# New Zimo MX10 central station pictures



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Zimo is finally showing pictures and info on their new central station:

http://www.zimo.at/web2010/

It looks very compact...we'll have to get Axel to give us a good translation!

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

From google translate:

The new digital system ZIMO MX10 is designed contemporary and equipped and has a matching "styled" handy (well actually "handed" to cross) housing. The mechanical dimensions are remarkably small - in terms of technical data and compared with some clunky "Central-boxes", even with the previous models MX1 ZIMO itself

A digital system is naturally defined by many characteristics more than by the electric power, and in many aspects is ZIMO new standards (to be implemented not easy, so in model railroad equipment rarely found, but very useful) example of the socket for USB sticks, with the LAN port, integrated in the era of "i "...' s and" smart "... 's actually a" must ", or with a small graphic display that shows just the information that appears on a central should be, (and not only on the connected control units, where it is actually cheaper). of RAM and 64MB of flash memory with 4 GB of making the data management for large systems with extensive electronic equipment possible.

The separate display along with the rotary knob and some buttons does the basic unit MX10 incidentally also available as a single unit, so no external control devices such as cabs, smart phones or computers. It provides (set address, Driving & press functions or switch-off) then simply driving and switching operation, single-line CV-programming, and most of all software update from ZIMO and sound shop. This saves the purchase of a separate decoder update device.

Primary care by DC power supply .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ....... 24 to 30 V, between 80 and 500 watts
(Maximum input voltage, for special applications with high rail voltage ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... 35 V)
Rail voltage at the output for the main line, adjustable ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 10 - 24 V
(Special operations with increased rail voltage ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... .. Up to 27 V)
Driving current on the main track (track 1) ... ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 12 A
Rail voltage at the (second) output for programming and update track, or branch circuit. ... ... .... 10 - 24 V
Driving current on the secondary output (bar 2). ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 8 A
Supply of cabs and other equipment on the CAN bus ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 32 V, 3 A
Built-in battery for maintaining the driving data (in static RAM) and operating the time clock ... .. 100 mAh
Radio Properties ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ZigBee 2.4 GHz, 10 mW, 256 kbd, for 64 wireless devices
Dimensions (without antenna) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... 170 x 200 x 40 mm
Weight 1 kg


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Well, was hoping for 15 amps or more, but 12 is good, nice to see another high capacity booster available. 

Zigbee protocol... just like Aristo. I would assume it won't have the aristo problems of dropped links. I believe Axel said it was Zigbee II or a more advanced version than what Aristo is using. 

One knob to control... many BMW owners would tell you they hate the single knob control... but it keeps the design clean. 

OK Axle, I'll bite: when do you get one? 

Regards, Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

I just came across this new Zimo Central Station myself. 

Wonder what the price will be - it's supposed to be significantly leww than the old Zimo Central Station. 

Greg - the primary track current is rated at 12 amps but there is also a secodary track connection rated at 8 amps. 
So total would be 20 amps from that one unit unless there are some restrictions shown in the user manual yet to be published. 
On the surface it looks as if one can use both outputs at the same time. 

One spec struck me a little bit, but I don't know much about it - Zig-Bee power at 10 mW, isn't that rather low? 
Or is that the most allowed without a license? 

LAN connection should allow the development of TouchCab software to offer another option as far as the throttle is concerned. 
Key thing will be the price I think. 

I have some friends going to the Leipzig Fair in a few days where Zimo will show this unit for the first time - be interesting what their impressions are. 

Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Knut, I can buy several boosters for separate power districts... I need more amps in one district... the guess was that it was either 15 amps, or 2 sets of 8 amp outputs that could be paralleled. 

Now, if you could parallel the 2 outputs, and get 20 amps, wow, I'm there... but I think it would have been advertised as such, because that would be a huge marketing point. 

400 watts in one place 500 watts in another... it seems to have the wattage correct for 20 amps total and 24 volts. 

Yep, low power, very low... bidirectional communication regs from the FCC... unidirectional like Airwire, and the old Digitrax, Lenz, etc. can run higher power. 

Yep touchcab, but it only supports a few systems. Engine Driver and Withrottle are already on the iPhone and Android, and support WAY more systems. 

It won't be cheap... 

Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

I have a feeling the price will be very reasonable on this station--much less than the previous version. They seem to be going the same way as Maerklin in that they are using simpler central stations but more powerful handhelds (hence the New Zimo touchscreen or Iphone/ipod touch in Maerklin's case). Zimo likes having their own dedicated controller and always have (but costly), whereas it makes sense for Maerklin to concentrate on the software and let the super-competitive handheld market keep advancing those products. I bet when you combine the new Zimo station with something like an ipad or iphone for control the price will be more than competitive with existing systems. 

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Dunno Keith, there's a lot of software in the unit, and it gets updated more frequently than other brands. That said, Zimo seems to be making new stuff faster than the other European companies, there's been constant improvements in the decoders over the last couple of years, class D amps, more features, smaller (I do Z scale also), etc. 

But the overall system cost is really where it's at, although using cast-off iPhones for controllers is not too bad for most people, just not outdoors. 

Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Greg - 

The 500 watt reference is to the DC power supply to drive the DCC Central Station; the 400-Watt in the title may just be the title not necessary the maximum DCC output. 
If the limit is 400 watts then one obviously can't draw both 12 and 8 amps at 24 volts at the same time. 
However from previous commenst about this unit on the Zimo website, the maximum DCC otput probably hinges on the DC input voltage and the amount of power that needs to be dissipated by the unit itself. That I expect will be spelled out in the user manual. 

As to paralleling the two outputs - you're probably right that this cannot be done or Zimo would have mentioned it. 
A good question for the Zimo guys at the Leipzig Fair 

As to the 10 mW of Zig-Bee power - any educated guesses what that would translate to in typical wireless range? 

As to TouchCab vs WiThrottle..... I personally never liked the idea that with WiThrottle I also need a computer in addition to the WiFi network which all those concepts need. 
Yeah - WiThrottle does support a lot more systems, but one only has to worry about the support for the system one actually has. 
My comment was really related to the fact that I don't like the Zimo Throttle at all and now with the LAN port on the new Central Station there is at least one alternative. 

Price-wise I think they can't be too much more than NCE for similar functionality to make a dent in the US Market. 

Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Ahh, I use JMRI, so have computer handy... also have internet network handy... 

Touchcab transmits directly to command station? there is no software? maybe I missed that... the wireless server software is already in the command station? or touchcab somehow sends cab commands from wifi to the cab bus? 

Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

As to TouchCab vs WiThrottle..... I personally never liked the idea that with WiThrottle I also need a computer in addition to the WiFi network which all those concepts need. 
Yeah - WiThrottle does support a lot more systems, but one only has to worry about the support for the system one actually has. 
My comment was really related to the fact that I don't like the Zimo Throttle at all and now with the LAN port on the new Central Station there is at least one alternative. 

