Passing loop using both ports on ADS-2sx decoder.

[westernwill]

Never heard of a POETS Friday.....Push Off Early, Tomorrows Saturday.

You are being very polite there Chris.

 

In my day another word was used instead of "Push".

 

[NormanQ4]

Hi Chris, I'm sorry to leave you hanging, with all the goings-on I'd forgotten it was Friday so I'll put you out of your misery.

I'm very grateful for the prompt response and resolution from HRMS.

The main item that was changed was on the points set up screen.

The accessory decoder that I selected was in fact the one that I was using.

The tech came in, and instead, manually selected the Hornby R8247 from the drop-down list.

Why didn't we do that? It just seems so simple, obvious, straightforward and logical. NOT!!!!!!!

He also said that I shouldn't use the reverse polarity switch, but should reverse the wiring instead.

Unfortunately using that switch was the only way that I could get the points to function without causing a short or stall on the frogs.

Just another couple of RM idiosyncrasies. Why have a drop-down list or reverse polarity switch if we are to ignore them?

All is now good and working as it should, although quite a painful experience.

No pain, no gain. Aint that the truth.

[96RAF]

There is something flawed in the code if selecting the right decoder from a drop down doesn't work but selecting the wrong one does.

 

When selecting the correct decoder at the programming stage one is presented with a bespoke setup screen telling for instance how ro connect the device, if it is a learning device or has to be manually programmed, etc.

 

Why else provide a drop down if a generic pick can/has to be used and is the only one that works. Why does everyone using ‘other’ decoders not have the same problem. I think HRMS needs to explain why this is.

 

Rob

[Chrissaf]

Think about it logically. The DCC commands used to operate an Accessory Decoder are a standard written by the NMRA. Thus it should follow that the DCC commands sent from RM to operate the points should be the same regardless of the brand model of Accessory Decoder used. Thus it therefore also follows that the R8247 can be the selected decoder in the pull down list regardless of the decoder actually being used.

.

I've always been of the opinion that the appearance of other brand decoders in RM selection boxes, at least as far as 'self learning' decoders such as the ADS range are concerned, are there purely to give the user confidence that their decoder is supported. I came to this conclusion after doing some testing on my own RM controlled layout. I physically use the R8247, but found I could choose other brands in RM and my layout still functioned as designed.

.

But Rob is correct, the appearance of a decoder brand choice in the decoder programming screen is totally valid. The 'self learning' decoders have their own distinct setting up requirements and HRMS have tailored the RM user interface to suit the decoder being set up, with decoder specific notes and instructions But not so, the operations screen. The operations screen should be using bog standard NMRA DCC commands irrespective of the decoder used.

.

This HRMS solution somewhat proves those theories as it would appear that the bulk of HRMS RM development testing goes into the code written for the R8247 and not the other brands.

.

Regarding no pain, no gain.

One learns more (and remembers more) through painful learning experiences than if everything just went 'tickity boo' first time........I bet now, you won't have an issue like this again because choosing the R8247 in any selection box will be something you will now try as first choice to resolve any other operational issues that might arise.

.

 

[St1ngr4y]

Hi Norman,

This doesn't make sense to me either. Why did it work for me, using exactly the same settings as yours. When I did it on my operational pc, the decoder which had ports 5 & 6 was an ADS8, but I configured them as AD-S2 2-port. 

 

You said "The main item he changed...."  - did he change anything else?

 

Ray

[NormanQ4]

Hi Ray the other things that he changed were the polarity switch and it looked like he couldn't quite make up his mind whether or not there should be a colon after the word Point in the point/signal window, eventually settling on yes there should.

The thing that I thought of when the corrections were being made was " how did Ray get it to work?" I would have to believe that there is a flaw somewhere in the system and that HRMS know it's there.

I would like to thank you and Chris for joining me on this journey.

I can't begin to imagine how long it would have taken me to reach that conclusion with my system of trial and error.

 

I'm sure I would have finished up with one big pile of straw. 😀

[96RAF]

I say again...

‘I think HRMS needs to explain......’ what exactly is going on

Rob

[St1ngr4y]

Hi Ray the other things that he changed were the polarity switch and it looked like he couldn't quite make up his mind whether or not there should be a colon after the word Point in the point/signal window, eventually settling on yes there should.

 

 

Aha - that's the answer .....

 

If you look closely at your first screen images on page 1, you will see that the colon is missing. Did you type these in yourself? The interesting thing here is that when you go to the "Other points/signals", each line has a dropdown list for you to choose from, but it only contains other points/signals which have already been defined. So, for example, if you create point 5 before point 50, then the dropdown list will not contain point 50 yet. It will let you type it in, but if you miss out the colon, then this could be why it doesn't work. However, if you then go on to add point 50, then in its dropdown lists, Point 5 should now exist, so did you type this in also?

I would guess now that if you return to it and re-configure as AD-S2 instead of R8247, they will still work. 

It should be possible for the software to either prevent the user from typing in the entry or at least to verify the correctness of the entry if it has been typed in.

Ray

[Chrissaf]

Strewth almighty what a subtle difference to look for.....even after these last couple of posts highlighted the missing colon issue, I went back to review the images on page 1 to see what was being documented. At first I couldn't see the colon even though these latest posts explained where it was. I had to look again really closely and magnify the image to eventually get that eureka moment.

.

Talk about such a subtle difference, up till now no one outside HRMS would have picked up on that missing detail and just goes to prove how important command syntax is in computing. So when this issue comes up again, and it will do at some point in the future, then anybody who has been following this thread will now know exactly what to look for.

.

Given what I wrote earlier about standardised NMRA DCC commands, I am sure that Ray is 100% correct about the function still working if the R8247 decoder choice is reverted back to ADS. These missing colons are obviously the real crux of the issue, and the other things that HRMS commented on such as decoder choice and reversal check boxes are just less important side issues.

