Electronic track cleaners - any experiences?
Tom Houston
I've recently been tempted to buy one of these units,
(after a mammoth session cleaning track by hand)
but I've not actually met anyone who's got one.
Any guidance on their theory of operation or tales of
their operation in practice (do they work?) would be
appreciated.
cheers,
Tom
--
anti-spam in return address, remove atthingy and dotwotsit
to obtain my real E-mail address.
JohnShelley
Tom Houston wrote in message <01beb5e3$67bb89e0$45fcabc3@default>...
>hi folks,
>I've recently been tempted to buy one of these units,
>(after a mammoth session cleaning track by hand)
>but I've not actually met anyone who's got one.
>
>Any guidance on their theory of operation or tales of
>their operation in practice (do they work?) would be
>appreciated.
>
>cheers,
>Tom
My personal view is that they are OK if used in moderation. They do combat
dirty track, but please do remember there is no such thing as a free lunch.
At the risk of boring/losing a few of you and also being a bit simplistic
and also upsetting the manufacturers, they work as a high voltage and very
high resistance power source. When a loco motor is connected it effectively
provides a short circuit to the electronic track cleaner therby ensuing
that it dose not create a high voltage. When the loco loses all contact, and
hence power to its motor, due to dirt etc on the rails the voltage rises
until it can arc through the dirt and re-establish the traction current
flow. All very nice, the train keeps moving without a percetible pause, but
the arcs create localised heating and can erode the surfaces that they are
struck between. Hence my apprehension. If any location suffers continual
arcing there is a real possibility of damage due to overheating. My
personal opinion is that they are a useful adjunct to proper track cleaning
and are very useful in locations that are difficult to get to. There again
if you can't reach a bit of the track on you toy train there is something
wrong with the layout. What do you do when the train falls off there??
Cheers for now
John
Harrow Middx
remove nospam for response
Mick Bryan
Tom Houston wrote in message <01beb5e3$67bb89e0$45fcabc3@default>...
>hi folks,
>I've recently been tempted to buy one of these units,
>(after a mammoth session cleaning track by hand)
>but I've not actually met anyone who's got one.
>
>Any guidance on their theory of operation or tales of
>their operation in practice (do they work?) would be
>appreciated.
I use a Gaugemaster HF-2 twin track railcleaner. Experience of using it,
seems to show that the track tends to take longer to get dirty - there is no
real substitute for elbow grease. Usually it means that I clean the track
manually at the beginning of the day at an exhibition, and it "normally"
will not need cleaning until the following morning.
Cheers,
Mick Bryan
layouts, kits, bits and humour at:
www.bryan20.freeserve.co.uk
Anthony New
>
> Tom Houston wrote in message <01beb5e3$67bb89e0$45fcabc3@default>...
> >hi folks,
> >I've recently been tempted to buy one of these units,
> >(after a mammoth session cleaning track by hand)
> >but I've not actually met anyone who's got one.
> >
> >Any guidance on their theory of operation or tales of
> >their operation in practice (do they work?) would be
> >appreciated.
> >
> >Tom
>
> My personal view is that they are OK if used in moderation. They do combat
> dirty track, but please do remember there is no such thing as a free lunch.
> At the risk of boring/losing a few of you and also being a bit simplistic
> and also upsetting the manufacturers, they work as a high voltage and very
> high resistance power source. When a loco motor is connected it effectively
> provides a short circuit to the electronic track cleaner therby ensuing
> that it dose not create a high voltage. When the loco loses all contact, and
> hence power to its motor, due to dirt etc on the rails the voltage rises
> until it can arc through the dirt and re-establish the traction current
> flow. All very nice, the train keeps moving without a percetible pause, but
> the arcs create localised heating and can erode the surfaces that they are
> struck between. Hence my apprehension. If any location suffers continual
> arcing there is a real possibility of damage due to overheating. My
> personal opinion is that they are a useful adjunct to proper track cleaning
> and are very useful in locations that are difficult to get to. There again
> if you can't reach a bit of the track on you toy train there is something
> wrong with the layout. What do you do when the train falls off there??