I feel the exactly same way. I much prefer a dedicated, reasonably priced purpose made controller, and I think it still remains the one thing Zimo is missing. They have the new super-throttle, but I think they could still benefit by a simpler, dumbed down model which they seem reluctant to develop.


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Very interesting--here is a link that shows two drawings--front and back of MX10. 
http://www.zimo.at/web2010/products/ErstinfoMX10.htm

I also just noticed that it supports loconet, which should mean that the Massoth Navigator with multireceiver should work with it! The Massoth multireceiver is supposed to work with Digitrax, Roco, Lenz, Piko, or any other that uses Xpressnet or Loconet. If it is possible to use a Navigator with I will be VERY interested in this central station... 

Keith


----------



## adelmo (Jan 2, 2008)

Keith: Check to make sure the Massoth Navigator/Zimo hook up will not limit function and programming control. 

I was going to keep my 10 amp Lenz set but the Massoth/Expressnet Navigator was not full featured. 

My understanding is Massoth central station required for all the Navigator controls to be operational. 

Alan


----------



## adelmo (Jan 2, 2008)

Keith: Check to make sure the Massoth Navigator/Zimo hook up will not limit function and programming control. 

I was going to keep my 10 amp Lenz set but the Massoth/Expressnet Navigator was not full featured. 

My understanding is Massoth central station required for all the Navigator controls to be operational. 

Alan


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi Alan, 

Yes there would definitely be limitations, especially with the built-in automatic control functions that are currently available between the Navigator and Massoth central stations, and it would have to be very reasonably priced to be worth it. One interesting note is that they mention less wireless range using the new 2.4GHz system compared to the longer wavelengths of the older system, especially in penetrating buildings. 

Keith


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Cougar Rock Rail on 28 Sep 2011 12:00 PM http://www.zimo.at/web2010/products/ErstinfoMX10.htm
I also just noticed that it supports loconet, which should mean that the Massoth Navigator with multireceiver should work with it!

keith,

If you want to use the Massoth navigator and a lower cost system than Massoth itself, I think then you're better off to consider the Piko system.
I hadn't read that Zimo supports loconet, but even if it does - you're converting protocols twice with that type of set up using the navigator - that can't be good from a functionality aspect.

Knut


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Check with Axel, I believe you can parallel the outputs for a 20 amp on one track setup on the Zimo system.


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By krs on 28 Sep 2011 06:28 PM 
Posted By Cougar Rock Rail on 28 Sep 2011 12:00 PM http://www.zimo.at/web2010/products/ErstinfoMX10.htm
I also just noticed that it supports loconet, which should mean that the Massoth Navigator with multireceiver should work with it!

keith,

If you want to use the Massoth navigator and a lower cost system than Massoth itself, I think then you're better off to consider the Piko system.
I hadn't read that Zimo supports loconet, but even if it does - you're converting protocols twice with that type of set up using the navigator - that can't be good from a functionality aspect.

Knut 


Knut: If any one wants to use the Navigator with a simpler, less expensive system than massoth, they would be significantly better off with an LGB MTSIII which looks and feels much better that the Piko system, has a great realiability record, and is readly available in the US. I have heard some grumblings about the Piko system (assembly issues) and Piko's costumer service is not up to snuff either as reported on G scale central.
Keith will gain nothing over what he currently has by exchanging his MTSIII station with a Piko station.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

If it can do 20 amps, tell Axel to send my demo system!!!! 

Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 29 Sep 2011 07:41 AM 

Keith will gain nothing over what he currently has by exchanging his MTSIII station with a Piko station.



I didn't know Keith had an MTS III system, but as far as the Navigator and MTS III is concerned:

The DiMAX Navigator is designed to be used with a cable connection or wireless and it is compatible to the LGB MTS III system. If you use the DiMAX Navigator with the LGB MTS III system the DiMAX Navigator can only perform within the limited capabilities of the LGB MTS III system but is unlimited when used with the PIKO Central Station.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Dan Pierce on 29 Sep 2011 06:39 AM 
Check with Axel, I believe you can parallel the outputs for a 20 amp on one track setup on the Zimo system. 


Everything about the new Zimo system seems to be speculation!

I thought I could at least depend on the information as posted on the Zimo web site being correct but now Oliver, who lives in Austria and is somewhat tied in with Zimo claims that the capabilities listed are more Dr. Ziegler's wish list rather than capabilities of the unit as shipped originally. In fact he stated that all capabilities listed will not be available initially - which is OK as far as I'm concerned as long as it is made clear what capabilities exist and which ones come later with a firmware update.


Being able to connect the output in parallel to increase the current output requires current sharing hardware in the unit - one can't implement that just with a firmware update unless that hardware is already there.
Based on all the comments I have read so far, that capability is definitely not there, at least not in this version.

I would agree with Greg - if it was a capability, it would have been a major selling point for Zimo and they would have mentioned it.

But it would be great if somebody proved me wrong!

Knut


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Are there really that many people wanting to turn their rails into arc-welding rods? 20Amps seems crazy to me...oh well. 

Knut, what you are stating about capabilities being available 'someday' seems to be pretty typical of Zimo. I really like that they aim high, but I've been watching their website and products over the years and it's a perpetual stream of updates.


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By krs on 29 Sep 2011 09:41 AM 
Posted By mbendebba on 29 Sep 2011 07:41 AM 

Keith will gain nothing over what he currently has by exchanging his MTSIII station with a Piko station.



I didn't know Keith had an MTS III system, but as far as the Navigator and MTS III is concerned:

The DiMAX Navigator is designed to be used with a cable connection or wireless and it is compatible to the LGB MTS III system. If you use the DiMAX Navigator with the LGB MTS III system the DiMAX Navigator can only perform within the limited capabilities of the LGB MTS III system but is unlimited when used with the PIKO Central Station.
knut: Is this a quote or a declaration, it is not obvious.


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

I think what Knut is saying, Mohammed, is that I could get some benefit by going to the Piko central station, in that with my MTSIII for example, I'm limited to 28 speed steps and can't use all the automatic functions that the Dimax central station/navigator would give me. With the Piko, I'd get 128 speed steps and any automation etc., because it was designed for the navigator in the first place. In reality, I would not go to the Piko unless my MTSIII central station gives out on me someday, and for the little premium in cost I'd get way more by going to the Dimax system. 

Keith


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By Cougar Rock Rail on 29 Sep 2011 10:48 AM 
I think what Knut is saying, Mohammed, is that I could get some benefit by going to the Piko central station, in that with my MTSIII for example, I'm limited to 28 speed steps and can't use all the automatic functions that the Dimax central station/navigator would give me. With the Piko, I'd get 128 speed steps and any automation etc., because it was designed for the navigator in the first place. In reality, I would not go to the Piko unless my MTSIII central station gives out on me someday, and for the little premium in cost I'd get way more by going to the Dimax system. 

