I would like to recruit a small group of experienced modellers who would be interested in trying out my linear motor track system. I only build a new layout every year or two, but it would be great to see what more people could achieve. Using a linear motor track system offers some unique possibilities for complete layouts in the tiny scales, and for animations and scenic features in the normal ones. The basic skill requirements are decent levels of ability in general modelling and soldering. If you can build and wire a conventional layout, and build a simple electronic kit, then that should be enough. You may have seen some of the posts or videos of my linear motor powered T Gauge models. Up until now, intellectual property issues and my agreement with the patent owner have meant that I could only make and use this track for my own projects (with a very limited exception a couple of years ago). As of the start of 2022, the situation has changed and these restrictions have disappeared, although there are still some regulatory issues that would obstruct selling commercially. The general plan would be to have interested modellers spend a month or so sketching out ideas, exchanging suggestions, playing with track plans, etc., and only at the end of that phase decide whether or not to commit and go forward. I would then have a suitable batch of track manufactured for the combined set of projects, while also sourcing the components for the controller kits. Payment would not be required until after this point when all the bits and pieces were ready to ship. Ongoing help and support would be provided via this forum, and hopefully each of you would be willing to document your progress in a suitable forum topic (warts and all). This linear motor system was originally designed for T Gauge, but can handle trains from 1:720 (two thirds of T) up to Zn30, and even industrial narrow gauge in N. For roads, the range is 1:480 up to cars only in N. Canal boats, trams, etc. are also viable. The main advantages of a linear motor compared to conventional propulsion are: very reliable running, no track or wheel cleaning, excellent low speeds, long trains, steep gradients, and easy automation. The main drawbacks are: no wheels (models slide along the track), flat (paper) track surface, slightly jerky or wobbly motion, and over-wide double-track spacing. Each piece of track is a small printed circuit board, which get soldered together into a complete layout, hence the requirement for decent soldering skills. Despite of their unusual nature, these track pieces form a complete sectional track system with the usual pros and cons of such a system. To keep things simple, no turnouts will be offered at this time. I would also prefer to limit things to rail only, but if enough people are interested then the 2-lane road pieces could be included as well. The road and rail tracks are compatible, so you can build a road layout using rail track, as long as the wider curves and single lane are acceptable. The absence of turnouts means that your track plans will have to be either basic end-to-end or basic continuous run (preferably more than just a simple oval!). The controller can power up to 8m of track, and has built-in automation that is more than adequate for sequences like an end-to-end shuttle or twice-around-and-stop-at-the-station, all with smooth acceleration and deceleration. You can build your own trains or I can include some of my low-resolution 3D printed models (unpainted versions of those seen in the videos). Prices in USD are expected to be $70 for the controller kit, $35/meter for track, $7/vehicle for trains or cars, $20 shipping from Australia, using PayPal, with a planned maximum of 10 participants. If you are interested, I would suggest starting by watching (or re-watching!) the videos from one or more of my T Gauge layout topics here, followed by a selection of the other videos from the YouTube channel to get a better idea of the full range of possibilities. To experiment with track plans, you can use any common track planning software (such as AnyRail) starting with several lengths of T gauge flex track to create the various pieces of sectional track, then copy and paste as needed. The rail straights are 96mm, 48mm and 36mm long; curves are 122mm radius at 45 and 22.5 degrees and 140mm radius at 45 degrees. Double track spacing is 18mm. If the ends don't quite join up, you can fudge it as long as the ends are perfectly parallel and within 5mm or so. For roads, start with HO or S flex track, and straights are 108mm and 36mm, with curves of 54mm radius at 90 and 45 degrees and 244mm radius at 11.25 degrees. There is also a T piece which is equivalent to a 108mm straight overlaid with two 54mm 90 degree curves. Road designs must line up and join properly - fudging is not possible. You can mix and match road and rail, and the 2-lane road track uses the same 18mm spacing as rail double track. This technology has quite a few subtle differences from conventional model rail, so please feel free to ask questions. Then let us see what happens.
Could you please clarify why do turnouts create problems? How does decoupling work? Does the track itself makes this weird noise or the controller? Is it possible to put some plastic layer between the engine and the track? For example to 3d print plastic ties and rails? Thank you.
