Transitioning from DC to DCC in Simple Terms for Beginners

[DJ Dangerous]

After typing something on the A Class sound thread, I thought that maybe other people could benefit from the few simple things that I've learned about DCC, while preparing to make the transition from DC to DCC.

It seems like such a minefield, sounds incredibly expensive, and when people write about it on here, they tend to assume that everybody knows what they mean when mumbling about CV's and other crazy stuff.

From speaking with @murphaph, who is quite the DCC guru, and reading posts from @irishthump and @NIRCLASS80, there are cheap and simple options for making the progression from DC to DCC, such as using a LokProgrammer (€150 EURO or so) and some very basic LokPilot chips (about €24 EURO each).

These chips only offer four functions, and don't offer sound, but do mean that your DC locos will become DCC locos without spending €100 plus per loco.

This is the route that I intend taking, slowly, with a mix of some DC lines and some DCC lines, gradually moving to all DCC.

I have a Bachmann DCC set which I'll steal the controller from.

It only has ten functions, so I'll miss out on any other functions on the pre-programmed chips for now.

I'll eventually upgrade to a better DCC controller, but it will facilitate the transition with minimal cost.

Sorry for embedding URL's to Spanish retailers, but they were my bookmarked ones.

The reference numbers will be the same for the LokProgrammer and LokPilot chips so you can find them on eBay or wherever.

If anybody would like to add to this thread, in simple terms, aimed at begineers, please do so!

You can see @murphaph's test loop by clicking here.

The way he has set up RocRail to run his locos is breathtaking.

You can see @irishthump's video on how he set up the new Murphy Models 121 Class decoder by clicking here.

 

[Noel]

My tuppence, Advantages of DCC over DC for me were:

• Sound
• Prototypical driving simulation. Acceleration, coasting, braking, driving trains properly
• Less wiring - (ie no block sections needed), literally just two wires needed for track power (I have no droppers on our layout)
• Ability to double head (consist)
• Ability to run locos right up to each other without isolation rails
• DCC can act as a bus for all accessories such as coach lighting, point motors, signals, no extra wiring needed
• Much simpler to wire than a DC layout, quicker to get trains running - two wires

Our layout was built 28 years ago as a DC layout with extensive wiring for block sections and isolation rails (eg loco she's, sidings, terminus platforms, etc. To convert to DCC all I had to do was connect two wires from DCC controller to my DC switch box and flick every single switch on and leave them on. It took me 20 minutes. No droppers anywhere, and no tales of woe encountered it just works, and come of the track sections are quite long. The fishplates have made excellent conductors. DCC = Simpler

[DJ Dangerous]

I believe that block sections are required if one wants to take beginners DCC to the next level, as per @murphaph's test loop, and droppers required for current / occupancy detectors, so I'm not sure that the wiring is any simpler.

I think that it was @warb's Barrow Street where I saw a photo of a massive amount of DCC control equipment and cabling, but I'm not sure.

But this thread is not about that... Yet!

Just to try help frightened people like me make the leap from DC to DCC.

The ability to double-head trains and to run locos right up to one another with no isolation rails must look and feel awesome!

[warb]

Barrow street is broken down in to the following

1 main controller

with 4 boosters supplying

2 main lines 

1 points/signals

1 points fiddle yard

and aux 12v/16v/3v  lines

 

 

 

[DJ Dangerous]

That is breathtaking!

You even have fans installed at the back!

[Ironroad]

This is a great topic and since I'm at a crossroads on taking the plunge into DCC and completely ignorant of what I may be getting into, I'm very interested in all and any contributions.

So a couple of questions (which may seem silly to the informed),  Noel, when you say

5 hours ago, Noel said:

Our layout was built 28 years ago as a DC layout with extensive wiring for block sections and isolation rails (eg loco she's, sidings, terminus platforms, etc. To convert to DCC all I had to do was connect two wires from DCC controller to my DC switch box and flick every single switch on and leave them on. It took me 20 minutes. No droppers anywhere, and no tales of woe encountered it just works, and come of the track sections are quite long. The fishplates have made excellent conductors. DCC = Simpler

Is it correct to assume that you were using points with live frogs rather that the isolated type? If using the latter you would have have tp provide a power feed to sections that would otherwise be isolated?

