains go.  Imagine being on business trip and running the trains from your hotel room at your house and watching them go.  Of course, then you would need the wife on standby to shut down the power or handle a derailed train.   It really just adds another dimension to the hobby that attracts more people to it.

[Martijn Meerts]

I'm not sure a windows 8 machine with touch screen running JRMI would be the best solution really. I rather prefer the whole computer controlling the layout and touchscreen devices that connect to the computer to do specialised tasks. The touchscreen interfaces also need to be designed well, which isn't often the case, and that's mainly because the programmers are also doing the design. As a programmer myself, I know the majority of programmers have no eye for design whatsoever ;)

 

I pretty much exclusively use a Mac these days, and there are no native programs for computer control for the Mac. The Java based ones (JMRI, Rocrail etc.) do work of course, but I don't really like them all that much. I've been experimenting a little with making my own program, native for the Mac, and generally aimed for the not-so-technical people that have fairly simple layouts that don't require all the features the other programs have. Obviously, it will be designed with handheld touchscreen devices in mind.

 

One idea I had was to stream video from a camera equipped train to for example an iPad, including data taken form the software that's controlling the layout so you can see which signals are coming up and stuff like speed limits. On the iPad you then need to stop/slow down when needed etc. Basically a railroad simulator, except you're running an actual model train. With a fully digitally controlled layout you can set up some rules (max speeds, emergency stop when ignoring a stop sign etc.) so people don't go crazy. I think kids may like something like that at shows and such. 

 

Now I just need to become an overnight billionaire so I can quit my job and have time to work on all my projects ;)

[surfingstephens]

I'm not sure a windows 8 machine with touch screen running JRMI would be the best solution really. I rather prefer the whole computer controlling the layout and touchscreen devices that connect to the computer to do specialised tasks. The touchscreen interfaces also need to be designed well, which isn't often the case, and that's mainly because the programmers are also doing the design. As a programmer myself, I know the majority of programmers have no eye for design whatsoever ;)

 

I pretty much exclusively use a Mac these days, and there are no native programs for computer control for the Mac. The Java based ones (JMRI, Rocrail etc.) do work of course, but I don't really like them all that much. I've been experimenting a little with making my own program, native for the Mac, and generally aimed for the not-so-technical people that have fairly simple layouts that don't require all the features the other programs have. Obviously, it will be designed with handheld touchscreen devices in mind.

 

One idea I had was to stream video from a camera equipped train to for example an iPad, including data taken form the software that's controlling the layout so you can see which signals are coming up and stuff like speed limits. On the iPad you then need to stop/slow down when needed etc. Basically a railroad simulator, except you're running an actual model train. With a fully digitally controlled layout you can set up some rules (max speeds, emergency stop when ignoring a stop sign etc.) so people don't go crazy. I think kids may like something like that at shows and such. 

 

Now I just need to become an overnight billionaire so I can quit my job and have time to work on all my projects ;)

 

Yes, let's just say that computer controls for trains have a ways to go before they are user friendly.   I used to program (IT guy) heavily for a number of years and always think I can build something myself although the reality is I have no time to do it and I am more in the Management side of things now,  so I no longer write code.    Coding is something you need to be doing every day to get really effecient and good at a particular language.    I agree with the problem of mobility.  If I try out a touchscreen on a machine it will then be linked via the usb port to the Sprog III just like my current laptop is so no real gain other than the touch part.    I am still thinking it over and how it may work.   I think if you had one screen for the switches on your layout and a seperate screen for the the throttles it would be pretty nice.  Possibly a pc with two screens that  are touch sensitive? Thanks for your thoughts on the topic, I am really just thinking out loud about how it may work best, and am happy to get other views on it.

[Martijn Meerts]

I actually do a lot of coding on a daily basis, although that's mainly PHP stuff for websites and the occasional Android bits and pieces. For personal stuff I'm sticking mainly to Objective-C because I actually rather enjoy the language (unlike many others ;))

 

I've tried various software (Rocrail, JRMI, Koploper (Dutch only thing), iTrains, TrainController, Railware, etc.) and while some of them are incredible bits of software (I particularly like TrainController), they are usually too complicated. On top of that, they either have silly UI's or they're overly expensive, or a combination of both. Looking at Rocrail for example, they have a window where you can set for example the maximum speed of a train. Rather than writing "max speed forward" and "max speed reverse", for which there's more than enough space in the UI even on small screens, they write 'V_Max' and 'V_RMax'... Their loco list also has '#__' which I presume means the address, and 'V___' rather than 'speed'. Of course, the UI is actually fairly straight forward to alter, but it's been like this for years and it's not looking like it'll change anytime soon.