Decoupling: All of the vehicles are self-propelled, and what appear to be couplings are actually just alignment pins to reduce sway and wobble, particularly for shorter UK models. Coupling and uncoupling involves parking a train across a section break, then turning the track power or one side on or off. For a more familiar analogy, think of it all as a conventional DC layout with one controller plus on/off sections, where every loco and carriage is powered with speed-matched mechanisms, and all the Kaydee coupler springs have fallen out. The capabilities and limitations are very similar. Noise: The combination of track and train forms an electric motor with a lot of very loose rattly parts. The track is the stator and the trains are the rotors. The longer the train, the more pieces there are to buzz and rattle. The controller uses something similar to PWM to get fine speed control and low speed running, and these frequencies fall in the audible range. As a train accelerates, the frequency keeps changing but for practical reasons it has to be kept within a certain range, so it sounds like notching up and changing gears. The trains naturally move in 1mm steps, based on the coil spacing. This works fine at high speeds, and if the controller is set up this way the trains are almost silent. However, low speed running is terrible, so I use a modified PWM technique to reduce the effective step size to 0.25mm. This gives much better running, but is noisy, very much like low-frequency PWM with conventional trains. Plastic Track: I have tried this using 2-color 3D printing to make proper (but thin) track with ties/sleepers and raised rails, and it does look quite good. The train magnets are arranged to protrude slightly below the model, and slide along between the rails. Unfortunately, the magnetic field strength falls off very quickly with any sort of gap between the track and magnets, so even 0.5mm is problematic. Further, while it works well enough on straight track, the rigid wheelbase (magnetbase?) and the need to hunt slightly left or right so that magnets retain perfect alignment with the coils means the track gauge on the curves has to be widened very noticeably. Alas, not viable. Any sort of smooth running surface improves things compared to running on the raw track, which is very much like a cobblestone road. A better appearance, smoother running and less noise. I have tried a variety of materials, such as thin styrene sheet painted or printed on the underside. In the end, the best I have found is self-adhesive label paper from an office supply store, with suitable track or road designs printed with an inkjet or laser printer, then coated with several layers of matte spray varnish. The canal used the same paper, but painted and with gloss varnish. Turnouts: One of the main complications with any linear motor system is the electrics. The goal is to have a certain current flowing through the coils. Too low, and the trains come off the track; too high, and there will be power consumption and overheating problems. For this application, 0.3-0.4A is about right. For a simple layout, that all just boils down to spacing the power feeds correctly: 0.8m-1.2m (8-12 pieces of track) apart for 12V. Nice and easy. Turnouts consist of two very short sections of track, only one of which can be powered at a time. In addition, there will usually be one or more stop sections (sidings, loops, etc) associated with each turnout, and these rarely line up with the normal power feed spacing. This means that several of these short sections need to be chained together into correct length power sections. Then some of these sections need to be dynamically turned on and off to switch the turnout and stop sections, but the 0.8-1.2m rule still has to apply at all times. Dummy load resistors often have to be added to make things add up. To further complicate things, the curved track on the turnouts is nearly 1mm below the straight one, significantly further away from the train magnets and so has to be driven at nearly double the normal current to compensate. Designing the wiring and controls for even a simple switching layout becomes something of a logic puzzle. A simple power section needs a single 3-wire cable. Each subsection needs two cables, an input and an output to connect to the next part of the section. Each turnout needs three 3-wire cables on the surrounding tracks to interrupt the normal sections, then three more to actually control the turnout sections. All cables are 3-wire, and that unfortunately means two DPDT relays per switching element. So, lots of cables and relays. And connectors. My new Penzance layout has 9 turnouts, 19 other sections, 2 improved controllers, 12 relay boards with 6 relays each, and something like 65 3-wire cables underneath the board. Plus custom software to control it all. I use a highly modular control system to keep things manageable, with standard relay boards that plug into and daisy chain from the controller. All 3-wire cables have connectors so the wiring is really just a big plug-board. The standard controller using standard software can handle up to 6 toggle switch inputs for points and sections, and drive up to 3 relay boards, enough for a modest layout with a loop and a couple of sidings, say 2-4 turnouts. The automation features include all this, with the turnout and stop section operation included in the playback, so sequences involving passing two trains, switching a few cars on or off, etc. are easy enough to do. Modest layouts with a handful of turnouts really aren't as scary as all of this makes it sound, but the wiring design approach is very different to a conventional model railway, and I do not want to cope with them at this time. If I did so in future, it would probably start with a few standard designs with variants, etc. Hope this helps.
Martin, I am interested in getting a set and playing with it, I would probably build an uneven road with vehicles for animation. Thanks
Kim, You are obviously familiar with IDL and have an electronics background, so that side is fine. I have enough track in my spares collection for a good-sized road layout without having to manufacture more, depending on what you are thinking of, so.... What scale? Setting? Period? Basic concept? What size (baseboard, track length, etc)? Stand-alone or part of an existing layout? What sort of vehicles?
