# USAT Trainpower 10 trouble



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

It's 12/22/12, and RLD and Charles Ro are closed for Christmas, so I'll ask here.

I bought the Trainpower 10 from RLD Hobbies back in April. I've been working 9 months to get my new layout running by Christmas, and I made it! Today! But there seems to be a problem with the power pack that one of you might be able to diagnose. I wired it up yesterday and ran a train for the first time today. Both my locos will run fine for a while, but then, stop, and do a series of lurches where they are getting power every couple of seconds, lasting a fraction of a second or so. Just enough to cause the locos to lurch, stop, lurch, stop, etc. I found I can get them running again by either cranking up the speed control knob or reversing. Hitting the breaker or turning the unit off and back on seem to have no effect. It happens with my Thomas and my GP38. 
Can anyone diagnose this problem with the info I've provided here, as I'd like to have the trains running for Christmas. Thank you.
Ken Silva
Phoenix, AZ


----------



## Trains (Jan 2, 2008)

Make sure the switch for G, HO,N is set for G scale.

Don


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Will this do the same for either engine alone? Try each separately. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Yes, set for G. Yes, individually run locos. I even have 5 blocks, each controlled by a separate toggle switch. 3 are sidings, and I've now turned them off. 2 are main line, and the same thing happens in each of those blocks. The sidings aren't long enough to properly do a test.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

By reading your response, I'm not 100% sure you understood my request. 

Will this happen if only one loco is running at a time, only the single load on the transformer? 

If so, and it happens with either loco, then either there's an over-sensitivity to the circuit breaker, or you have a "mild short" somewhere... 

Any chance you have an ammeter? 

Can you tell if there is any load with no locos, but connected to the track? 

Greg


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Take all but one engine off the track in order to insure that only one loco is running. This includes cars with metal wheels!! 

You need to make sure only one thing has power and test it out as any car or engine could bridge a gap in the blocks. 

It may be a wiring issue of a block is why I ask that all be removed. 

If problem persists and you try several different engines, then it could be the power pack, make sure problem does not happen at the same place on the track. 

If everything works, then add one item back on the track at a time. 

Let us know the results.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Just another possibility to try and isolate the problem.









If you've got some extra track that you're not using on your layout.
[*] Create a small test loop with the extra track indoors.
[*] If possible make the loop large enough to be able to run each locomotive with its respective normal consist of cars you've run on your layout.
[/list][*] Disconnect the suspect power supply from the layout and use that same power supply to now power the test loop.
[*] Place only one of the of the locomotives with no other cars on the test loop.
[*] Attempt running that locomotive for a long duration.
[*] If the problem isn't encountered, repeat the test with the other locomotive.
[*] If the problem is encountered, repeat the the test with the other locomotive.
[/list][*] If the problem is encountered with both locomotives running all alone on the test loop, then I would think that you've got a problem with the power supply, or the wiring connection between the power supply and the test track loop.
[*] If you've got another power supply that is capable of supplying the needed power, try using it instead.
[/list][*] If the problem is not encountered with either locomotive running alone on the test loop, then I would think you've got possible wiring problems of some sort on your layout.
[*] Another possibility could be that one of the cars being used in the train is intermittently causing a short circuit, try running each of the cars alone in combination with each locomotive.
[*] One last test would be to test each locomotive pulling its normal consist of cars on the test loop for a long duration.
[/list][/list]


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Thanks for everyone's input. 
I do have 2 old MRC power packs that I used for my HO layout 30 years ago. One is analog and one is digital (if those are the proper terms for such packs.) Can I try those instead of the Trainpower 10 to run either Thomas or the USATrains GP38? I don't know if either would have enough power or if it might do damage. 

I don't have any extra track (it being so expensive) to try that test. I will try disconnecting each of the blocks' wiring, one-by-one to see if that might reveal the reason. Perhaps a toggle switch is bad. I'm using DPDT center off for the 2 mainline blocks. One of these toggles controls just 1/2 of the mainline. The other one feeds the other 1/2 of the mainline, plus 4 other sidings, each controlled by a simple on/off toggle. 

