RailPro User Group
RailPro => RailPro Specific Help & Discussion => Topic started by: ON28 on February 24, 2020, 04:14:20 PM
-
First, thanks to Bill for hosting this board, very helpful. I am a new user, and have a mix of LM2s and 3s in an HO consist of (older) Intermountain F3, Atlas/Kato GP7 and Proto-2000 BL2. I tore down and cleaned up the drive trains of each, then installed the LMs (see photos on other threads). All LMs and HC are up to date. My question is, just how well are these locos supposed to MU together? The Proto unit seems for the most part best run alone. All have lights, the Geep and F3 have sound. I'll add that the Kato drive is far superior to the others, and I added bronze phosphor wipers to the Proto. How much of the differences among these units is supposed to be ameliorated by RP's MU function? Because RP seems to promise a much better MU experience than the tedious process of fiddling with CVs in traditional DCC, but actual results are short of perfection. Do I expect too much?
-
In theory LMs should be able to balance 100%. In practical application the locos' operating smoothness and uniformity will determine how close you get to 100%. Smooth runners consist better.
Try experimenting with different settings on the "Loco. Setup Advanced" screens.
-
Thanks, any suggestions on how to use the loco settings is also greatly appreciated.
-
Did you run the Motor Full Load Current Test after tweaking the drives?
-
Did you run the Motor Full Load Current Test after tweaking the drives?
Of course.
-
Thanks, any suggestions on how to use the loco settings is also greatly appreciated.
Equipment dependent so no magic answers. Start by setting everything on screen 2 to the same settings for all locos. Change one setting significantly for one loco. Note consist performance. Lather, rinse, repeat until you get a flavor for how the settings are affecting consist performance. Then dial them in.
-
I'll try it, thanks! But this hews close to the adjusting of DCC CVs that RP promotes itself as an alternative to.
-
There has to be some way of adjusting loco performance. No two locos perform the same or perform as desired. We're talking about China made toys here, not aerospace equipment. RP's visual interface is way more intuitive and simple to use than adjusting cryptic register settings IMHO.
Model trains. Some assembly required.
-
There has to be some way of adjusting loco performance. No two locos perform the same or perform as desired. We're talking about China made toys here, not aerospace equipment. RP's visual interface is way more intuitive and simple to use than adjusting cryptic register settings IMHO.
Model trains. Some assembly required.
Yes to that! I reset the trio's settings to factory default, the consist ran better. The DCC guys are always most interested in the RP MU function. Come to find, many have never adjusted a CV in decades of DCC use, or just run like-running locos in consists to avoid issues.
Now, let's talk about user anxiety caused by RP production being dependent on a single individual...
-
Forget control system, my entire model railroad layout is dependent upon a single individual - me! That doesn't give me anxiety so why should a supplier? Life is too short to worry about such things.
-
RailPro is not dependent upon a single individual, Ring Engineering is a small company just like any other in the industry. The have a Programmer, an Engineer, an order production staff. There is more than one person involved and they continue to grow; Granted that one guy, Tim Ring, is the main developer, but he is not the only person involved.
-
I know a guy who only runs the same two identical DCC locomotives in consist because they are the only ones that run well together. I have watched guys peck and poke at computer screens for hours trying to adjust CV's. RailPro is nothing like that. The few settings that may need adjusting, as described by Alan, are easy ones to change on the controller, with no computer or CV knowledge needed.
-
After setting the Full Motor Current, I then adjust the start speed/voltage so that the engine is just barely moving at 1% throttle- not herky jerky, but smoothly. I then tweak the start and decelerate amounts to my standard (10%), and that usually makes everyone happy.
Of course, after you run the beasts for a bunch of hours, it's wise to redo the Full Motor Current, especially on a BNIB loco as things have worn in. I normally don't have to readjust anything else.
Easy Peasy, Lemon Squeezy.
-
After setting the Full Motor Current, I then adjust the start speed/voltage so that the engine is just barely moving at 1% throttle- not herky jerky, but smoothly. I then tweak the start and decelerate amounts to my standard (10%), and that usually makes everyone happy.
Of course, after you run the beasts for a bunch of hours, it's wise to redo the Full Motor Current, especially on a BNIB loco as things have worn in. I normally don't have to readjust anything else.
Easy Peasy, Lemon Squeezy.
Helpful, thanks for that.
-
My speed-matching was a success. I set the IM F3 and Proto BL2 on parallel tracks and adjusted the acceleration, deceleration, start speed, top speed, even max current draw, until they ran like near-identical twins forward. Backup was a different story as we find early on in the hobby, some locos run better backwards, thrust washers notwithstanding. (Be sure to have clean track and wheels, for best results.) Also, the BL2 has a near-imperceptible hitch in her giddy-up I can't remove but still MUed nicely. Added benefit -- speed matching seemed to smooth current draw and reduce voltage spikes.
I made sure the HC and LM programs were up to date, however, after I did I noticed that the HC still indicated V1.0 for the LMs, even though I updated with the newer update on the Ring site. Hmm...
-
I made sure the HC and LM programs were up to date, however, after I did I noticed that the HC still indicated V1.0 for the LMs, even though I updated with the newer update on the Ring site. Hmm...
You not looking at the hardware version number are you? that doesn't change. Look at the software version number, that should be 2.12 if the update was successful.
- Tim
-
The updates were for an LM2 and two LM2-S. The RPA only has updates of 2.07 for LM2 and 2.09 for the LM2-S.
That is correct. My bad, I thought you had said the loco that didn't want to play well had an LM-3S in it and just assumed it was an LM-3S you had updated. I read wrong :-[
Still, the hardware version number for any LM won't change when you update it, it will always be what it comes from RE as, which is 1.xx at the moment. Only the software version number changes so what software version number is the LM reporting to the HC? 1.xx or 2.07/2.09 ?
- Tim
-
Apologies ON28,
I don't know what happened there but my post has swallowed your post. I clicked on quote too.
- Tim