.

This highlights a procedural methodology that HRMS should really document more effectively in the RM manual. That is to add ALL the point configurations INDIVIDUALLY on the track plan first, BEFORE linking them together with the 'other' point configuration. That way all the points should then appear in the pull down box with the correct colon syntax. In other words, avoid typing in any commands manually.

.

I've just looked back at Geo's 'Mimic Point Direction' thread who's thread effectively started off this thread. And can see that the syntax colon is missing in his screen shots too. So he too must have typed in manually rather than using the pull down selection box as well.

.

[Fishmanoz]

That colon shows clearly in the syntax in the manual when switching both points and signals this way.  Examples are on pages 82, 83 and 89.

 

I’m betting this will be the only change needed, not the other things HRMS did. 

 

I think this will also obviate the need to use a second decoder port for the second point.  With correct syntax, it will work with Ray’s phantom point solution with both points connected to the same port.  At least it’s worth a try. 

[NormanQ4]

Last night I discovered another twist to this saga.

I was looking to purchase another "ADS-2sx decoder" so copied from the title above which took me to a google search page.

On scrolling down that page I came across the Hornby Forum Passing Loop thread link (US) which had the first couple of lines of text from my post which is still awaiting moderation.

Google seems to be harvesting content from the Hornby Forum which has not been approved and published by Hornby.

On checking the Google link today, that couple of lines is no longer shown, although it still shows the thread title.

 

This learning curve now seems to have gone full circle.

[NormanQ4]

@Fishmanoz

I’m betting this will be the only change needed, not the other things HRMS did. 

You've won that bet Fishy, I've just changed it.

 

I think this will also obviate the need to use a second decoder port for the second point

I'm not sure about this bit though, since I need to power the frogs. 

Any advice would be welcome before I resort to reconfiguring the wiring

[St1ngr4y]

Hi Norman,

The original idea of having point 50 on the diagram as a "ghost" point, and physically wiring both points to port 5 on the decoder should work ok. When both points fire together, the frog of each point requires the same polarity. Using the terminals provided on port 5 of the decoder for frog polarity switching should work ok, provided you get the outside pair of wires of the polarity switching terminals the right way round. A multimeter is useful when trying this out. Are your electrofrog points the latest Peco where the frog is electrically isolated from the blades by snipping a couple of links underneath? Also, where have you placed IRJs?

Ray

[NormanQ4]

Hi Ray

Everything is working perfectly as it is using two ports, no shorting or stalling.

Wires snipped underneath, IRJs on each leg of the V at the frog.

[St1ngr4y]

Hi Ray

Everything is working perfectly as it is using two ports, no shorting or stalling.

Wires snipped underneath, IRJs on each leg of the V at the frog.

 

... then I don't see any reason not to try using one port, unless you are an advocate of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"  😆 You must have the frog wiring the correct way on point 5, so just extend its frog wire to the other point, as well as the three wires to the point solenoid from point 5 to the other point, and Bob's your uncle.

Ray

[NormanQ4]

Thanks Ray

[Chrissaf]

This thread has been extremely useful and enlightening. As Fishy says, the colon is clearly visible in the RM manual, but has been obviously overlooked and not obvious unless one is clued up and specifically looking for it. I have a vague recollection of previous unsolved posts, where this colon would most probably have been a fix for those forum reported issues as well. Water under the bridge now, but this is one fix I have definitely filled away to be resurrected in the future when similar RM point/signal control issues are raised.

.

I agree with comments by others......a well written piece of software should perform automatic syntax checking of user input and highlight syntax errors to the user where found, and not just blindly accept the user input as typed.

[96RAF]

I wonder if this colon maybe plays a part in help sort the long running multi aspect signalling logic saga.

Rob

[St1ngr4y]

I can mention a different scenario where the syntax of an instruction can be slightly different, but still works, and it doesn't involve the user typing it in wrongly.

If you use the macro record facility to record a program including point or signal changes, then the line generated for these has one less space in the middle than it should have, but the program still works. This image will help to explain what I mean...

/media/tinymce_upload/e36b6cb7d6ba8c8a22c58161c3e02a1f.png

This program was recorded to switch point 45 and signal 110, and the images show what can be seen in the program editor when the recording has finished. The top image shows the dropdown list of points as defined in the layout file. Normally, when you expand this dropdown list, the current value in this field matches with an item in the list, but this recorded line doesn't. It is displayed on its own, above the first item (alphabetically) in the layout file. The reason for this is that it is subtly different to the one in the list. There are only four spaces preceding the word "Port" in the generated instruction, whereas in all the other items in the list, there are five spaces. The same applies to the generated line for the signal. This is what the dropdown looks like when there is a match with the layout list:-

/media/tinymce_upload/91393712ce958765fd8c454a48f7b810.png

Now I know this is trivial, and it shouldn't matter as long as the program still works, but I reported this ages ago and nothing has been done. I can't imagine it being anything more than a one-line change to the software program code.

Ray

[St1ngr4y]

Hi Norman,

Just to clarify for other readers, the post above was made on Friday, at which time you had the points attached to two different ports on the decoder.

Since then, have you tried the one-port method, and have you tried going back to the AD-S2 decoder configuration?

Ray

[NormanQ4]

Hi Ray

Both points changed back to ADS-2sx configuration and working as they did with Hornby R8247 decoder.

I will change back to one port tomorrow and report back.

[NormanQ4]

Hi Ray

Good news, I changed back to using one decoder port and everything is working as it should - both points firing simultaneously, frog power applied correctly and direction indicator pointing the right way.

It's actually better than using two ports as with that option there was around one - two second delay between each point firing.

[St1ngr4y]

Good to know this one has been finally "put to bed".

 

Ray