>
I know several people who run them and swear by them. I have taken apart
one of the "Railco" units and examined it in operation, and think that
the power level is low enough that the "heating" effect from the arcing
is probably not significant.
*However*, I have observed that in repeated use (while testing
locomotives and controllers on a short piece of track, actually) the
repeated arcing tends IME to build up spots of black at intervals which
make the problem worse, and can eventually cause other locos (not just
the problem one) to stop there. IMHO arcing is something to be avoided
unless you are deliberately welding or eroding, so I won't use them.
For those interested, the actual method of these gadgets is that a
high-frequency oscillator is coupled into the track circuit via a
high-ratio step-up transformer to give a high voltage (200V - 400V).
When a loco is present in circuit, the low resistance load damps the
oscillation and stops the ac output. I have also tried building my own,
and have found that the power level required to make the thing work is
just on the border of what is acceptably safe. Greater power (than the
"Railco" provides) works better but gives either electric shocks or RF
burns to anyone touching the track at the wrong moment. I've had plenty
of these in the past and neither are very nice.
I tend to agree with John, that it is better to run a cloth over the
track regularly - the fewer hardened carbon spots the better!
As a matter of interest, at least two professional (permanent) model
railway exhibitions have used a cloth pad soaked in some cleaning agent,
weighted down and pulled behind a loco to clean their track. The old
Triang track-cleaning car may work here - has anyone any experience of
using it on a regular basis?
Anthony.
Jonathan Hall
>
>
> *However*, I have observed that in repeated use (while testing
> locomotives and controllers on a short piece of track, actually) the
> repeated arcing tends IME to build up spots of black at intervals which
> make the problem worse, and can eventually cause other locos (not just
> the problem one) to stop there. IMHO arcing is something to be avoided
> unless you are deliberately welding or eroding, so I won't use them.
>
Some months ago I bought a used Lima class 33 and it had obviously been
used a great deal on a 'Relco' fitted layout because on one of the
pickup wheels the erosion effect had cut a deep groove into the tread of
the tyre!
The original fault seemed to be that the pickup wiper in the bogie had
been disturbed and had burnt through on one axle and therefore only one
wheel was picking up for the loco.
jonathan
Steve Spreadborough
effect. They seem to be a bit sturdier than cloth pads, which can get
snagged on frogs and track joints, as well as being far easier to fix.
Cleaning agent in this context can be just meths.
Steve
Anthony New <a...@wsi.co.uk> wrote in article <376500...@wsi.co.uk>...
sw99
As an operator with Stapleforth TMD and Stapleforth Main Line (modern image
'N' gauge ), we use Relcos hard-wired in to the track but operated via a
switch.
We have clean track and locos at the start of an exhibition and only turn
the Relco on if we have a sticky bit. We turn them off after a max of 30
mins but if the loco still sticks then we investigate either the loco or the
bit of track.
So far, after 4/ years of exhibiting we have had no burnt out motors or
overheating/ shorted Relcos......
We also use feedback controllers with no snags either.
Regards.........Stu
John New
years and they seem to help keep the dirt loose enough to wipe off
easily with a cloth. Problems I know with Portescap motors on 2-rail
systems so use with care with fancy modern motors.
--
John New : Webmaster 4 sites (York, Weymouth, Wessex As. & Island Pub)
http://www.johnrnew.demon.co.uk/wmrahome.htm & wessex.htm
http://www.yorkshow.freeserve.co.uk
http://www.johnrnew.demon.co.uk/island.htm
Anthony New
Sounds like a good system.
Anthony.
Anthony New
>
> I have used RELCOs on my exhibition Hornby Dublo 3 rail layout for a few
> years and they seem to help keep the dirt loose enough to wipe off
> easily with a cloth. Problems I know with Portescap motors on 2-rail
> systems so use with care with fancy modern motors.
> --
What sort of problems?
Anthony.