Secondly, is there an issue with reverse loops?  In DC since the polarity is reversed it is necessary to create a section of track that can be isolated to facilitate reversal of polarity.

Dump questions perhaps but I'm dumb on this subject, Thanks

[DJ Dangerous]

9 minutes ago, Ironroad said:

Is it correct to assume that you were using points with live frogs rather that the isolated type? If using the latter you would have have tp provide a power feed to sections that would otherwise be isolated?

 

I never thought of that.

For Insulfrog type points, surely you'd need to somehow liven up the insulated blade or run a feed to the track off the dead blade, as the whole idea of DCC is that everything is always live?

[Ironroad]

Hi DJ, the point of my question is to clarify that if all track section are live at all times in DCC, that points which isolate sections are unnecessary and as part of the process of transitioning to DCC it is preferable to install points with live frogs and if indeed insulfrog points are already installed it would be necessary to wire a feed across these points.  Perhaps very basic but I'd like to be sure nothing is taken for granted.  

 

[irishthump]

1 hour ago, Ironroad said:

This is a great topic and since I'm at a crossroads on taking the plunge into DCC and completely ignorant of what I may be getting into, I'm very interested in all and any contributions.

So a couple of questions (which may seem silly to the informed),  Noel, when you say

Is it correct to assume that you were using points with live frogs rather that the isolated type? If using the latter you would have have tp provide a power feed to sections that would otherwise be isolated?

Secondly, is there an issue with reverse loops?  In DC since the polarity is reversed it is necessary to create a section of track that can be isolated to facilitate reversal of polarity.

Dump questions perhaps but I'm dumb on this subject, Thanks

Points...

Yes, if you use dead frogs you'll need to provide power feeds to isolated sections. I also solder small jumper wires across the switch rails of the point so that they are always conducting power. I can post a picture of what I did to better explain it if needs be.

Reverse loops require a special module for DCC which automatically switches the polarity when a train enters and exits the revers loop. The loop also needs to be isolated from the rest of the layout.

[irishthump]

6 hours ago, Noel said:

 

Our layout was built 28 years ago as a DC layout with extensive wiring for block sections and isolation rails (eg loco she's, sidings, terminus platforms, etc. To convert to DCC all I had to do was connect two wires from DCC controller to my DC switch box and flick every single switch on and leave them on. It took me 20 minutes. No droppers anywhere, and no tales of woe encountered it just works, and come of the track sections are quite long. The fishplates have made excellent conductors. DCC = Simpler

No offence intended but that's really not a reliable way to do things. I would imagine the existent DCC wiring on your layout is helping conductivity to different sections. I know you say you don't have any problems but you're asking for trouble. Fishplates will conduct, that's what they're designed for, but over time they can oxidise or loosen and that will affect them. Painting and weathering track can also cause a loss of conductivity (I notice your own track isn't painted), I have experienced this first hand.

The best practice is to install a DCC bus and to use droppers every few feet or to all seperate pieces of track. I've also heard people suggesting that the track itself acts as it's own bus which is nonsense. Track is actually a poor conductor which is why a bus is the best option.

[Noel]

4 hours ago, irishthump said:

No offence intended but that's really not a reliable way to do things. I would imagine the existent DCC wiring on your layout is helping conductivity to different sections. I know you say you don't have any problems but you're asking for trouble. Fishplates will conduct, that's what they're designed for, but over time they can oxidise or loosen and that will affect them. Painting and weathering track can also cause a loss of conductivity (I notice your own track isn't painted), I have experienced this first hand.

The best practice is to install a DCC bus and to use droppers every few feet or to all seperate pieces of track. I've also heard people suggesting that the track itself acts as it's own bus which is nonsense. Track is actually a poor conductor which is why a bus is the best option.