But why would the locos run OK for a while before the problem begins? And why would increasing the speed make the problem cease? Only to return when I decrease the speed?


----------



## railcandy (Dec 19, 2010)

I run 2 of those power supplies.... No problem, but your's may be a bad one. I've had some supplies that do the same thing in the past. Greg sounds right, Not enuff Amps getting to the locos. If you get a multimeter and test the outputs you'll have a beter idea. Good Luck! 

Perry


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Back to my post, do the simple tests first... then you can isolate it to the transformer or the track/locos... 

It sounds more and more like the transformer. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Update: I let Thomas run at a constant, slow speed for over 2 hours without a problem. Then, I picked up the controller and as soon as I touched the speed knob to stop him, the problem of stuttering returned. Both forward and reverse. When it does this, I can turn the speed waaaaay up, and it won't stutter until I turn it down again. But it seems that if I can find a spot on the speed knob where it runs smoothly, it will keep running smoothly. It's only when I adjust the speed that the problem returns. Does this confirm that it's the power supply or the controller or what do you folks think now?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Controller... confirmed. 

Greg


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By avlisk on 23 Dec 2012 09:51 AM 
{snip...}[/i] But why would the locos run OK for a while before the problem begins? And why would increasing the speed make the problem cease? Only to return when I decrease the speed? From your above statement, it makes me believe that Dan's mention of block problems caused by car wheels electrically bridging between blocks may be your problem. Since as you state above the problem is seemingly compensated for by increased speed (i.e. shortened duration of short circuit). If it were just the power supply an increase in the speed of the train wouldn't likely resolve the problem.


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Steve C, the stuttering begins within the block, not necessarily when crossing from one block to another. But I can make it stop its stuttering/stalling when I increase the speed (turn up the knob) every single time. It usually resumes stuttering when I turn the speed control down again, but I can usually find a slow speed where it will continue running all day again. 
Greg, do you suppose it's only the controller and the power supply box is OK? This might save me some money to replace only the controller.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By avlisk on 23 Dec 2012 03:40 PM 
Update: I let Thomas run at a constant, slow speed for over 2 hours without a problem. Then, I picked up the controller and as soon as I touched the speed knob to stop him, the problem of stuttering returned. Both forward and reverse. When it does this, I can turn the speed waaaaay up, and it won't stutter until I turn it down again. But it seems that if I can find a spot on the speed knob where it runs smoothly, it will keep running smoothly. It's only when I adjust the speed that the problem returns. Does this confirm that it's the power supply or the controller or what do you folks think now? With your continued refinement of your description of the problem, I would agree with Greg's diagnosis that it's the controller.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yep, sounds like the "controller" part, but I don't have the schematic of the system and cannot be sure that all the "smarts" are in the handheld. Good design would put most of the control part in the handheld, and the part that varies the power output on a heat sink in the main box. 

But where the problem lies, from a bad potentiometer to a bad "control circuit" would be pretty impossible without a schematic. 

Time to send it back for repair I am afraid. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

The end of the saga, I hope. 

I swapped out the Trainpower 10 with a 1960's vintage MRC Throttlepack 500 which has only had accessory-powering duty on an HO layout these last 2 or 3 decades. Both Thomas and then my USAT GP38 run slow, fast, smooth, without a stutter to be found! Then, I swapped back to the Trainpower 10 and stutter, stutter, stutter. Then, back to the 500, and smoooooooth and sloooooooow. I think we found the culprit. I assumed, being the newbie, it was me. It isn't! After running for about an hour, GP38 stopped, Throttlepack 500 showed overload light and very hot, which wasn't a big surprise. So, I unplugged it. But while running, it ran great.
Now, how good is RLD for warranty after 9 months? 
Thanks, guys, for all the input. 
Ken S. 
Phoenix.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