Paul Wells
1.5" strips, 6" long and then wrapped round a peco track rubber or
similar size piece of wood. Slightly dampen the denim with white spirit
and then rub along the track surface. Also keep the wheels of coaches and
wagons clean to avoid distributing dirt around the track. White sprit and
cotton wool buds for this.
Personally I wouldn't use an abrasive rubber on my track, not only will
it score the track but also drops the dirt (although microscopic) next to
the track. That's more dirt to get up into the motors of locos. Abrasive
track rubbers should never be used with steel track as it wears through
the protective coating.
Best wishes to all, Paul Wells: Modern Models.
So far I have not found a problem using white spirit but it would be
advisable to keep away from track ballast of the foam type ballast.
John New
Portescaps on my own two rail stock but when we used RELCOs on a club
layout the guys with the Portescap fitted locos insisted we had a switch
to isolate them when they were running their stock. I will find out
more when I next see the relevant club members on Saturday at our open
day and post the answer in this newsgroup if no one else has answered
the query first..
JohnShelley
John New wrote in message <3766C5F6...@johnrnew.demon.co.uk>...
>I think the problem is that it burns them out.
I guess that because the Portescaps have very low inertia they try to follow
the high frequency of the "electronic track cleaner" (similar effect to them
running on pulse modulated controller, I suppose) and they them take
relatively high (for them) surge currents which burn out their "commutator
brushes" (not really the right phrase I thin, but can't think of a better
one at this time of night!) and hence we have a very sick motor.
This is something which doesn't happen the first time, but is more of a
slowly slowly degredation process.
As always, there's no such thing as a free lunch. ie every good thing has a
disadvantage - it's up to you to choose which is the lesser of the two
evils.
Cheers for now hic hic
Dick Ganderton
it and was not impressed! The frequency at which it oscillates is, if I
remember correctly, in the long wave radio band and is a recipe for RF
disaster on a large layout. Anyway, the frequency is far too high for a
coreless motor to follow.
Tom Houston
Wow, thanks for the advice chaps, I suppose the Relco (& others)
work by not actually cleaning the rail so much as making the wheel-rail
contact less sensitive to poor contact caused by dirt buildup. More of a
work-around than a solution.
I'm still a bit worried about the voltage thing, I have two wee girls who
are
always all over the front of my layout.....mind you, a belt or two might
be
the solution to my 'trespassers on the line' problem ;-). also I'd be
worried about the discharge pitting the track/wheel surfaces, though how
that would compare to the damage done by mechanical cleaning (no I don't
mean sandpaper) or just the normal running of trains....
Actually in the meantime by sheer coincidence, I've found a Fleischmann
track cleaning wagon.
This actually seems to do the job very well. Unlike my Hornby one.
It cleans the track by two rotating discs slung under the car between
the wheels. These take replaceable cleaning pads made of 'sticky-backed
felt'
(best description) which rotate as the car moves along the track.
I bought it second-hand at an exhibition, of course the pads which
came with it were bogging and had to be scapped. I'm
using double-sided tape and thinly sliced wine corks at the moment.
I was amazed that the first time it ran round my track I had to change the
corks, they were so filthy.
Actually I'm so impressed with the operation of this cleaner I've ordered
a Fleischmann track-cleaning loco. I'm hoping that the greater weight and
longer
wheelbase will prevent derailments (a problem I haven't yet got an answer
to).
Anyway, thanks again for all the info.
Tom Houston
(no relation to Fleischmann, other than the amount I spend buying their
kit)
Reg Barron
10 years with Relcos, running up to about 20 volts. I am presently
on my second Relco, the first one died after several years,
but the motors keep going.
Reg Barron
(USA)
John New
he confirms that the problem with the Portescaps is, as already stated
in this thread, that they try to respond to the surge of power from the
Hi Frequency unit as they are more sensative than an iron core motor.
As a result they get very hot very quickly and burn out.
May be curable by placing a 1mF capacitor across the motor to give an
alternative path. However who can afford the testing exept Portescap
themselves. Can we have a definitive answeer from Escap?!