 

I've considered helping them out with some UI design stuff, but after looking at the code, it's typical Java coder stuff. Variable names that are max. 4 letters long and don't actually describe what value the variable holds, function names that make no sense, and all that goodness ;)

 

 

As for layout control, it really depends on the situation. If you have a simple home layout, just a single computer (possible with a touch screen) should be enough, possibly with an additional iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch as wireless control. For larger, club layouts I'm thinking also a single main computer to control the layout, and several handheld controls. From the main computer you could limit each handheld control to only certain trains, so that certain people can only control a certain set of trains. Or you could set each controller to only be able to operate a certain area of the layout, so 1 controller can do the main station, another one does the yard, another the engine service terminal etc.

[surfingstephens]

I chuckled about your summary of the typical poorly written and documented code.  My life story right there.  When I used to code I would comment the work and describe the logic as I wrote the code so you ended up with a running story about what I was doing in sections of the code and the intent of what it was designed to do.   Most stuff I look at has zero to none of that.    Like I said, I am not coding much more, my last round of coding was in C# for .Net, so I am pretty dated at this point.   I have been kicking around learning how to code for the IPhone for fun, but I really just do not have the time.     The good news is it appears the movement to use computers to operate the trains is gaining momentum.  For the longest time, it was pretty much buy our proprietory hardware and use a hand controller with just numbers and F keys.   Not to user friendly.   Check out the last post on this link http://www.jnsforum.com/community/topic/8110-my-layout-using-jrmi/  ,   I shot a video of what I am messing with at this point.   It sounds like you have already done all of this and a lot more than that in your quest to find something you like.  If you find something you are excited about let me know. 

Edited November 19, 2013 by surfingstephens

[Martijn Meerts]

I don't often comment my code either, but that's mainly because I'm usually the only one working on it. I'm the only coder at work. I have started to try and get into the habit of commenting code though, it's proving difficult ;)

 

I have fully automated a couple of layouts now, actually made a few posts about it on the forum. Just some general stuff about computer control and blocks and the like. In the first post I added a video of the station area of an automated layout which shows trains coming and going, decelerating and coming to a stop and all that. First post is here: http://www.jnsforum.com/community/topic/276-automated-computer-control-chapter-1-introduction/

 

The layout in the video doesn't exist anymore, and in this version it only had trains running in 1 direction. I have a layout up on the attic at the moment which is also fully automated, has trains running in 2 directions, and has a small yard as well. I haven't had the chance to shoot any video of that however, really should do it at some point. Other than that I'm working on a large-ish layout at the moment which will also be fully automated, but I'm still working on the hidden yard for that one, which is taking way longer than it should :)

[cteno4]

Martin,

 

I know what you mean it being hard to comment when it's just you, but I forced myself to do it years ago worrying about the getting hit by the bus thing and leaving my clients in a crunch. But it's helped as I have had one program in an exhibit now for 22 years and go back and add to it every couple of years and even though I try to name all my variables and functions very descriptively its helped me quickly remind me what the hell I was thinking a decade or more before! The history in the comments also makes it easier to figure out when the hell something came in.

 

Cheers

 

Jeff

Edited November 20, 2013 by cteno4

[Martijn Meerts]

Yeah, often times when I look into my "old" code, even simple stuff form only a few months ago, I wonder what the hell I was doing ;) Then again, if I have to fix some old code that my boss coded before I started working here, I'm spending about 5 days just figuring out what on earth is going on, and then about 5 minutes to apply the fix...

 

I've also once, just for fun, gave all my variables completely nonsensical names. You get some really interesting code like that, and you'll be lost after only a few minutes =)

[cteno4]

Its the evolution over the years and the history of what new features came in when that usually screws me up. once i have that straight then its a lot easier for me to follow my logic over the span of time.

 

it does feel off leaving notes to yourself, kind of fells like walking around talking to yourself. the old adage is you're ok as long as you dont start answering yourself!