RLD is a very reputable firm, but I believe your warranty is with the manufacturer, which is also probably stated in the owners manual. I'd contact Charles Ro. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Greg, you are correct. RLD says to return the power pack to Charles Ro for warranty work. Ken S. 
PS For what it's worth, the GP38 will run on the HO pack for about 20 minutes before it overloads and shuts down. Thomas, however, ran for over an hour and was still going when I shut it down for the day. Each was pulling 2 to 3 cars. I expected Thomas would pull more amps, being more of a "toy", but I was wrong.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ken: Thomas has one motor, your diesel has two. That makes all the difference in the power needed. Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually one or two or four motors really don't make much difference... it's the basic characteristics of the motor and the load on the motor. 

To prove it to yourself... get 2 identical locos. 

Put together a 20 car train or so (10 will do too) and run it up a grade at a set speed and measure the amps. 

Now put the second loco on the same train and run the same train up the same grade the same speed. You will find the amps is almost EXACTLY the same (turn off the lights on the second locos)! 

Why? Because motors draw the current needed to pull the load... doubling the number of motors will HALVE the load on all motors. 

The Thomas has a low current draw motor, and is pulling very little load. Thus less current. 

The USAT loco has a very low impedance motor whose design pulls more amps and it is heavier. (characteristic of most all USAT locos) 

So you really cannot always go by the number of motors, it's really more factors and more complex than that. 

Greg


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

motor draw is a function of "LOAD" here. 

Amps consumed will vary with a change in the load - i.e. increase the cars - the load increases - the amps will increase.... 

D


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I just went out and measured the amps required for several of my locomotives. The measurements were made with 12 volts on the track. I couldn't go any higher because Thomas would not stay on the track. I was surprised at how little power Thomas needed and how fast it goes with minimal voltage. No cars were being pulled.


Thomas (no smoke, lights, or sound) one motor

12 volts
0.4 amps

LGB Forney #20252 0-4-4 (lights and sound, smoke off) one motor

12 volts

0.7 amps

16 volts (Went to higher voltage because it would barely crawl at 12 volts)

0.8 amps

LGB White Pass diesel #2155 (lights and sound) two motors

12 volts

1.3 amps

LGB White Pass diesel with LGB Santa Fe #21562 (lights and sound) 4 motors

12 volts

2.3 amps

I may not have said it correctly in my earlier post, but more motors means more power is required. This is most likely why Ken didn't have any problem with Thomas, but did with his larger diesel.

Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, this is why I specified testing with a train. ;-) 

Of course, running light, putting more locos on the track will pull more cars... there is the current required just to move the loco. 

But who runs trains with locos with no cars? That's why I was very specific about 10-20 cars, on a grade, etc. 

So your test is valid for pulling nothing but the locos themselves. 

Pull a train that kicks the current draw up and you will find what I said is true. 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I do not see what pulling cars has to do with it. The amps required to move the engine at a given voltage without additional load will be the minimum. Adding cars will increase the amperage needed to move the train. Ken ask why one engine tripped his his power supply and one didn't? My suggestion was that the second engine, for what ever reason required more amps and over heated the circuit breaker, for me the reason was the second motor. We do not know the output of his HO PS, but it is probably not very high.


Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Chuck: 

Your test is valid for locos by themselves, I agreed and stated that. 

If he was running the locos by themselves, you are most certainly right. 

I was talking in the practical sense, that most people pull additional cars with their locos. 

I reacted to what I perceived as an overall generalization, and I see it all the time... that you need more power if you run double headed, or use a loco with more motors. It's just not true. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

After reading all the above chat, interestingly, when the GP38 overloaded the HO pack, (which is a one amp pack I think, maybe 1.5 amp, and over 40 years old), it was pulling the maximum number of cars I have (3), on one of the sharpest curves (10' diameter) and on the steepest grade (shallow, but a grade). I didn't realize these factors would affect the number of amps. I thought the motor pulled whatever it was designed for. So, I've at least learned something here thanks to you all, and I can run Thomas to my heart's content on the HO pack! Just to be certain, let me ask this: if I run just one loco at a low speed, will it draw fewer amps than the same loco at a higher speed? 
Ken S.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

You've painted quite the picture for US...!! ha 

Pulling 3 cars... 

