Author Topic: Railpower 1300 testing  (Read 41046 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

mmagliaro

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6368
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1871
    • Maxcow Online
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #105 on: March 26, 2018, 06:18:43 PM »
0
Max, this has been an outstanding thread. You've gone above and beyond to determine exactly what's going on, and furthermore, proposed--and demonstrated--a practical workaround to address the problem.

I'd vote this as a "best of" thread for the DCC/Electronics section.

I appreciate the sentiment sir.  But honestly, I'm a little gun shy about it because:

1. I want to try the zener in a real 1300 and prove that I get the output I expect.  This part I can do.

2. I'd really like to test a 1300 on a smattering of decoders of the type Rapido uses, with and without the modification,
to see if we can prove that this alleviates the problem.
This part I CAN'T do. 

While I think my change will help, what proof do we have other than theory?  I would hate this thread to be logged
for all time as a "solution" when it isn't proven.

Here's an open request to Rapido Trains (Jason):

If you have some sort of test bed you used to see what the 1300 is doing to your decoders, would it be possible to
test a modified power pack I could send you to see if it solves the problem?  Would you have any interest in doing this?
(I fully understand if you don't have the time or inclination to get mixed up in this... but I had to ask!)

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 32958
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +5343
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #106 on: March 26, 2018, 07:21:14 PM »
0
Yes, but the catch there is that they would probably have to use a better transformer.  Transformers all experience some voltage drop as the current increases, and the closer you push a transformer near its maximum current rating, the harder it drops (as of course, you know).  So to get a 1/2 amp output with a fairly stable output voltage would probably require using a better transformer than the one they have in there, and probably one with more like a 1A current rating.  I'd venture that a zener for a few pennies would be more desirable to somebody in the accounting department than a better transformer, cynical though I may be.

Yes, adding the Zener diode limits the top voltage while retaining some reserve voltage coming out of the transformer. Basally you added a voltage regulator to the circuit.

Changing the voltage divider arrangement of the speed-control potentiometer would also limit the top voltage out of the transistor. For example changing the pot from 20k to 15k and inserting a 5K resistor between the top lead of the pot and the positive output of the bridge rectifier should result in limiting the top output voltage of the transistor.

As far as transformer quality is concerned, I have never heard of different levels of their quality (of standard industrial grade transformers utilized in consumer products).  Transformer is an iron core with couple of copper wire windings. They are designed to have input and output voltages, and handle certain wattage (volt-amps).  I don't think there is a better and not-so-good quality.  All MRC had to do is to get a transformer with a same wattage, but lower output voltage, to retain the lowest component count throttle design.

I suppose that the iron core material can have slightly different magnetic qualities, but I think that the effect of that on the "quality" of the transformer's ability to deliver the rated wattage to the output would be minimal. After all, I'm discussing a low cost commercial quality parts (not some esoteric high-end piece of equipment with a transformer made with some fancy ferromarnetic core, and oxygen-free 99.9% pure copper wire).
. . . 42 . . .

mmagliaro

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6368
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1871
    • Maxcow Online
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #107 on: March 26, 2018, 08:21:12 PM »
0
Yes, adding the Zener diode limits the top voltage while retaining some reserve voltage coming out of the transformer. Basally you added a voltage regulator to the circuit.

Changing the voltage divider arrangement of the speed-control potentiometer would also limit the top voltage out of the transistor. For example changing the pot from 20k to 15k and inserting a 5K resistor between the top lead of the pot and the positive output of the bridge rectifier should result in limiting the top output voltage of the transistor.

As far as transformer quality is concerned, I have never heard of different levels of their quality (of standard industrial grade transformers utilized in consumer products).  Transformer is an iron core with couple of copper wire windings. They are designed to have input and output voltages, and handle certain wattage (volt-amps).  I don't think there is a better and not-so-good quality.  All MRC had to do is to get a transformer with a same wattage, but lower output voltage, to retain the lowest component count throttle design.

I suppose that the iron core material can have slightly different magnetic qualities, but I think that the effect of that on the "quality" of the transformer's ability to deliver the rated wattage to the output would be minimal. After all, I'm discussing a low cost commercial quality parts (not some esoteric high-end piece of equipment with a transformer made with some fancy ferromarnetic core, and oxygen-free 99.9% pure copper wire).

I think what I really meant by "quality" was whether or not the transformer really delivers its stated output voltage at its stated current.  It might say "12.6VAC 3 AMP", but in fact only output something like 11 volts when you get up to 3 A.  I don't know how many cheap "wall warts" I've played with that have a certain voltage and current rating on them, but have severe voltage drop when you get anywhere near the advertised current on their label.  I've almost come to expect a transformer to not really hold its rated voltage much over 1/2 its rated current.