JohnShelley
John New wrote in message <376D61CF...@johnrnew.demon.co.uk>...
The answer is VERY (sorry not really meaning to shout) important. Can you
get your tame electronics wizard to define please.
My understanding of previously reported problems is that is the brushgear
that gets very anxiuous and takes up smoking at an early age as it is made
up from very very fine material.
>
>Cheers for now
Dick Ganderton
large to get into a 4mm loco!! (Possible a 1nF would be better!!)
John New
Nigel but as I am not an electronics expert I could easily have made a
mistake.
Paul Hubbard
<john_shel...@tesco.net> writes
>The answer is VERY (sorry not really meaning to shout) important. Can you
>get your tame electronics wizard to define please.
>My understanding of previously reported problems is that is the brushgear
>that gets very anxiuous and takes up smoking at an early age as it is made
>up from very very fine material.
We had terrible problems with can motors and ECM controllers. Going
back to the heady days when Hawnby was doing the rounds, locomotives
leaving the station for the fiddleyard (downhill) would suddenly stop
responding to the controller, open up to full speed and go racing off.
The only major conclusion I came to was that can motors are so near
perfect in construction that they act as generators and produce thier
own back emf which confuses the ECM controllers into slamming on full
power. As to the RELCO units, we had no real problems and our current
layout, Ulpha, is running quite well with a RELCO and a combination of
motors, including can jobbies.
--
Paul Hubbard
Anthony New
>
> I think you really mean a 1uF capacitor - a 1mF one would be a bit too
> large to get into a 4mm loco!! (Possible a 1nF would be better!!)
>
Confusion is understandable - not only do many writers (incorrectly, in
terms of SI units) use mF as shorthand for micro-Farad, but once upon a
time, it was actually a standard useage, with mmF for micro-micro-Farad,
or (as we now say) picoFarad. Up to the late 1960's few would understand
you if you asked for a 10 nano-Farad capacitor; I have some old
capacitors with values in mmF written on the case. Of course in those
days, hardly anyone manufactured capacitors in the milli-farad range so
there wasn't any real confusion.
I think it follows the English tradition of using thousands in numbers
or words, with only millions as prefixes, like the English "billion" (a
million million) which has also disappeared.
I started using the term mF in its correct SI sense to mean milli-Farad
in the 1970's, well before I heard anyone else use it, but it seems to
have caught on now.
My own particular "bete noir" is the use of mhz or mHz (milli-Hertz)
instead of MHz.
Anthony.
Dick Ganderton
talk about the two types as if they are interchangeable, which they are
not!). Can motors are nowhere near as efficient as coreless ones, all
they are are conventional motors with conventional armatures all held
together by a cylindrical "can". Cheaper to make!
All motors act as generators producing back EMF.
Dick Ganderton
accurate. (Have just retired from 32 years in technical (elecronics)
journalism).
mhz is a total nonsense - milli hours z what units are they?
One of the worst is K* when it should be k*. The use of upper case K is
reserved for kelvin (absolute temperature) so K* means kelvin ohms not
kilohms.
I have also come across people who write m* when they mean M* only a
difference of 1000000000!! Either your equipment goes bang in a big way
or doesn't work!
I also insist on using leading zeroes (0.1) and don't use commas in any
large numbers (except money). All to try to prevent confusion.
JohnShelley
Dick Ganderton wrote in message <376FDF...@graskop.demon.co.uk>...
>I have always believed that when writing about anything you must be
>accurate. (Have just retired from 32 years in technical (elecronics)
>journalism).
>
>mhz is a total nonsense - milli hours z what units are they?
>
>One of the worst is K* when it should be k*. The use of upper case K is
>reserved for kelvin (absolute temperature) so K* means kelvin ohms not
>kilohms.
>
>I have also come across people who write m* when they mean M* only a
>difference of 1000000000!! Either your equipment goes bang in a big way
>or doesn't work!
>
>I also insist on using leading zeroes (0.1) and don't use commas in any
>large numbers (except money). All to try to prevent confusion.
>