Sharpest curve,... 

Steepest grade,.... 

Each is accumulative in creating more work for a loco; i.e. each situation adds more load - together with each other load. 
Motors do have a maximum load rating, this does not imply they run at that level of load - doing nothing or very little work, but does indicate the level they will not do any more work at! ( on average ) 

Speed is a direct function of Watts, I know Greg will luv this part!! 
If you increase the volts it will run faster. 
But as it runs faster it gets hungry for a bit more amps to "push'"the volts to the loco...so yes, the current needed to run faster will increase! 

Then throw in those points where you installed feeder wires to the track, how far away are they from the problem area you were running on your track? Greater distance will increase the resistance, thus drawing more amps to keep the loco running, or not?!! 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ken: Thanks for your input. There are a lot of factors that impact the power draw of a locomotive. A train that runs on a level layout with wide curves and a low power transformer may crap out with the same train on a layout with steeper grades and sharper curves. Nancy and I will head out to Sun City in early February. I hope that we can meet up sometime while we are out there.

Chuck

Ps, I am still at a loss as to what pulling 20 cars has to do with your problem? My whole point was that your diesel required more electric power than Thomas and that tripped the protection.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

One of the basic laws of physics involves the energy to do "work"... things like friction, and moving something away from the earth's surface... take energy... 

Just like a car going up a hill, you need more gas for more power... in this case the "gas" is a combination of voltage and current... 

If you can get an inexpensive meter (Harbor Freight has them for 5 bucks and less), and hook it up in amps mode and watch it as you run trains, you'll learn a lot. 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg: I strongly agree. If your power supply does not have meters, volt and amp. Get them and use them. You will learn a lot. Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

5 bucks on sale from harbor freight:


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

I feel like Columbo, always "just one more thing". Another interesting thing was that when the GP38 caused the HO pack to shut down, it was also at the farthest point from the feeder wires. So, it was the perfect storm of parameters to cause the shut down, I think. So, here I go with "just one more question": should I run another set of power feeder wires to this farthest point from the power pack. It's about another 30 feet. Is that significant, or will the Trainpower 10 solve all my problems when it gets repaired? If I run more wires, should they be 12, 14, 16 or something else? 
Ken S. 
PS That meter looks like the same one LSOL uses on its reviews.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

An additional power feed will not hurt, but check your rail joiners first. They should be clean and tight. Brass rail is very good conductor. If you have a meter check the voltage around the track to see if there is a drop. That should give you a hint as to whether or not you have a problem. Any of those gauges of wire should be OK. Just do not go any finer. Does Thomas slow down? That will also be a clue to voltage drop. Chuck


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Call me frustrated here,,, had this all typed out......and a kitty stepped on the keyboard and killed the laptop, not just extra letters - but shut it OFF, aaaaargh!! haha..not! 

So let's see........ 

After you have the Train Power 10 operating, 
after you have a meter to measure with, 
run your loco slowly away and measure what is taking place, while it moves further from the feeder wires.. 
Hopefully you might see an increase in the current readings,...? 
this will help you then decide 'if' you will need to add any additional feeders to the track... more info to collect... Or as Marty says -''Tests"....mmm 

Earlier I had wanted to mention also that when using a meter to learn info, in a track power arrangement like yours is, the readings are a combination of 'all the items in place' here. OK, what I'm pointing out is your measuring more than just the locos usages of power. 

Your collecting - reading - uses to push power thru the longer wires, the resistance inherent in the power supply, transformer and parts, the track, and then the loco!! I say this compared to a battery powered loco that does not have long wires, a complex power supply, or track - only the motors to read directly!! 