Keith 
Keith: I know , my comment was directed toward the form of the response and not its substance. 
As to the substance, I am not well informed about the capabilities of the Piko central station but I seriously doubt that it has the same capabilities and the Massoth central station and that the only difference bewteen them is how much current they can each handle. Whatever these difference may be, they will be reflected in differences between Navigator functions available to Massoth central station uses and those available to Piko central station users, in much the same way as is the case for Massoth users vs LGB users.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

The Piko handheld and the piko base station are nothing else but a slimmed down Dimax. The MTS III only has some cross over capabilities. I don't know, but I would expect that the Piko unit is more stabil than the MTS III unit, because MTS is very sensitive against bad short circuits. While I can put an iron rod over the track as often as I want to with the ZIMO (excellent extra electronics for the short circuit detection and immdiate shutoff) if have several MTS here which are beyond repair, all coming from different customers all with the same story (I had an accident and the engines created a short circuit) and voila, MTS was gone. If oyu are lucky it can be repaied becasue you may only have blown some of the large components, but if you are unlucky , then they are gone for good (becuaswe there is nobody aorund here that is willing to repair them, and shipping them oversees will cost you almost what a new MTS will cost you).

Keith is a very experienced and carefull operator and I suspect that's why he never had any problem. But the stories are too many fopr my personal comfort zone. Would love to test the reliability of the Piko system and see how well it handles mistakes.


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

I have the solution: Axel, you're going to have to come up on a Canadian holiday road trip! When the wireless MX32 comes out, grab a MX10 and some of your beautiful RhB trains, and come visit! You can start here on the spectacular West Coast, and as I know you are a talented chef you will appreciate the good food. We can test your system out, and I can demonstrate the virtues of the Massoth navigator, and then you can head East visiting HJ, Knut and others on the way to see Jason on the East coast. Of course there are a couple of potential problems with my logic: If you start at my place and I really like the system, it'll never leave my place and then the others won't get to try it! On the other hand, you might like the Massoth so much you'll want to stop at Tony's in Alberta and grab yourself a Dimax system! Ahhh....so many options...  

Keith


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Too funny. But I am liking the basic idea, to send one unitt up for a 1 week each trial. Then when the unit is shipped inside Canada nobody else is invovled in customs clearance. And ultimately there is at least one buyer if not even multiples. I am willing too risk that.

Keith, why don't you start a list


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 29 Sep 2011 11:22 AM 
......my comment was directed toward the form of the response and not its substance. 
As to the substance, I am not well informed about the capabilities of the Piko central station but I seriously doubt that it has the same capabilities and the Massoth central station and that the only difference bewteen them is how much current they can each handle. Whatever these difference may be, they will be reflected in differences between Navigator functions available to Massoth central station uses and those available to Piko central station users, in much the same way as is the case for Massoth users vs LGB users.


We already went through the differences between the Massoth and the Piko Central station in great detail and I think it was here on MLS.

Other than the current capacity which one can manage by adding DCC boosters, there were three other areas that I remember off hand, all related to port capacity of the unit itself but nothing to basic Navigator functionality like the limitations one gets using the Navigator with MTS III.

All of the port limitations of the Piko Central Station could be overcome by adding additional external modules, but then tyhe price would be back at the Massoth Central Station level so one might as well buy that if one needs those extra ports.

As to reliability and construction quality of the Piko Central Station - I have no clue. Haven't heard anything negativ so far.

Knut

BTW - I wasn't commenting or even thinking of Keith replacing anything he had.
My comment was simply a reply to his idea of using a Massoth Navigator connected via Loconet to the new Zimo Central Station.


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Knut: neither you nor I appear to know the specifics of the Piko central station, thus we can not have a useful discussion about it pros and cons, nor can we make vaild comparaisons between it and the LGB MTSIII station. Unless someone outer can enlighten both of us and the others on this forum, there is little value in making statements about what is can and cannot. We are both expressing opinion not facts.
But as far as reliability is concerned, I have heard some grumbling on the G scale forum, and  I have spoken to many owners of MST stations and most seem quite satisfied, many continue to have and used stations that they have purchased when LGB (EPL) was still in business.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 29 Sep 2011 03:12 PM 
Knut: neither you nor I appear to know the specifics of the Piko central station....

That might be true for you but not for me.
The comparison between Massoth and Piko Central Stations was done earlier this year based on factual information, not opinions.
When I voice an opinion, I try to use words like "I believe" or "I think"..... 


What it came down to in the end is the following:

Differences beween Piko and Massoth Central Station

1) 5A DCC Current vs. more with Massoth, how much more depends on the model. Can be overcome on Piko by adding DCC boosters.
2) No computer interface on Piko Central Station.
3) The PIKO navigator firmware is different from the Massoth because of the analog capability.
4) There is only one DiMAX bus connection on the Piko Central Station and on the RC receiver, Massoth has 2 or more on their items. But one could fix this with the Massoth DiMAX adapter (8138001).
5) The PIKO has no separate programming track connection. One can switch into programming model with a button on the Piko Central Station, one can't switch using the Navigator like one can with the Massoth system.
6) On the PIKO Navigator only the screen and Stop buttons are backlit, all buttons (or almost all) are backlit on the Massoth Navigator.
7) The PIKO Central Station, RC receiver, switch decoder, and reversing unit are more water resistant than the equivalent Massoth units
8) Spring loaded connectors on Piko Central Station are rather flimsy (like MTS III) compared to Massoth
9) No ammeter on Piko unit. Steady-state current can be checked with Navigator but not peak currents.

There was also a comparison between Massoth and MTS III with the Massoth Navigator.

What hasn't been done yet - at least not that I'm aware of, is a comparison between MTS III with the Massoth Navigator and Piko with the Navigator.
But that would be relatively straight forward using the information that is already available.

Knut


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

I was not really looking for a superficial compraison between the Piko and the Massoth station, I was more interested in the functional differences between the MTSIII station and the Piko station. What functions, controls and features does each one have? what is the maxiumum number of trains can each control on a layout? what is the maximum number of functions each can control? What automatic functions if any can be programmed into the central station? Doulbe heading, route control? These are the kind questions I wanted answer to. 

P.S. is piko still using a rubber gasket to protect the electronics from moisture, or have they started potting them as Massoth is doing?


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 29 Sep 2011 01:19 PM 









Too funny. But I am liking the basic idea, to send one unitt up for a 1 week each trial. Then when the unit is shipped inside Canada nobody else is invovled in customs clearance. And ultimately there is at least one buyer if not even multiples. I am willing too risk that.

Keith, why don't you start a list










Yes by all means start a list.

BUT keep in mind that the list is for the Second MX10 unit and so on, as the FIRST MX10 and MX32 Handheld Unit belongs to ME!!!!!!









Ron


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Axel the day you have a 20 amp system, just ship it to me. 

Keith, my passenger train draws over 10 amps with all lights on now, only 10 cars and 3 locos, and the cars draw the majority of the amps... I need over 10 amps to run 2 trains. 

I don't like having 20 amps on the rails, because now I have to be smart and put polyfuses on my track pickups to protect from derailments, but that passenger train looks great! 


Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Greg - 

If you want a 20 amp system or a 20 amp booster, I think you have to build it yourself. 

I talked to a friend of mine in Germany today - his company builds large Garden Railroads for either rather wealthy people or commercial one for hotels and restaurants, etc. 
The largest commerscial boosters they use are the 15 amp units from Heller. 

Here is a layout at the Hotel Pasewalk - they use three Lenz DCC systems feeding three areas of the layout. 
For additional power they use five 10 amp Lenz boosters and eight 15 amp Heller boosters. 

http://www.fgb-berlin.de/galerie/details.php?image_id=2047 

BTW - The only DCC system currently where one can tie two outputs together to increase the current is the Lenz system. 
One can do that with either the Lenz central station and one booster or with two Lenz boosters. 
But since each of those units only provides 5 amps one still only ends up with only 10 amps per power district.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 29 Sep 2011 05:29 PM 
I was not really looking for a superficial compraison between the Piko and the Massoth station, I was more interested in the functional differences between the MTSIII station and the Piko station.
Rest of the functionality is the same between Piko and Massoth as far as we could tell.
MTS III capabilities are clearly one level lower - no point really to compare those.

Knut


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Knut: comapring a Massoth to a Piko is analogous to comparing a smart car to a Mercedes, they both have windshield ,engine and tires, etc.. and they are both made by the same manufacturer. You can attach a turbo charger to the smart's engine, put on some fat wheels, a stiffer suspension, etc. and spend as much money as necessary to make their cost equal, yet most sensible pople will never suggest that the modified smart has same functionality as the mercedes. 

Secondly, it is was long ago, yesterday for that matter, you were not even aware of some the basic functionality of the Massoth System (serial-parallel), and now you are proclaiming that Piko and Massoth has the functionallity.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 29 Sep 2011 09:07 PM 
Secondly, it is was long ago, yesterday for that matter, you were not even aware of some the basic functionality of the Massoth System (serial-parallel), and now you are proclaiming that Piko and Massoth has the functionallity. 
You still haven't caught on that there are two serial interfaces that LGB has implemented - the old original one between Central Station and decoder - that is the one where people see the delay.

Then there is the serial control between the LGB on-board decoder and the newer LGB sound boards, that is the one that Zimo supports but Massoth doesn't. That is the one we have been talking about.

There is no delay triggering sound functions that way if the communication between Central Station and decoder follows standard NMRA practice which, somewhat unfortunately, LGB and Massoth called "parallel".In fact, the NMRA DCC communication between central station and decoder is all serial communication - but that is another story.


Knut


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

let me quote for you from the Massoth XLS specifications as posted on the Massoth Website, it might help lay this thing to rest once and for all. 

The XLS is delivered with a HiFi loudspeaker (57 mm) with a metal cap and an interface cable for LGB® and Aristocraft DCC. The unit may be installed wire by wire as well. Mounting material is provided. 
Here you can find the list of loudspeakers of each loco. 

*Technical Data Drive Decoder: 
*- *NMRA/DCC compatible 
- LGB® MTS I, II, and III compatible* 
- best driving characteristics with analog op. (selectable) 
- 14, 28, and 128 Speed Steps 
- 256 internal speed steps 
- 10239 Locomotive Addresses 
- *Automatic Detection of operating mode and speed steps setting* 
- 3.0 Amps max. continuous output (drive stage) 
- 4.0 Amps max. maximum total output (incl. functions) 
- Adjustable Motor frequency 
- Load Control in digital and analog 
- Switching Speed (programmable) 
- Adjustable Motor driving curve 

*Technical Data Sound Amplifier*: 
- 6 independent sound channels 
- High end amplifier stage with 1 Watt output (sinus) 
- Loudspeaker connection with 8 Ohms impedance 
- Sound Storage Capacity up to 150 sec. 

*Technical Data Function Outputs*: 
- 3 Light outputs (front, rear, internal 0.3 Amps each) 
- 6 Function outputs (0.6 Amps each) 
- Programmable Special Functions 
- Suitable for Power Buffer connection 
- 1 Amp max output of all function outputs 
- Intelligent function mapping up to F16 
-* Parallel and serial data processing (LGB® MTS Pulse Chain Control) 
and automatic detection (serial data processing disengageable) 
*
Size in Millimeters: 60 x 32 x 18 mm


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

@Knut:

That sound interface is LGB's proprietary version of SUSI? Right?


@all:

Actually to be correct the term serial and parallel on the MTS is actually highly confusing and technically incorrect. The reality is that LGB's MTS I and II (before the P upgrade) implemented "micro" DCC which resulted in repeating in short order F1 commands. Eight F1 commands = F8. True DCC sends out packets and can send the information in correct DCC format sending the receiver a F8 command. But the nature of the DCC signal is in any case serial (serial versus parallel - think of serial computer interface and LPT the old printer ports which were parallel or the old scanner cable that were parallel too. In parallel the bits were send on 8 bit lines). The better term is pulsed DCC versus full DCC, but of course that would have made the P designator impossible. They could have used N (=native)







.

Anyhow the rest of the industry is using for accessory controls (including sound) SUSI (Serial User Standard Interface). SUSI was developed by DIETZ Germany and you can control up to 3 interfaces with CV ranges from 897-1024. SUSI has an NMRA specification. Interesting enough the LGB interface uses the same CV ranges (i.e. LGB Unesco Ge 4/4 III). It is also 4-pin, just like the DIETZ SUSI, but all it takes is a different protocol and that's what it seems they did.

@Greg:
The ZIMO central stations together in bridge mode will give you 20A. Also, have you have considered tinting warm tone LED's to eliminate your incandescent bulbs. Granted some engines are power hungry, but honestly l didn't get the big power to exceed 5A on the ZIMO handheld read-out when I forced the wheels to a standstill (that's as far as I can make stall current happen). An have you seen the Bigboys Pitman motors?

@Knut:
ZIMO's MX1 for years could be bridges together for higher function output. ZIMO's MX1HS allowed you out of the box 16A track-power. The problem is not the high current, the problem is the synchronization (and slight delay of hte packets against each other) when it comes to short circuit detection, becasue you have to shut all amplifiers of at the same time, and ZIMO took precaution in their own interface. There is one commercial layout in Europe that uses a 100A common track bus of tied together ZIMO systems.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 30 Sep 2011 06:15 AM 
let me quote for you from the Massoth XLS specifications as posted on the Massoth Website, it might help lay this thing to rest once and for all. 

The XLS is delivered with a HiFi loudspeaker (57 mm) with a metal cap and an interface cable for LGB® and Aristocraft DCC. The unit may be installed wire by wire as well. Mounting material is provided. 
Here you can find the list of loudspeakers of each loco. 