 

ive only had to go thru someone else's code one time. what a mess, but i was brought in as the guy walked off the project wanting a lot of money to finish (blackmail basically) but when i got into the code i soon found what he had done was pretty worthless, he just made a few things work on the surface but the core was not there! they had to start the whole thing over again.

 

jeff

[surfingstephens]

Martin, I saw the stuff you did with your train set up.   Really nice.  That is what I have in mind to do next.   Just not sure if I willing to commit the man hours to do the blocks and the wiring.  When I  "feel" like I want to embark on that project then I will give it a try.   Definitely requires a lot of time "under the table" doing the wires. What did you use as your sensors under the table for the blocks?  What product?

 

Jeff you and Martin are both cracking up on the coding stuff.  For me, I no longer code, but for about 10 years I was and independed contractor and just billed by the hour to write software for people.  I enjoyed it greatly, but as time went on I got more and more involved in design and then Project Management and then running the entire IT group.  So, of course I miss, just putting my headphones on and some music and coding for long stretches at a time in peace.    I keep telling myself I may finish out my career (10 years to go roughly) just happily coding and letting others deal with Management.  Chuckle.

[Martijn Meerts]

Its the evolution over the years and the history of what new features came in when that usually screws me up. once i have that straight then its a lot easier for me to follow my logic over the span of time.

 

it does feel off leaving notes to yourself, kind of fells like walking around talking to yourself. the old adage is you're ok as long as you dont start answering yourself!

 

ive only had to go thru someone else's code one time. what a mess, but i was brought in as the guy walked off the project wanting a lot of money to finish (blackmail basically) but when i got into the code i soon found what he had done was pretty worthless, he just made a few things work on the surface but the core was not there! they had to start the whole thing over again.

 

jeff

 

Jeff, sounds familiar.. I recently had to build an Android app, and while I got the basics done fairly quickly, I just didn't know enough about the SDK to really make it work. So we sent it out to a freelancer, got it back like a month later (which was about 3 weeks later than expected ;)), and I had to add some other things to it.. The code was .... Well, it made a bowl of spaghetti leak neat and tidy :)

 

 

 

Martin, I saw the stuff you did with your train set up.   Really nice.  That is what I have in mind to do next.   Just not sure if I willing to commit the man hours to do the blocks and the wiring.  When I  "feel" like I want to embark on that project then I will give it a try.   Definitely requires a lot of time "under the table" doing the wires. What did you use as your sensors under the table for the blocks?  What product?

 

Depending on the size of the layout, and the precision you want, the wiring doesn't have to be that bad actually. The thing is, you'll really want to plan the layout a little with blocks in mind, so you don't end up having sections of the layout that are hard to add blocks too. You also want to make sure not all blocks can have trains travelling in both directions. For train stations and the like it's nice, but for most other tracks trains will be going 1 direction (unless if you have a single-track line of course :))

 

For the layout in the video, that one was running on the Selectrix digital system and used occupancy detectors made by Rautenhaus. For the hidden yard I'm currently working on, I'm using s88 modules by Littfinski. I buy the kit versions, as they're easy enough to assemble, and all the components are easy to solder. Command station is the ECoS 50200 by ESU. The yard actually is a lot of wiring, but that's because I've added feeder wires to each section of track, as well as added additional feeders to the turnouts to make sure the trains can crawl over them. The yard also has a LOT of blocks considering some of the tracks have multiple blocks.

[Melandir]

Marijn

 

This is a good occupancy detector for 16 block also with railcom on all of them (so you put the Esu 50200 at good use)

 

http://www.bluecher-elektronik.de/prod/gbm/gbm16xn.html

 

it is modular and can use different interfaces s88 and loconet for sure

 

I'll use a Z21 command station on my layout

[Martijn Meerts]

That one's actually rather expensive... I can get about 5 occupancy detectors with 8 inputs for that price, and while those don't have Railcom, they're good enough for me. I don't really plan on using Railcom :)

 

On top of that, to use Railcom on that detector I'd have to switch over to loconet, considering the s88 bus I'm using now doesn't support it. That in turn means I need to first get the ESU loconet adapter, which isn't cheap either, and I'd need to replace the occupancy detectors I already have, or use a mix of Railcom and non-Railcom detectors, which would get confusing.