When I say that I can read 'x' amounts of amps on a battery powered loco, a past example being 4-5 amps on low grades pulling 50 cars, a track powered system should read more, as there are more components for power - electricity - volts and amps - to travel along to get to the loco, to make it run!! In My case the meters are built in the loco, and give direct readings of just the motor load only! 

So much to learn, so little time!! 

your doing Fine Ken!! keep it up!! 
.... Dirk - DMS Ry. It snow about 10 miles down the road, so good thing I took My girl to work...


----------



## SparkyJoe (Oct 14, 2012)

Besides the current draw rating of individual motors, no one mentioned gearing as a factor in current draw and loco speed.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Sparky JOE, why don't you expand on this some more... 

Gearing does what? 

Low gears pull heavy loads,.. at slower speeds.. 
Higher gearing will run faster, but wither under greater loads, which will really crank up the amp loads... 

What were you thinking?? 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

To run at a certain speed with a certain load on the loco, if you add more resistance to the circuit (more wire), it will require more current or voltage... that would mean theoretically that it should trip the breaker easier. 

Your problem is a defective power supply/throttle the first time, and a woefully underpowered supply/throttle the second time. 

Quit worrying and get your Trainpower fixed. Many people have used this product for years with no trouble. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

The Trainpower 10 is in the mail today, 12/31/12, winging its way to Malden, MA. Yes, Thomas does slow down on the curve at one end of the layout where the wires are attached, and again (about 40 feet away) at the curve at the other end of the layout. The layout is a dogbone shape. The curve the farthest from the hookup wires is also the slight grade, and the place where the GP38 shut the system down with an overload. About half the track is used, beat up a bit, and the rail joiners on those sections are sloppy. I will be buying some over-joiner split jaw clamps to fix that problem. I will go to Harbor Freight and buy that meter because now, I'm very curious about amps and voltage drop. I plan on wiring jumpers between rail sections and have a solding gun and supplies to that end. I think that brings this issue up to date and answers any outstanding questions you posed to me. 
Thanks. Ken S.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ken: The rail clamps are a very good idea. But before you put them over your rail joiners make sure the end of the track going into the rail joiner is bright an shinny. Also clean the inside of the joiner. If those two surfaces are not clean, you will not get good electrical contact. I put a small dab of LGB conducting grease (graphite paste) in each joiner. There are other conducting pastes out there. This also cuts down on corrosion. If you are going to use rail clamps you probably will not need to solder jumper wires, unless you really want to. Take it one step at a time. Only do what you really need to do. What is the diameter of your curve where Thomas slows down? Many trains will slow down on curves as there is more friction. If it speeds up on the next straight section, I suspect your curves and not an electrical conductivity problem. Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Don't buy the over the joiner clamps... get the regular clamps... the conductivity problem is between the rail and the joiner... pressing on the outside of the joiner does not improve the connection very much.. 

Get the normal ones, you'll thank me in a couple of years... 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Chuck, The curves are 10' diameter where Thomas slows down, pulling only his 2 carriages. One curve section has the feeder wires and is level, the other is far from the feeder wires and is the slight grade up. When he hits the 16' diameter curve and the slight straight downgrade, he speeds back up. The used track isn't very bright or shiny, but so far (2 weeks) there's power getting to every piece of track. Should I use a wire "toothbrush" to clean the dull-looking rails? Ken S.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

The curves are great. Do not use a wire brush. The wire brush probably scratch the track, not good. Here is a link to a thread on cleaning track. Read through it and go to the thread linked in my post.


track cleaning 

Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Please note that most trains will slow down a bit on ANY curve, there's more friction there. If it's not a big difference, don't worry. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

How about using the wire brush just to clean around the rail joiners? I'll use the Bridge Master track cleaner for the tops of the rails. 
Ken s.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I missed this, brass track? whose manufacturer? 