*Technical Data Drive Decoder: 
*- *NMRA/DCC compatible 
- LGB® MTS I, II, and III compatible* 
- best driving characteristics with analog op. (selectable) 
- 14, 28, and 128 Speed Steps 
- 256 internal speed steps 
- 10239 Locomotive Addresses 
- *Automatic Detection of operating mode and speed steps setting* 
- 3.0 Amps max. continuous output (drive stage) 
- 4.0 Amps max. maximum total output (incl. functions) 
- Adjustable Motor frequency 
- Load Control in digital and analog 
- Switching Speed (programmable) 
- Adjustable Motor driving curve 

*Technical Data Sound Amplifier*: 
- 6 independent sound channels 
- High end amplifier stage with 1 Watt output (sinus) 
- Loudspeaker connection with 8 Ohms impedance 
- Sound Storage Capacity up to 150 sec. 

*Technical Data Function Outputs*: 
- 3 Light outputs (front, rear, internal 0.3 Amps each) 
- 6 Function outputs (0.6 Amps each) 
- Programmable Special Functions 
- Suitable for Power Buffer connection 
- 1 Amp max output of all function outputs 
- Intelligent function mapping up to F16 
-* Parallel and serial data processing (LGB® MTS Pulse Chain Control) 
and automatic detection (serial data processing disengageable) 
*
Size in Millimeters: 60 x 32 x 18 mm 


I suggest you study the 4 pin LGB (SUSI like) connector interface, that is what Knut is referring to.[/b]


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

I suggest you study the 4 pin LGB (SUSI like) connector interface, that is what Knut is referring to.[/b]

*Axel*



That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder (an LGB sound board is a seperate physical entity from a Massoth decoder). All Massoth decoders have a SUSI interface which is used for accessory control such as sound. When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol. The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 30 Sep 2011 07:04 AM 
I suggest you study the 4 pin LGB (SUSI like) connector interface, that is what Knut is referring to.[/b]

*Axel*



That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder (an LGB sound board is a seperate physical entity from a Massoth decoder). All Massoth decoders have a SUSI interface which is used for accessory control such as sound. When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol. The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49. 



If you would have read my previous post (30 Sep 2011 06:25 AM - right after your posting fo the Massoth datasheet) you would have avoided making your last post, which is just re-iterating what I already posted. And as far as CV49 goes - are you 100 % sure of that?


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

3.6.1 SUSI bus 
The SUSI bus interface controls components 
that work in compliance with the 
SUSI norm (e.g. sound modules). The 
SUSI bus is activated with CV 49 bit 4 
= 1. 

From page 24, configuration manual for Massoth decoders (V 2.3), yes I am sure. The table dispalyed above is outdated but about 2 years


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 30 Sep 2011 06:25 AM 
@Knut:

That sound interface is LGB's proprietary version of SUSI? Right?




Well Axel,

I wouldn't call it an LGB proprietary version of SUSI, but yes - you are referring to the LGB proprietary serial interface between the on-board decoder and the LGB sound board that I just cannot get into Mogammed's mind.

Zimo makes dual use of the SUSI connector on their decoder board - you can program the protocol on that SUSI connector for either SUSI or the LGB serial signafor their lates sound boards.


This has nothing to do with the LGB "pulse chain"!

You obviously know what I'm talking about.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 30 Sep 2011 06:25 AM 
The ZIMO central stations together in bridge mode will give you 20A.

Just to be clear..
Are you talking about the new Zimo Central Station? The MX10?

I knew that one could tie the outputs of the older version together to double the output but on the new MX-10 the answer so far by the guys in Austria close to Zimo so far said "no", definitely not.


If that configuration is supported, it should make Greg and some others happy - certainly a good selling point against all the competiton for high powered DCC systems.

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 30 Sep 2011 07:54 AM 
3.6.1 SUSI bus 
The SUSI bus interface controls components 
that work in compliance with the 
SUSI norm (e.g. sound modules). The 
SUSI bus is activated with CV 49 bit 4 
= 1. 

From page 24, configuration manual for Massoth decoders (V 2.3), yes I am sure. The table dispalyed above is outdated but about 2 years 
Great - seems we are getting somewhere now.

Mohammed - the "L" Massoth manual that you pointed me to earlier only has 16 pages, so that is obviously not the one you refer to above.
Which Massoth manual should I look at?

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

OK -

Found the manual that is being referred to.
It's a configuration manual that covers all Massoth decoders, not the decoder specific manual.

But CV 49 only allows selection of the Massoth proprietary bus or the SUSI bus, not the bus to control the LGB sound module which is what we are talking about.

This is the very brief description of those two buses in the Massoth mnual:


*3.6 Massoth bus*
*The Massoth bus connector is used to control components (like the pulsed smoker). The Massoth bus is activated in CV 49 bit 4 = 0.
3.6.1 SUSI bus
The SUSI bus interface controls compo- nents that work in compliance with the SUSI norm (e.g. sound modules). The SUSI bus is activated with CV 49 bit 4
**= 1.*


Big question - Is the Massoth bus by chance identical to the LGB serial bus?
I doubt it or Massoth would have mentioned it in the manual, but I really don't know

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By mbendebba on 30 Sep 2011 07:54 AM 
3.6.1 SUSI bus 
*The SUSI bus interface controls components 
that work in compliance with the 
SUSI norm (e.g. sound modules*). The 
SUSI bus is activated with CV 49 bit 4 
= 1. 

From page 24, configuration manual for Massoth decoders (V 2.3), yes I am sure. The table dispalyed above is outdated but about 2 years 
Just to be clear on this statement in bold above.

The LGB serial bus is NOT the same as the SUSI bus, Zimo just uses the same physical port on their decoder for either one of these prototcols.

There are sound modules that are SUSI compliant - LGB sound modules are not - they have their own serial interface. 


Knut


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By krs on 30 Sep 2011 10:31 AM 
Posted By mbendebba on 30 Sep 2011 07:54 AM 
3.6.1 SUSI bus 
*The SUSI bus interface controls components 
that work in compliance with the 
SUSI norm (e.g. sound modules*). The 
SUSI bus is activated with CV 49 bit 4 
= 1. 

From page 24, configuration manual for Massoth decoders (V 2.3), yes I am sure. The table dispalyed above is outdated but about 2 years 
Just to be clear on this statement in bold above.

The LGB serial bus is NOT the same as the SUSI bus, Zimo just uses the same physical port on their decoder for either one of these prototcols.

There are sound modules that are SUSI compliant - LGB sound modules are not - they have their own serial interface. 


Knut 



Knut: I have addressed this point above and here is what I said:


"That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder (an LGB sound board is a seperate physical entity from a Massoth decoder). All Massoth decoders have a SUSI interface which is used for accessory control such as sound. When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol. The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49."



The only other thing that I want to add is that all Massoth decoders are capable of automatically detecting which LGB protocol is required


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

"That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder (an LGB sound board is a seperate physical entity from a Massoth decoder). All Massoth decoders have a SUSI interface which is used for accessory control such as sound. When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol. The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49." 