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 32958
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +5343
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #108 on: March 26, 2018, 10:18:59 PM »
0
I think what I really meant by "quality" was whether or not the transformer really delivers its stated output voltage at its stated current.  It might say "12.6VAC 3 AMP", but in fact only output something like 11 volts when you get up to 3 A.  I don't know how many cheap "wall warts" I've played with that have a certain voltage and current rating on them, but have severe voltage drop when you get anywhere near the advertised current on their label.  I've almost come to expect a transformer to not really hold its rated voltage much over 1/2 its rated current.

To be honest, I have never thoroughly tested any of the AC wall-warts I used (and I never load them up to more than roughly 70% of their rated current). But I have seen what you describe in the DC wall-warts. Those utilize a simple bridge rectifier and a usually too-small-value electrolytic filter cap. With no or little load, the voltage will reflect the peak (not RMS) voltage. As the load increases, so does the ripple, and the voltage gets closer to the true RMS value.

As for commercial transformers (like ones available at Digikey), their output voltage is specified at the full load current.  Like this one:
https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/triad-magnetics/F-157XP/237-1920-ND/5032138

But that is neither here nor there as we really don't know how MRC designed their throttle.
. . . 42 . . .

Point353

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 3350
  • Respect: +777
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #109 on: March 26, 2018, 10:48:07 PM »
0
I see now.  I tried it.

It does reduce the maximum pulse height, but you have to change the resistor to 2.2k in order to get a full 12V average DC out
at full throttle.  Otherwise, you only get about 9.5v and I don't think that's good enough.  With a 2.2k, the pulses are reduced to 20v from 25v, which is a nice improvement, and the maximum DC out is about 12.3v at full load, which is fine.

What I don't like about this is that it changes the fundamental waveform.  You lose the intermediate half-height pulses, which I think would improve motor performance at low speed, and I like the way they gradually "catch up" to the full pulses as you raise the speed, thereby giving it more smooth DC at higher speed, which is desireable for motors.
It depends, too, upon what you intend to power with your throttle.
Dual-mode locos may need over 7VDC applied just to begin moving.
For comparison, according to MR test data, the Kato FP7 reaches 103 s(cale)mph at 6VDC, 178 smph at 9VDC and 248 smph at 12VDC.

Also, I wonder if those full voltage pulses are still necessary for decent performance with 5-pole, skewed armature and coreless type motors versus older 3-pole motors.

If Jason from Rapido can't perform an analysis on the failed decoders, perhaps he could ship a few off to peteski, if he would be willing to investigate them. 

mmagliaro

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6368
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1871
    • Maxcow Online
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #110 on: March 26, 2018, 11:07:31 PM »
0
It depends, too, upon what you intend to power with your throttle.
Dual-mode locos may need over 7VDC applied just to begin moving.
For comparison, according to MR test data, the Kato FP7 reaches 103 s(cale)mph at 6VDC, 178 smph at 9VDC and 248 smph at 12VDC.

Also, I wonder if those full voltage pulses are still necessary for decent performance with 5-pole, skewed armature and coreless type motors versus older 3-pole motors.

If Jason from Rapido can't perform an analysis on the failed decoders, perhaps he could ship a few off to peteski, if he would be willing to investigate them.

Yes, some locos run like rocket ships at 12v, while others don't.  I am not trying to make a power pack that adapts to all that nutty behavior.  I think it best to stick to the 12v nominal expected voltage for a power pack.

And from my own personal experience, even beautifully-running coreless motors do run better with a little pulse in the DC when coaxing them along at extremely low creep speeds.   So while pulses aren't "necessary", they definitely help.


peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 32958
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +5343
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #111 on: March 26, 2018, 11:27:10 PM »
0
It would be interesting to scope out Kato's power pack to see what voltages it has.  As I understand, it is also a very simple transistorized throttle using full-wave unfiltered DC.

Point353:  Usually only sound decoders need 5-7V DC to "boot up" and start working.  Non-sound decoders running on DC work with as little as 2-3VDC.  We are talking about smooth (filtered) DC.

Sound decoders usually have stay-alive capacitors in their internal power supply. If the decoder is fed a pulsing DC, the voltage it sees will be somewhere between the RMS and peak voltage of those pulses (depending on the capacitance of those caps).  I'm talking about pulses derived form a sine-wave AC (from a transformer). If the DC throttle is a PWM throttle, then things get a bit more complicated - the decoder will see the average voltage of the PWM pulses (again depending on the capacitance of the decoder's stay-alive caps).