If you want to clean the track, a fine wire brush in a dremel... fine, not coarse... nothing that would fit in a regular drill.. 

You can also dip the ends in CLR or Limeaway... that would be better, but more work. 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg: I like the cross sectional profile of the over the joiner clamp to the over the rail clamp. The over the rail clamp has a "V" shaped slot that goes over the rail foot. This creates a wedge effect which if tightened too much has lead to failure. I have had several break at the point of the V. The over the joiner clamp has a vertical end rather than a point. This should put less stress on the clamp as the foot of the rail is pushing against a vertical wall instead of pushing up and down against the wedge of the V. You may not have this problem in Southern California, but in climates that go from well below freezing to above 100F some fail. I have ordered some over the joiner clamps to see how they perform, over the rail and over a clamp. Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, no real big extremes.. got down to freezing the other day and it was a huge deal. 

I will say that certain clamps have a history of breaking and others do not. The Hillmans have a square notch, which gives 2 points to contact the rail foot, BUT 2 major stress points. The Split Jaws have a single v-shaped groove, never heard of these breaking, and they are heavier/thicker. 

I use only the SS ones, which are stronger still than the brass. 

So, it really depends on which of the 4 or 5 manufacturers also in my opinion. 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Mine are split jaw and several have broken. The nonbroken half makes a good power connector. Chuck


----------



## Dr Rivet (Jan 5, 2008)

Greg / Chuck 

I think in our environment some of the problem is the use of SS cap screws in brass clamps. As the clamp goes through multiple cool-heat cycles during the winter the stress on the weaker brass finally causes a failure. Every Sunset valley clamp that has broken has failed diagonally through the cross section of the threaded side of the clamp. This is why I think the different thermal expansion/contraction rates of the brass and SS is the problem. All my new clamps for the outdoor layout are SS.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Chuck, you don't say, but are yours brass? 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes and so is my track.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I now know why I never throw anything out. I went out and dug around in my Split-Jaw box and found two broken clamps. One is only partially broken (middle), you can see the crack and the bent side, and the other (right) the side is completely broken off. A new unused one is on the left. Both of the broken ones are not threaded, so since the screw can freely move back and forth in the hole I do not think that it is thermal expansion of the bolt. Both breaks start at the point of the "V". Sorry for the lack of sharpness in the picture. Chuck


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

I think I'll go out and loosen the screws on my rail clamps. Certainly before summer's 115F temps arrive. 
One more, more thing. In the new GR, which I've just subscribed to, I've encountered another Large Scale (non) standard. This one is about polarity, and the loco they are reviewing talks about a "polarity switch" to go between LS and NMRA standards. This probably explains why Thomas goes in the opposite direction from my USAT GP38. So, which one is "right"? Why are there 2 standards? Which standard is Thomas on? Which standard is GP38 on? And which locomotive do I need to rewire to bring it into the standard that best suites me? Or, since I only have 2 locos, which don't run at the same time, should I even care? I may get another loco from both the Thomas series and from USAT in the future, but not much more than that. 
Ken S.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ken, Welcome to the wacky world of Large Scale. In large scale there are no standards other that the gauge. When LGB started in the late 60s they chose one version of polarity for the track. This was opposite to the polarity "standard" for all other scales that run DC that had been defined by NMRA. All LS manufacturers adopted the LGB standard, including Bachmann. It wasn't until Thomas that they quasi adopted the NMRA polarity. The Thomas in the set is wired backward to all other LS engines. I reversed the wiring to the motor so Thomas now plays nicely with all of my other engines: LGB, USA, Aristo, Accucraft. Most recent Bachmann engines have the polarity switch. It doesn't really matter unless you are running more than Thomas at the same time.


If you bought Thomas as a single, not as part of a set, I believe he has the polarity switch. I know that is the case with Percy. James also has the switch.

Here is a thread from Dec. 2009 where we talk about changing the polarity in Thomas.