Hi Graham, I know, Don’t worry no offence taken,  I grew up with the old Zero One mantra ‘just two wires’, layout track was laid in 1994 and it’s still working, no oxidisation, some former isolation joints were bridged with friction pushed 5cm long wires under rails (no solder), absolute sacrilege I know but it just works, no DCC bus, no droppers, made conversion easy. A good pal of mine has droppers to every separate piece Of track. My only regret is that I didn’t use electro frog points back then which would have needed some local frog wiring  and switching. Gort though has a few droppers. For newbie folks reading this starting out with a new layout some DCC bus droppers seem like a prudent idea if not more work. I got away with it on about 400ft of code 100 track. I do remember paying particular attention to the level of friction and snugness of all fish plates when laying the track back in 1994/1995.  Initially I used peco foam underlay with the intention of replacing it within a few years, but never got around to it until this last year, and most of it bar one roll and a few point underpays proved UV robust. There’s only a few feet where it’s started to perish 27 years later. In time it will all be replaced but it’s so ultra quiet transmitting no noise to ply baseboard. On Gort I used closed cell dense 3mm foam.

[murphaph]

I feel DJ has praised me well beyond my abilities deserve but here's my $0.02 nevertheless:

Personally I would advise anyone building from scratch to use a bus of appropriate wire gauge, to divide the track up into signalling blocks just in case later you do decide to add some automation and to run droppers to each block, soldering the fishplates within blocks to have no potential points of failure. This doesn't cost anything except a bit of wire and some time.

This isn't "complicated". It's still just two wires but it's going to be more reliable and future proof.

In DCC you theoretically don't need electrofrog points as the whole layout is receiving the same DCC feed, but many DCC folks do still install electrofrog points (and the associated switchgear to change the frog polarity) for one reason: better slow speed running of short locos with limited pickups over the points. The insulfrog is a dead spot so an 0-4-0 with one dodgy pickup can easily stall at prototypical speeds. 

An alternative could be to use beefy capacitors as a "battery" to keep the loco alive. All personal choice. In the hidden areas you can typically get away with insulfrog coupled with simply going faster over the points to use momentum to carry the loco over any dead spots.

These aren't really DCC issues though. An insulfrog point in a DC layout can cause the same problems though DCC usually offers better slow speed running than DC so the problem might only manifest itself because DCC is better in this regard.

The takeaway is that DCC wiring is simpler (on more complicated layouts) or at least as simple (on very simple layouts) as DC and IMO the benefits are clear. You are driving the train and not the track. It's just way more realistic.

[DJ Dangerous]

To simplify for idiots like me, a "DCC Bus" is a fancy name for a power cable running underneath your board (usually), from your controller, following the route of your tracks above, and "Droppers" are cables passed from your track through your board to this cable.

And, "Frogs" are the blades on your points.

[Galteemore]

‘Frogs’ aren’t so much the point blades  as the place where the rails cross and potentially clash electrically. The technical term is a common crossing. An easy way to make it electrically simple is to use plastic frogs - but these can lead to unreliable running. Or use the point blades to change polarity with direction of travel - but dirt on point blades can lead to ...unreliable running. I have experienced both of the above variants !

Best option is a frog which is electrically separated from the rest of the turnout and has its polarity switched at same time as point blades move - usually done with a switch on point motor. Here’s a crossover on my layout being prepared. You can see the gaps which isolate the frog, and the yellow wire powering each frog. The brown wire at bottom of pic shows how stock and switch rails are bonded to eliminate reliance on blades conducting power.  I have done this on two layouts now and it’s a worthwhile amendment. Peco points will normally have a little booklet enclosed telling you how to do it, or search online - that’s how I worked out the crossover wiring ....

Edited October 26, 2020 by Galteemore

[Barl]

This is an interesting topic as it can be very confusing for people to transition to DCC. In my experience DCC isn't complicated and, as the lads have said above once all the track is connected to as wire 'bus' then insulfrog points shouldn't be an issue. All of my points are insulfrog.

One point that I don't think is mentioned is that it's worth having a short section of track isolated -either in a fiddle yard or siding - that can be used as a programming track for loco's etc., rather than having to connect to a separate piece of track each time.

[murphaph]

Just be careful with the isolation of the programming track if it is contiguous with the main track. If you are not careful and park a loco so that the loco's wheels bridge the isolation between programming and main track, you can inadvertently program all your locos on the main track. If doing this it would be very good practice to isolate the two sections with a short completely dead section that's as least as long as needs be to ensure a loco can't bridge the two sections under any circumstances.