The bottom line is that the DCC decoders are safest to be run from their native DCC signal or from filtered DC (like a 9V battery).
. . . 42 . . .

Point353

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 3350
  • Respect: +777
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #112 on: March 26, 2018, 11:33:47 PM »
0
It would be interesting to scope out Kato's power pack to see what voltages it has.  As I understand, it is also a very simple transistorized throttle using full-wave unfiltered DC.
There's some info on the Kato unit here:
http://www.sumidacrossing.org/Musings/files/131222_Kato%20DC%20Power%20Pack.php

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 32958
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +5343
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #113 on: March 26, 2018, 11:45:29 PM »
0
There's some info on the Kato unit here:
http://www.sumidacrossing.org/Musings/files/131222_Kato%20DC%20Power%20Pack.php

Thanks!  So yes, it is a very basic transistorized throttle and its output voltage is more inline with NMRA recommendations.
. . . 42 . . .

mmagliaro

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6368
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1871
    • Maxcow Online
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #114 on: March 27, 2018, 02:52:31 AM »
0
Thanks!  So yes, it is a very basic transistorized throttle and its output voltage is more inline with NMRA recommendations.

I agree, because with a 17 VAC RMS supply, that's 24V peak, and there are always a few voltage losses through the diodes and transistor, so yeah, it's not going to be more than 20 on the output peaks.

Point353

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 3350
  • Respect: +777
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #115 on: March 27, 2018, 09:23:46 AM »
0
I agree, because with a 17 VAC RMS supply, that's 24V peak, and there are always a few voltage losses through the diodes and transistor, so yeah, it's not going to be more than 20 on the output peaks.
Note that the Kato pack lacks the extra resistor (connected between the AC input and the base of the transistor) that provides full voltage pulses as in the 1300.
If you ever have the opportunity to try a Kato pack, it would be interesting to know how well you think it runs your locos at low speeds.

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 13424
  • Respect: +7026
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #116 on: March 27, 2018, 09:33:29 AM »
0
To be honest, I have never thoroughly tested any of the AC wall-warts I used (and I never load them up to more than roughly 70% of their rated current). But I have seen what you describe in the DC wall-warts. Those utilize a simple bridge rectifier and a usually too-small-value electrolytic filter cap. With no or little load, the voltage will reflect the peak (not RMS) voltage. As the load increases, so does the ripple, and the voltage gets closer to the true RMS value.

Note that some newer "wall warts" are actually switching supplies.

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 32958
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +5343
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #117 on: March 27, 2018, 03:32:11 PM »
0
Note that some newer "wall warts" are actually switching supplies.

A valid observation.

There are couple of ways to reliably identify those.

Those are pretty much DC only (I have seen a single example of a specialized AC electronic switching supply for a certain LED lamp).

1. Then are much lighter than then the old-style ones because they do not contain a large and heavy hunk of iron and copper (the step-down power transformer).  They still have transformers, but they are very small and light.

2. Another instant clue is if their input voltage rating is not a single voltage (like 120VAC) but a range of voltages like 100-240VAC.  That indicates that it is a switching power supply which can automatically handle voltages pretty much anywhere in the world.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 03:35:49 PM by peteski »
. . . 42 . . .

Point353

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 3350
  • Respect: +777
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #118 on: March 28, 2018, 10:04:21 PM »
0
Instead, here's my idea of putting in a 20v zener diode.  This limits the maximum pulse height to only 18v, and as you can see, it preserves the alternating pulse height behavior.  I do admit I'm wondering if the clipped square wave shape at higher speeds will create more heat or noise from a motor.    But I rather doubt it, since it's certainly no more harsh than  the square waves from a PWM.

A 20v 1W zener costs about 50 cents, and that's a consumer price, buying only 10 of them (which I just did on eBay... ).
So we are talking pennies here from a manufacturing standpoint.

The second plot, at half throttle, doesn't show the voltage on the voltmeter.  Instead, there I was measuring the current through the zener.  As you can see, it's miniscule, so a 1W zener can easily handle this and it won't even get warm.


Could you run a simulation that shows how much current flows through the zener diode when the throttle (R2) is at the full setting?

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 32958
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +5343
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Railpower 1300 testing
« Reply #119 on: March 28, 2018, 10:10:26 PM »
0
Could you run a simulation that shows how much current flows through the zener diode when the throttle (R2) is at the full setting?

I see where you are going with this. Looks like you are familiar with electronic design. I missed that myself.  :facepalm:
I would still change the speed control pot to 15k, and install a resistor between the top lead of the pot and the positive of the bridge rectifier. With the high gain of the Darlington transistor, you could also add a resistor between the wiper lead of the pot and the Zener diode's cathode.
. . . 42 . . .