Thomas discussion 

This link brings you in at the end of the thread. You will have to scroll back to the beginning to see the full discussion.

Chuck

Here is a long thread on rail joiners and rail clamps that we had in the summer of 2010. Scroll to August 17th and you will see a post I added showing two alternatives to soldering jumper wires or using rail clamps. I still have track held together with both method as well as using clamps. When I'm lazy I use the clamps.

joiners, clamps, and jumpers, etc.


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Interesting. I would have guessed the USAT were NMRA and Thomas, being an oddball loco, would have its own standard. I would have been completely wrong about both. Thomas was an eBay purchase, so I don't know if he was originally part of a set that someone broke up, or not. On further examination, under a magnifier so my old eyes could see it, there is, indeed, a polarity switch on Thomas. I flipped it and he's now running the same direction as the GP38. Hooray! No polarity switch found (yet) on the GP38, though. I will assume there isn't one, based on the Thomas discussion thread. Curiously, there is among the 4 switches on the GP38, one that reads: motors. Is this a polarity switch? 
Thanks again. Ken S.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ken: No, it is basically an on/off switch. As far as I know, Bachmann is the only manufacturer using a polarity switch. Because your Thomas has the switch, it is not part of the set, at least that is what I think that I know. Chuck


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Brass will expand faster than stainless... stainless screws in brass could seem to help cause this problem, BUT if the clamps were tightened in warm temperatures, then there should be less in cold, i.e. the brass should contract more and have less pressure. 

So, unless you re-tighten your screws in very cold weather, I would guess is that the clamps are just too tight for the design/material. 

There IS an NMRA standard for polarity on the rails, just the same as in HO, BUT LGB saw fit to do it in the opposite polarity. Bachmann added the polarity switch so you could either meet the standard or match directions of your LGB. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

OP update. I got the repaired power supply back today from USAT. They don't tell me, though, what they did to fix it and they don't have a working email, so I'll have to call them next week to find out, I guess. So far (15 minutes into running), the repaired supply seems to have lost its stuttering glitch and is working. YAY! 

An interesting thing I'm finding is that the places on the railway, the curves and the grades, where the locos were bogging down when running on the temporary HO pack, now don't slow at all with the 10 amp supply, even at very very low speeds. That's great. Can anyone tell me why this is so? It must have something to do with the amps?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

You ran out of amps in the HO pack... you draw more current when there is more load. You now have 10 amps. 

Same difference as going up a hill in a Yugo or a 500 hp car... the Yugo slows down, and the 500 hp car just ignores the hill. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Thank you, Greg. It's amazingly magical to me. If the HO pack ran out of amps, why wasn't Thomas tripping the overload on the HO pack as the USAT GP38 did? Ken S.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Because the GP38 draws more current. It has two motors and lights, Thomas has one motor and no lights. Think of Thomas as a 40 watt light bulb and the GP38 as a 100 watt bulb. Chuck


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

OP's final report. Charles Ro's repair tech, Joe, tells me there was a bad batch of these power supplies. (He's repaired about a dozen from the same batch.) Seems that there was a bad run of transistors or resistors where a short wouldn't be properly protected and would blow these 4 components (2 of each). He replaced 2 transistors and 2 resistors on the mother board and the supply works again. FYI for anyone interested. 
Ken S. 
PS Tech Joe was very friendly and informative on the telephone.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks for getting back and closing the loop, valuable information for anyone having the same issue in the future. 

Glad it's resolved. 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I strongly agree with Greg. Closing the loop helps everyone. There are many threads that start asking for help and that help is offered. Many times the first question is the only time we hear from him/her. It helps us to know how it turned out.

Thanks, Chuck


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

OP here again. I just blew up the Trainpower 10 again. This time, I forgot to throw a toggle and my GP38 crossed an insulated gap. After years of DCC and no toggles, I need to be more careful and re-learn how to run a layout with toggles I guess. But don't you think the Trainpower 10 should be better protected against a short like this? Seems that this kind of thing happens all the time. I wonder if I can fix it myself this time, as this is getting expensive. Ken S. Phoenix, AZ


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Wow, not good... well, however you resolve this, clearly it calls for a fuse on the output! 