[irishthump]

6 hours ago, Barl said:

This is an interesting topic as it can be very confusing for people to transition to DCC. In my experience DCC isn't complicated and, as the lads have said above once all the track is connected to as wire 'bus' then insulfrog points shouldn't be an issue. All of my points are insulfrog.

One point that I don't think is mentioned is that it's worth having a short section of track isolated -either in a fiddle yard or siding - that can be used as a programming track for loco's etc., rather than having to connect to a separate piece of track each time.

Yeah I used Insulfrog points exclusively on my layout. I just don't want the hassle of wiring up live frogs and having and having to have a means to change the frog polarity. IAs I run mainly 4 or 6 axle diesels the dead frogs don't cause me any issue whatsoever once the track and loco wheels are kept clean. As I mentioned before I connect the stock rail and switch rail so I don't have to rely on electrical contact at the point. 

[Noel]

9 hours ago, DJ Dangerous said:

To simplify for idiots like me, a "DCC Bus" is a fancy name for a power cable running underneath your board (usually), from your controller, following the route of your tracks above, and "Droppers" are cables passed from your track through your board to this cable.

That's pretty much it.

9 hours ago, DJ Dangerous said:

And, "Frogs" are the blades on your points.

Not quite as @Galteemore's post above explains peco insulfrog point have plastic insulating frogs whereas peco electrofrog points have solid metal frogs requiring a switch to change the frog polarity depending on which way the blades are switched. insulfrog points work very well with modern locos that have AWD + all wheel pickup (AWP) as they are unlikely to stall, but 0-4-0 locos and 4-4-0 locos may stall. Electrofrog points were the solution to that years ago before modern quality loco chassis become the norm with AWD+AWP. 0-4-0 locos and 0-6-0 shunters might manage with keepalive capacitors on insulfrog points. KIngsbridge layout is all the older code 100 track and insulfrog points, but MM 141, 181s can crawl through any of the paintwork without interruption due to the excellent AWP on those locos. DC or DCC makes no difference to this issue.

 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Noel

[Ironroad]

Thank you all this has been quite informative. Summing up so far:-  live frogs are not necessary and using insulated frogs simplifies matters although there may be some risk (perhaps minimal) with short wheelbase locos. Thank you for the explanation of a "BUS", but from the depths of my memory I recollect something about care being required with the wire gauge, what should that be? Also appreciate the advise that reverse loops still need to be isolated, but to clarify does this mean a section of track within the loop (presumably sufficient to accommodate a full train?.  The advise on the  isolation of a programming track is also well noted. 

Beyond this  what are the preferred or recommended control systems. I'm way out of touch but remember that the initial offerings such as Zero 1 and the Airfix systems were not compatible with each other and at least in the US the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA) established uniform standards which I presume all manufacturers now adhere to.  But who are the preferred most popular producers and how do they compare, both on performance/features and price . I suspect there is a middle ground where the most expensive may not be full value for money and the least expensive while initially attractive may be a poor longer term choice.   And of course since I like reverse loops do all producers facilitate them?

[murphaph]

I can't comment too much on commercial systems as my experience is with home brew open source DCC modules that you solder together yourself. Others will have tips there I'm sure.

For the bus wire gauge you should bear in mind that a single DCC controller with inbuilt booster will be able to deliver a limited amount of current. On a small layout or one with few locos this could be sufficient. On medium and larger layouts you'll typically need additional boosters which simply amplify the DCC signal and provide more power. Therefore I suggest using cable with at least as much current carrying capacity (preferably a bit more for safety's sake) as your controller and or boosters can provide. I wouldn't skimp on it but I wouldn't overdo it either.

The reversing loop length needs to fully accommodate your longest train for physical rather than electrical reasons. The tail of the train has to be fully inside the loop before the head of the train can begin exiting the loop or the head of the train will collide with its own train further back.

I guess DC layouts also need reversing modules in reversing loops as the same problem with a clash of polarities must exist there.