The only other thing that I want to add is that all Massoth decoders are capable of automatically detecting which LGB protocol is required 

OK - let's take this one statement at a time: 
_That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder _ 
It should - that's how the decoder controls what the LGB sound board actually does. On the LGB on-board decoder that 4-pin connector and the cable to the LGB decoder provides the link between decoder and sound board; same thing for the Zimo decoder. 
If the Massoth decoder does not provide an interface to that 4-pin connector on the LGB sound board, how does it control the sound of the LGB sound board? 
Then a bit further down in your comment you say: 
_When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol._ 
So suddenly the Massoth decoder does connect to the LGB sound board using that 4-pin SUSI interface and the Massoth decoder uses the the LGB protocol? 
That contradicts what you said just two sentences ago. 
My question now is: Where did you get that information? It says nothing to that effect in any of the Massoth manuals. 
In fact in the Massoth on-board adapter manual it clearly states that an LGB sound board cannot be connected using this adapter. 

_The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49_ 
That refers to the SUSI protocol and the Massoth protocol for their smoke unit. 

_The only other thing that I want to add is that all Massoth decoders are capable of automatically detecting which LGB protocol is required_ 
That statement confused me for a while because one can't possibly detect the LGB protocol that the LGB sound board requires. 
But it seems you are back mixing up the "serial/parallel" protocol between the DCC Central Station and the DCC decoder with the protocols used to communicate between DCC decoder and separate sound modules. 
The Massoth decoder will detect and switch between the Serial and "Parallel" versions of the NMRA protocol between Central Station and decoder, but that is not what is being discussed. 

Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

This Massoth stuff really could use better documentation, just like the smoke unit documentation that shows a bunch of connections, but not how to pulse the smoke unit with the simplest method, a reed switch. 

And, when you present yourself as an expert, and Massoth as better than everything else in the world, you really need to back it up with being able to explain and clarify things better than most people. 

I'm with Knut, too much "magic smoke" here, undocumented information, confusion. 

Greg


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Greg, Knut: 

Most people do not have as much difficulty, as you both persinstently have, understanding the Massoth documation, the information I provide, or any thing else relating to Masotth; which leads me to conclude that the product is obviously not for either one of you. There are alternative products for you to choose form and you are free to choose whichever product meets you needs, aspirations, or documentation requirements. Now, as presenting my self as an expert, I really do not want to go there. But when it comes to the " magic smoke" comment, I do not want to go there either.


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By krs on 01 Oct 2011 01:05 PM 
"That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder (an LGB sound board is a seperate physical entity from a Massoth decoder). All Massoth decoders have a SUSI interface which is used for accessory control such as sound. When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol. The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49." 

The only other thing that I want to add is that all Massoth decoders are capable of automatically detecting which LGB protocol is required 

OK - let's take this one statement at a time: 
_That 4 pin connector on an LGB sound board has nothing to do with a Massoth decoder _
It should - that's how the decoder controls what the LGB sound board actually does. On the LGB on-board decoder that 4-pin connector and the cable to the LGB decoder provides the link between decoder and sound board; same thing for the Zimo decoder. 
If the Massoth decoder does not provide an interface to that 4-pin connector on the LGB sound board, how does it control the sound of the LGB sound board? 
Then a bit further down in your comment you say: 
_When connecting to a SUSI compliant device via the SUSI interface, the Massoth decoder uses SUSI protocol, when connecting to an LGB sound board via the SUSI interface it use the LGB protocol._ 
So suddenly the Massoth decoder does connect to the LGB sound board using that 4-pin SUSI interface and the Massoth decoder uses the the LGB protocol? 
That contradicts what you said just two sentences ago. 
My question now is: Where did you get that information? It says nothing to that effect in any of the Massoth manuals. 
In fact in the Massoth on-board adapter manual it clearly states that an LGB sound board cannot be connected using this adapter. 

_The choice between which protocol to use is controlled by CV49_ 
That refers to the SUSI protocol and the Massoth protocol for their smoke unit. 

_The only other thing that I want to add is that all Massoth decoders are capable of automatically detecting which LGB protocol is required_ 
That statement confused me for a while because one can't possibly detect the LGB protocol that the LGB sound board requires. 
But it seems you are back mixing up the "serial/parallel" protocol between the DCC Central Station and the DCC decoder with the protocols used to communicate between DCC decoder and separate sound modules. 
The Massoth decoder will detect and switch between the Serial and "Parallel" versions of the NMRA protocol between Central Station and decoder, but that is not what is being discussed. 

Knut 




Knut: there is so much circularity in your logic, that a response in unwarranted


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It's from, not form... myself, not my self and you don't want to go there because you can't defend it. Seems that now your only defense is to accuse Knut and I as being too stupid to understand you ... hmm... maybe too many people believe you without validating what you say... If you want to play expert, you need to be ready to act the part. Seems the common denominator is you... not everyone else... Greg Posted By mbendebba on 01 Oct 2011 09:43 PM 
Greg, Knut: 

Most people do not have as much difficulty, as you both persinstently have, understanding the Massoth documation, the information I provide, or any thing else relating to Masotth; which leads me to conclude that the product is obviously not for either one of you. There are alternative products for you to choose form and you are free to choose whichever product meets you needs, aspirations, or documentation requirements. Now, as presenting my self as an expert, I really do not want to go there. But when it comes to the " magic smoke" comment, I do not want to go there either.


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 02 Oct 2011 02:41 AM 
It's from, not form... myself, not my self and you don't want to go there because you can't defend it. Seems that now your only defense is to accuse Knut and I as being too stupid to understand you ... hmm... maybe too many people believe you without validating what you say... If you want to play expert, you need to be ready to act the part. Seems the common denominator is you... not everyone else... Greg Posted By mbendebba on 01 Oct 2011 09:43 PM 
Greg, Knut: 

Most people do not have as much difficulty, as you both persinstently have, understanding the Massoth documation, the information I provide, or any thing else relating to Masotth; which leads me to conclude that the product is obviously not for either one of you. There are alternative products for you to choose form and you are free to choose whichever product meets you needs, aspirations, or documentation requirements. Now, as presenting my self as an expert, I really do not want to go there. But when it comes to the " magic smoke" comment, I do not want to go there either. 



Greg: Please do not put words in my mouth, I do not see the word stupid anywhere any in my response, nor is it implied. Thanks for bringing the typos to my attention, I will be a bit more careful next time, you know how it is for us furners







.


----------



## Chata86 (Dec 5, 2010)

The new command stations use ZigBee? I've been working, professionally, with ZigBee since 2001. My name is even on some of the standards. I've never noticed an official NMRA-DCC ZigBee application profile in the working groups. 

It sounds like there are a couple central stations that implement ZigBee at this point, but to differing degrees of success. Some of the early ZigBee stacks weren't very good because there were too many options in the protocols. Also the software wasn't very stable, especially in the memory management department.