I've not seen a "power pack" in recent history that would fail from a direct short... 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

OP here with 3/11/13 update. Power pack fixed again. This time, they replace an integrated circuit that fried from the short, also taking a couple of newly replaced resistors with it. There are 4 protection circuits, and the fact that it blew up tells us that at least one wasn't protecting. Another indication that one of the 4 wasn't protecting is that these packs are notorious for lurching at very low speed start ups, according to Charles Ro. My pack wasn't causing any locos to lurch. In fact, I marvelled at the low speed smoothness. Now that it's fixed again, I did observe and report to Charles Ro this lurching. The fact that it's now doing this tells them that all 4 protection circuits are operating, and the pack is running normally. There won't be any more "fixes", as the cost to ship has now reached the cost of a new unit. I'll look elsewhere for my next power supply, and, I don't recommend these packs, as even when they work "right", they don't operate the trains smoothly. Am I being prematurely forced into the awful world of batteries now!


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

No! Batteries are only an option and not right for everybody. 
I believe Greg E recommends The MRC Power G 10 amp transformer. 
I think you should go that way when necessary. 

See ya down the line, 

John


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

sorry to hear about this... it looks good on the site, but it seems the unit is not "fully baked" design wise... The MRC Power G works well for me when I run DC... I use batteries too... (in my power tools ha ha) .. 

As bad as it sounds maybe you want to sell it now that it's working fine. If you really need a power supply with a remote, possibly one of the Bridgeworks, although they are really expensive. 

Greg


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

OP here. You're not going to believe this, but the TrainPower 10 just blew up again. This is the 3rd time. I'll give it some credit though, as it did function for a FULL MONTH! It was a derailment that caused a short this time, and the TrainPower 10 works no more. I've just about had it with USA Trains, as this was the same week I found out about split axles on my 2 Geeps, and a coupler also fell off and resulted in several broken parts on one end of my GP9 as it mashed into the loco in front of it in a double-header. That's 3 strikes against USAT in one week, and 3 strikes against the TP10 all by itself. Greg, does that MRC Power G have an external controller like the TP10? I would like to have that in my next power pack. 
Ken S.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

No, it's just the big lever on top. If you want something in your hand, the choices are slim. Bridgeworks makes a small remote, but you will see a sharp increase in price. 

Not sure if there are other good choices for you. 

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ken: I like the Bridgewerks remotes. If you want to continue with the USAt power supply, put a 5 amp fuse in the line between the power supply and the track, or any fuse that is less than the rating of the power supply. Better to blow a fuse than blow the supply. Chuck


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

Thanks Greg and Chuck. I called Charles Ro today, 4/13/13. Joe told me to just throw this unit away, as they've never had to repair a unit 3 times, let alone twice. They will send me a new one free of charge! I didn't expect such a totally satisfactory response or outcome, (assuming the new one works). I guess Charles Ro is a good place after all. Looks like that 3rd strike was only a foul ball.
Bridgewerks are so expensive, I think I'll start exploring the dreaded world of battery power for future expansion, just in case. As Allen McClelland once said, "It's all part of the fun of Model Railroading."
Ken Silva


----------



## avlisk (Apr 27, 2012)

OP's final, final report. The new Trainpower10 arrived this weekend and it's hitched up. I notice 2 differences from the original pack. First, the trains start up much more smoothly, even with 2 weeks of not running and the rails being dirty. And they run more smoothly once they are moving. Second, the momentum control pot, which I observed ran backwards to what is shown in the on-line videos, now operates as shown in the videos. I haven't yet explored what happens when I get a derailment and a short circuit, but I'm not tempting fate right now, and I"ll wait for a real accident to test that. Ken S.


----------