There are other digital command control like protocols on the market so care is required when ordering say decoders that you don't inadvertently order one that is incompatible with your chosen system, which IMO should definitely be the DCC as defined by the NMRA. If you buy decoders from IRM or MM they conform to this standard.

Motorola makes a competing standard called mfx which I believe is similar to what Märklin use. Some high end decoders like the Lokpilot 5 or Loksound 5 from ESU are multiprotocol decoders. They can be configured to respond to any of the protocols. If you go for NMRA DCC which you definitely should you can save some money on decoders by buying the DCC only version. ESU for example make the Lokpilot 5 in DCC only and it's a bit cheaper. 

You just need to be careful not to order a decoder marked mfx or mkl for example on the ESU site. I'm not very familiar with other manufacturers apart from Lenz.

[WaYSidE]

DCC where to start???

within the next month or so i am about to finish 4 years of building my DCC track layout, i only have spare time in winter, so its on /off build, returning each october to pick up from last winter. it took all last winter to rewire to block occupancy.

the layout hasnt run since nov 2019,  nor do i have good broadband so i will not be live streaming , unlike RULE1 in Waterford, as in this video uploaded October 24th 2020

DCC ??? i started with a layout that I tested on basic DCC wires, Z21 an DR5000 control options. once my entire layout (part1) was laid i ran as many different train to test the layout to make sure it all worked. all done, i then  installed blocks and many many many wires to DR4088, (S88) Dr4088CS, DR4088LN-CS, LOCONET for reporting at speed and allowing expansion. including introducing Dr04088ln opto, for optical sensors as well as the hundred or so current sensors build two layouts in one, the first DR5000 connected to 4 Dr5033 boosters, more to add using loconet booster bus,

the second part of layout, including to be built  hidden standing area, for long fully built rakes, will have railcom for Z21 and a new track that can run on 4 boosters on the booster RBus .as i have dreams of one day running rocos camera train, even with all its reported other problems.

STARTING OUT, my advice research reserch, research, ask questions, join supplier forum and unlike me start small and expand slowly, i had to start large due to space restrictions, finish the entire layout at once.
Good news is broadband, arriving to my house next winter according to a National Broadband Plan letter ,, so i can upload a video if and when i get it all running

 

Edited October 27, 2020 by WaYSidE

[DJ Dangerous]

A few lessons learned the other night as a DCC beginner, after frabtically emailing people for help!

Thanks, guys!

1. A "blanking plate" is a really crap name. It's looks like a circuit board, and nothing like one would expect a blanking plate to look like.

2. The blanking plate is removed by lifting it vertically upwards. Several members advised me that it can be levered up gently using a screwdriver, but I had to grip the sturdiest part with a pliers to break the dynamic friction.

3. All ESU chips, whether blank, IRM or Murphy Models, are set to loco no. 03 by default.

4. Drive hold and locomotive brakes are awesome for throttling up without the loco moving off.

5. There is no consensus between manufacturers so they all asign different functions to different features. F0 being the directional white marker lights seems universal.

6. On speaking with both Hatton's and Gaugemaster, a typical DCC controller like the NCE PowerCab (2,0 amp) or Gaugemaster Prodigy Advance (3,5 amp) is apt for scales up to OO Gauge, and will run a small O Gauge loco on a small layout, but for larger O Gauge locos and / or larger layouts, DCC boosters are required, and they're like €200 a pop.

According to Rails of sheffield, the NCE PowerCab can run 4 x OO Gauge trains or 8 x N Gauge trains.

According to Hatton's, the same controller can run up to 12 trains simultaneously, "dependant on power draw" .

So, no consensus there!

With a Bachmann EZ Command (36-501), I, at least, need two hands to "drive" a loco, so filming and driving is difficult, at least for now.

So no videos of this learner!