Anyway, I'd be curious to hear how the model railroading community uses it. Is it mainly used as an extension for controlling things like lighting in remote buildings that aren't close to the PLC on the track?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Aristo uses an early form of Zigbee for communicating between locos and the throttles/cabs, but they do not use it in the network sense. Overkill for their application, but ZigBee is trying to be sort of a longer range Bluetooth. 

Using a network protocol to run point to point means more overhead, basically because you have features in the protocol you are not using. 

But, when Aristo wakes up and figures out that their main weakness is that they do not have a "system", maybe they will use Zigbee as a true network. 

I'm not a Zigbee expert, but I believe Zimo is using the new 2.0 standard, but I cannot be sure that the 2.0 standard is actually released yet... articles dated in July indicated that a vote to ratify the proposed standard failed. 

The good thing is that compared to other "networks", the requirements for most model trains would not tax the performance of the system, so we can really use almost any standard. Zigbee would be fine. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Actually, I am just catching up:

Yes it is Zigbee 2.0 and it used for the wireless communication between CABs and base station.


----------



## mainerich (Feb 2, 2010)

Sheesh!

I have a headache from reading all of this.

I had the opportunity to spend some time with Axel this past weekend and what a great time it was.

Needless to say, I am scrapping the Revolution and going with the latest Zimo in the spring. Wireless and if I remember correctly, 20amps. We talked about a price of roughly $1200/$1300 for everything. It looks like we will save some costs by having the decoder and sound built into one.


I am heading down on Thursday to spend the day with Dan watching and learning how to install the Zimo DCC decoder in 2 of my LGB engines.

I will also be bringing down a USA Trains #6 switch to see how easy it is to add a switch drive.

I sure can't wait to get this system up and running.

Rich


----------



## Chata86 (Dec 5, 2010)

There isn't a ZigBee 2.0. There was ZigBee 2004, 2006, 2007, and 2010. Amazingly they aren't interoperable. When I heard ZigBee I figured the new DCC stuff would be multi-hop. It's kinda fun to think about using wireless multi-hop across a layout, all your scenery, switches and signals could be wireless. But then you realize everything is powered anyway, so why not use DCC. About the only point of hassling with ZigBee is for getting multi-hop and supposed interoperability. CAB to base station communications is just point to point - basic IEEE 802.15.4 would be a better choice. I'll bet this is just a proprietary protocol on a ZigBee capable radio - like the CC2520 or RF230.

What I'd like to see is a command station with WiFi. I don't need an expensive piece of custom glass single purposed as a CAB. I've already got an iPad, iPod Touch, and a couple of iPhones. Anyone had any luck with the TouchCab stuff?


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Chata:

First of all the Europeans take standards and regulations seriously. Already years ago when I tried to promote 802.11 I was told that this medium is officially not allowed for models/toys. Zigbee uses are wider defined.

2nd from many sources I have heard that Zigbee has a better range and less power consumption, which I would consider important for our application

Using ZigBee today opens for more opportunity for tomorrow than just just focus on today's implementation needs. As a visionary you want to be where the puck is going not where it is today.

Point in case, the latest development of the intercommunication standard in NMRA DCC includes the application over CAN bus







.

Guess what, to my knowledge ZIMO is the only manufacturer that has a CAN bus implemented, all others went with something proprietary. I whcih I could say Dr. Ziegler had a Crystal ball at the time, but at least he went with a brand new standard at the time versus proprietary implementation.

The MX10 has also an Ethernet Interface, so you can get you IPAD/Itouch/Iphone eventually used as a Train-controller, but of course not to that level of detail. The CAB application I have seen are very limited - just enough for visitors.


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Chata: do you know what the communication range of a Zigbee network is? is it greater than the communication range of IEEE 802.15.4 which is about 30 feet, I guess?. I thought they have roughly the same range. 

BTW : For Model trains the CAB is not the only device not connected to the track that needs to communicate with base, there are other devices that are not connected to the track and need to communicate with the base as well such as feedback modules, transducers, programming modules, hubs. 

Mohammed


----------



## VictorSpear (Oct 19, 2011)

Let's look at it this way: The term '*zigbee* itself loosely refers to the* waggle dance* of *bees *which - it is claimed - use this zig+zag dance to provide distance and location to fellow bees (nodes) for potential sources of vital information (food). Much of this waggle dance analysis on sensory perception was done by the famous Austrian ethologist Karl von Frisch (Nobel Prize, Medicine, 1973).


By Zigbee 2.0 they are most likely loosely meaning stack profile 2 (Zigbee Pro 2) announced in 2007....and that's* OK.*

How do we get to the Zigbee '2.0' semantics ? On June 13 2005, the Zigbee Alliance released Specification 1.0 - a.k.a Zigbee 2004. Stack profile 2 was Zigbee 2006. Zigbee 2007 was released with Stack Profile 1 for Home and Commercial use *and *Stack Profile 2 (Zigbee Pro) incorporating many-to-one routing, multicasting and Symmetric key-to-key exchange (SKKE). 


Long Story Short => Zigbee 2.0 implies Stack Profile 1 + Stack Profile 2 = Zigbee (2004) + Zigbee (2007). 


This is not to be confused with Zigbee 2010 moving towards SEP 2.0 (Smart Energy Profile 1, 2) for smart energy metering.


On the open ocean with two Xbee pros and clear line of sight, I am able to Tx/Rx with a range of 3,108 feet. Slightly less than 1 Km (3,280.39 feet). 

Cheers
Victor


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Victor: 

That is an impressive range and perfectly suitable for even the largest G-scale layout. What is the cost of setting a small (10 nodes) network with Xbee pros? 

Mohammed


----------



## VictorSpear (Oct 19, 2011)

In small quantities they run around $40+ for just the Bee itself, retailing at Sparkfun and other places. The Shack has also announced supply. For a developers kit you can go straight to Digi.com for various OEM offerings beyond the initial specification here: http://ftp1.digi.com/support/documentation/90000976_G.pdf 

I'll segue into another siding with better info in a few days..to keep the Zimo MX10 traction on this main line. 

Cheers 
Victor


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Everything I have read about Zigbee so far describes it as optimized for low cost, low power, sensor type applications - communication range wasn't one of the design criteria and I have seen range estimates from as low as 10 meter to over 100 meters.
Communication range depends on many factors and by generalizing we really can't establish whar range the new Zimo Central Station will have. I assume it will be more than adequate for the largest private outdoor layout - for huge commercial ones networking will be an option but I doubt that Mr. Average User wants to get into that.

Zigbee is at the bottom end of the wireless IEEE 802 options with very low data throughput and a range similar to WiFi - its strength is low power which translates into very long battery life and low cost


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By VictorSpear on 14 Nov 2011 10:51 AM 
In small quantities they run around $40+ for just the Bee itself, retailing at Sparkfun and other places. The Shack has also announced supply. For a developers kit you can go straight to Digi.com for various OEM offerings beyond the initial specification here: http://ftp1.digi.com/support/documentation/90000976_G.pdf 

I'll segue into another siding with better info in a few days..to keep the Zimo MX10 traction on this main line. 