[Sean]

4 trains seems like a good rule of thumb, 12 dependant on load sounds very misleading.

https://ncedcc.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/201479649-How-many-trains-can-I-run-on-a-Power-Cab- (I think this is official NCE documentation, not sure)

@Leynyshould check out this link to as a follow up to questions raised in his thread.

my own system is 2A and they recommend 2 or 3 trains in the documentation so i think this is a good rule of thumb.

totally agree about the blanking plates, I usually incorrectly refer to them as a dc decoder as technically that is kinda what they are there for.

re the non standard function list, I usually just leave them alone as with the more advanced controllers you can usually put a custom label onto functions, I can see why you would be more inclined to change to a standardised set with a basic interface such as that of the EZ command.... I actually have a bit of a soft spot for that controller too as ive got the analog version here (ez control) and i do miss having hands on control of a throttle from time to time, sometimes using an app is boring  

[DJ Dangerous]

Love the EZ Command. I hope that other controllers are so nice to use. The simplistic layout is great so far and the power dial feels excellent. Limited to ten functions but that's enough for me, for now.

[irishthump]

8 hours ago, DJ Dangerous said:

Love the EZ Command. I hope that other controllers are so nice to use. The simplistic layout is great so far and the power dial feels excellent. Limited to ten functions but that's enough for me, for now.

To be honest you won't use that many functions when running trains, ten is plenty if the main ones are assigned to F0-F10

[Mayner]

I "transitioned" to DCC over 20 years ago, but also play about with DC and Battery-Radio remote control. 

Intermediate/advanced Vs basic systems.

At the time I was building an N Gauge American walk-around style layout and my 1amp DC controller did not have sufficient power to operate 3-5 loco multiple loco consists hauling 20-30 car trains, the train physically slowed down when I added additional locos.

I went for a Digitrax "Empire Builder" an intermediate system which had a hand held throttle and a 5amp booster/command station capable of running/storing up to 22 loco addresses. https://www.digitrax.com/products/retired/starter-sets/eb/

The Empire Builder proved ideal for controlling the N gauge layout both in Ireland and a larger version started after we moved to New Zealand and later a G Scale garden layout, the main draw back was that I quickly used up the 22 loco addresses while running trains with multi-unit consists and had to adapt work-around such as giving all locos in a consist the same address to run the N gauge layout.

The main advantage of choosing an intermediate system produced by a specialist DCC manufacturer over a more basic system produced by train manufacturer was that the system was expandable and compatible with other DCC products, I added infrared and later radio wireless capability by adding IR and Radio RC modules to the system and additional throttles, computer route setting and loco programming using JMRI (Java Model Railway Interface) by adding a network adaptor (Digitrax and "Loco Buffer", points controlled by Lenz, Digitrax and other brands of stationary controllers and Tonys Trains (USA) circuit breakers (divide the layout into a number of separate sections to avoid a system shut down in the event of a short or a fault)

20+ years later I still use the original Command Station Booster to control a small OO gauge shunting layout.

Just like cell phone users DCC users have developed strong almost religious loyalty to a particular brand as the majority of DCC manufacturers have developed a unique user interface.

Sound 

I discovered DCC sound in the mid 2000s and built up a collection of American sound equipped locos in HO & On30 but disposed of the collection when I started building a railway in the garden, most of my Garden railway locos have digital sound, but like the HO & On30 stock its usually runs with the sound muted.

"Standard" Function Buttons

In recent years EU and US decoder/controller manufacturer have gone in separate directions in terms of Function controls 

In the "old days" Digitrax Throttle Buttons controlled.

F0 Headlights f/r

F1 Bell (American steam loco) 

F2 Whistle/Horn (non-latching)

F3 Coupler (knuckle coupler coupling up sound)

F 4-7 user selectable 

F8 Sound mute

F9-28 user selectable

F4-5 As far as I recall for controlling head and tail lamps independently.

Curiously Radio Control Systems battery-radio share similar F0-3 functions F 4 crew sounds 

The Future.

I will probably stick to battery RC in the garden and DC or static for most of my Irish Irish locos as I get more enjoyment from building rather than running models and probably hand on to DCC for the day we have to downsize to a smaller home and N gauge

Gets complicated with my sound equipped MM 121 and IRM 001 with F1 controlling engine start up and shut down & F3 horn (horrible sound)

 

[irishrailways52]

i find this video from Larry pucket to be verry useful in figuring out the basics of DCC from a DC modellers point of view. 

 

[DJ Dangerous]

Larry Pucket has several useful instructional DCC videos.