Cheers 
Victor

Thanks for the link Victor.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

With the low data rates needed for remote control (not considering streaming sound or video, which is where we might want to go at some point), a mesh network makes sense, like the Z-wave stuff used in homes. 

With long range, it becomes silly to always have direct point to point communications between the sender and the recipient, thus networks. 

I have 3 base stations on my home system and can go to 31 total, so I can cover all around my house without trying to get the signal THROUGH the building, and the attendant RF sources. 

Networking, if fast enough, adds reliability and flexibility, all good stuff. 

Note not all users of Zigbee use any of the networking capability, like Aristo. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Chata86 (Dec 5, 2010)

Axel-

Now-a-days there are standards that apply across both 802.11 and ZigBee, one such standard for example is SEP 2.0. ****, they even apply to HomePlug which is a little like DCC in that it's a wired power line carrier medium.

It sounds like we need some NMRA standards for Ethernet and WiFi too. That way command stations, throttles and PC based layout controllers could all be mixed and matched.


----------



## Chata86 (Dec 5, 2010)

Mohammed and Victor-

ZigBee is just a networking and application layer based on 802.15.4, so ZigBee has no "range". 802.15.4 has a range that depends on the receiver sensitivity, power amplifier and signal to noise ratio. Generally radios transmitting at 0dBm get about 100 feet indoors and about 1000 feet at 20dBm (which is the FCC limit of 2.4GHz ISM band). It's much further outdoors, line of sight. Even further with directional antennas - which generally people don't use for ZigBee since it's a mesh not point-to-point.

One confusing thing about ZigBee is that there is a "stack profile" and an "application profile". The stack profile is about the NWK configuration. And the application profile is more like the part we're all thinking about - how trains talk - the application profile. You have to get both matched to interoperate.

A 900MHz point to point, non-ZigBee radio, with a lower data rate would actually work further and through more walls. I've seen them go a hundred miles outdoor. But it wouldn't be viable outside the USA for FCC/CE reasons. Nor would it fit to a standard of any sort.

I concur with Greg. It is a fact that something like 80% of all ZigBee chips (which are just 802.15.4 radios) do not actually run ZigBee protocols or software. There are many reasons to use the commodity and standardized hardware and MAC/PHY of 15.4 without running the NWK and APP layers of ZigBee. ESPECIALLY since there is no NMRA ZigBee application profile.

The CC2520/RF230 (ZigBee capable radios, just the chip) can be had for only a few dollars. XBee modules have quite a mark up.


----------



## VictorSpear (Oct 19, 2011)

Chata,

I believe Mohammed may have been looking for a reference 'range' for a commercial Zigbee 'implementation' and not so much the actual 'specification'. The CC2520 has a ref range from TI of 400m LineOfSight. It's also only a chip as you mention and one may want to consider the CC2530 that is an SOC with an MCU inbuilt instead.

Some corrections may be in order here:

You indicate "_1000 feet at 20dBm (which is the FCC limit of 2.4GHz ISM band_)" ---Where exactly did you find this ? It is not in 47CFR15 or related references. I assume Zimo would have used a Point-to-Multi Point design in their Zigbee inclusion. The FCC EIRP is 36dBm max (4 watts) for P2MP for 2.4Ghz in the ISM bands. If they only use a P2P, it would be even more as per Special Rule 2.

900 Mhz P-to-P _"But it wouldn't be viable *outside *the USA for FCC/CE reasons"_ - It lies in ITU's Zone *2* but FCC/CE has nothing to do with anything *outside *this zone (Ireland, Hungary are among several countries considering opening up/opened this spectrum through public auctions)

If applications do not use the Zigbee stack offered in their embedded radios, that is an inherent choice of the application designer and the features it supports. Perhaps they are looking at expandability in the future. The Alliance now has 200+ worldwide members. Surely they have a reason to hang out offerings above the 802.15.4 which provides the basic lower layer network for WPANs ?

_One confusing thing about ZigBee is that there is a "stack profile" and an "application profile"_ - Why is this confusing ??

"_ESPECIALLY since there is no NMRA ZigBee application profile_" - One does not have to wait for the NMRA to create an application profile and I don't believe they would have any interest in doing so anyway. They are still working on defining a bus 'standard' for wired track so the wireless/radio RPs do not appear to be in their current spectrum of effort. I haven't yet seen Standards based organizations define application profiles yet. Have you ?

Cheers,
Victor


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

This discussion is all wonderful but it really sheds no light on what the range of the wireless portion of the new Zimo Central station REALLY is and how it is affected by various obstacles, other devices operating in that frequency band etc. 

I guess wel will only find out when the first units are shipped unless Zimo releases some information and test results earlier. 

What would interest me in general is to what degree the Zimo Zigbee wireless connection competes with other wireless devices that may be in the same vicinity and to what degree these different devices interfere with each other including the Zimo Central Station since these are all unlicensed bands. 

Knut


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Knut:

The question should be asked the other way around:

How does other equipment effect the ZigBee. The old 2.4 GhZ phone were "broad spectrum blasters"







. Nothing survived in their frequency range, because they side bands were fully blasted as well.

The younger the product the better they implemented "band hopping". Negative examples are old 802.11 Linksys routers which even blasted my blue-tooth head set (while younger no or bad band hopping). That's why my head piece is now a Dect 6.0 (1.9 Ghz). But my new 802.11n bridge doesn't compete with the 802.11 router.

ZIMO is using a commercial of the shelf (COTS) chipset and drivers in such a way that you will be able to use COTS repeaters if you layout goes around the house, although I will temporarily test it to have the Zentral station in my attic and see how far I can get. My furthest range would be 100+ m from house center point, so I will be dealing with roof penetration + line of sight.

I talked to some IBM Zigbee implementers and I have reports of several 100 m range. The nice part of our DCC implementations is that we can afford to have optimized antennas on both the central station and the handheld, something that you can't do with wireless and battery power. So you are stuck with a small piece of wire tucked away inside an engine.


----------



## benshell (Oct 1, 2008)

Axel, I'm planning to keep the base station in the garage, but put an antenna in the attic or on the roof. What type of antenna should I buy? I've already started running my power wires from the garage to the layout. If I knew what type of antenna to buy I might want to get a head start on installing that too. 

PS: Any update on when the MX10 and MX32FU will be available? I'm hoping to have it this winter and be able to start installing decoders before spring, but I'm starting to wonder if that's a realistic timeframe. Everything in large scale seems to be delayed far beyond manufacturer predictions.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Let me check with ZIMO. The antenna can be unscrewed, and I am wodnering if a dedicated RF cable can do the trick to remount the unscrewed antenna. Very worsed case scenario we put a repeater into the attic.

Stay tuned I will do some research.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

1/4 wave antenna, pointed down... a 1/4 wave antenna emits in a conical pattern, with the tip of the cone at the base of the antenna. 

if you use a 1/2 wave antenna, then you should put it closer to ground level. 

Greg


----------