Martin, It is going to be Z scale, Zscale motorbikes and cars. I dont have any specific dimensions, will build it on the fly, maybe just this as a layout and train tracks for a static view. I would like to have the roads cross each other that would be something unique to animation as most cant do crossings. It is going to be standalone. I am also thinking if there could be some random features like car taking an exit, maybe to a gas station and join back. There could be hall sensors which could detect the location of the vehicle at the gas station so it can be tracked and that could add to more animation features. I could also try to make some flex PCB for small custom shapes. No specific fixed plans, just build as I learn. Kim
Special animation features for roads using crossings and turnouts are certainly doable but are be a lot of work. I have done some experiments along these lines, and know what is involved for each possibility, but since I have been concentrating on rail for the last few years I haven't used them on a live layout yet. My intent with these projects was to keep things as straightforward as possible, since without turnouts or crossings the layout wiring really is train-set simple. For rail, the controller's built-in automation allows end-to-end shuttles or station stops with zero extra effort. For road however, you only get simple continuous movement. Adding even a single turnout, crossing or whatever greatly complicates things. For rail, while the controller already has full software support for a limited number of turnouts, automated shunting, etc., it still requires adding one or more accessory boards and a good deal of wiring. Plus planning and design. For road, I have used this controller for simple queues and crossings with those same accessory boards, but only with custom software. So, if you really want to go down that path I can get you started then advise and assist, but most of the effort would have to be yours. Z is the sweet spot for road models with this system, just as T is for rail. I've only done cars and small trucks, but motorbikes could work. The potential problem is the minimum vehicle length due to the number of magnets needed for stable running. In theory 2 magnets (5-6mm) is enough, but these very short vehicles have an annoying tendency to swing around 180 degrees and run tail-first. 3 magnets (8-9mm) largely but not entirely fixes the problem; 4 (11-12mm) or more is fine. A bridge or flyover is easy, as long as there is enough vertical clearance (a 20-25mm offset in track heights) to avoid unwanted levitation! Crossing on the level is more of a challenge, equivalent to building a custom turnout. One piece of track crosses directly below the other, with creative use of spare track joiners to drop the level of this piece plus unpowered offcuts from a spare piece to pack and fill out the top level for a smooth running surface. Since the lower piece will be 1mm further away from the magnets, you need to double the current flowing through it to compensate. If the crossing is at or close to 90 degrees, you may be able to keep both sections permanently powered (no active switching), as long as you are very careful about how you space vehicles along the track to avoid collisions. To do it properly, you would need sensors (yes, I do use Hall sensors) controlling short stop sections to protect the crossing. To go all-out, each approach road would need a small queue of stop sections and you could even fit traffic lights. However, that can be a **lot** of hardware and wiring and some fun software. I have done this for the level/grade crossing on Outer Melbourne and for simple pedestrian lights on a test track. This sort of queue is really the fundamental control feature for a road layout, and I have future plans to build such a general "queue" module to easily allow for complex layouts. I have considered this feature (a bus pulling over into a bus stop, etc), and it is doable, but again with some non-obvious complications and needing a good deal of control logic and special track pieces. I haven't built any road-specific turnouts yet, only rail. The two track types are compatible and can be combined, but the geometries can get tricky. However, improvising road turnouts is much simpler than with rail, since a road vehicle is very short: you can cheat and dynamically turn off the main section and turn on the divert when the car is exactly over the overlapping bit. For a proper rail turnout, the entire train must be handled smoothly so the whole route must be switched. The simplest animation of this type would be parking, using a single rail curve under the road track. You would stop the car on the short overlapping part, then switch the road section off and the rail on (probably with a reversing relay too, needed either for entry or exit). The car can then back out into the driveway (or forwards if you prefer) and the road section is reactivated. Rejoining the traffic flow is the same thing in reverse. The main thing is that this can be completely self-contained and not interfere with other traffic. The next level of complication would be your gas station example. The hidden difficulty is that every piece of track has to be an exact multiple of 12mm in length (due to the repeating 6-coil pattern). When a track diverges and then rejoins, these lengths generally end up misaligned. For rail, this can be avoided in a number of ways, all needing fairly long loops to do so. For your gas station, you could take advantage of only handling short vehicles and build it as two overlapping parking spaces. These don't have to be perfectly aligned since you can turn one off to stop the car on the overlap, then wait till the controller is on the correct phase before turning on the other to rejoin, avoiding the alignment mismatch.
There wasn't enough interest, so it never went ahead. I've just been working on my own layouts since then.
The original concept wasn't mine, but all the design, implementation and follow-on is. While it certainly has its drawbacks, it solves so many of the usual problems of working in this scale that I have switched over to it completely.
I have been waiting for this type of product to become available for years. I seen a small loop layout sold at train shows about 15 years ago, but I want to make my own pcb roads. make Z scale autos move around, maybe some other automations. Just waiting for controllers, or a how to with schematics. Why not share with the community as open source, nobody will ever make much money selling it, and keeping such secrets to yourself assures you will never see the fantastic creation myself, or Kim Vellore would share from implementing the technology.
This site has some interesting linear tracks, including sectional pieces. I don't know much about them though. https://www.teenytrains.com/
I did look at producing some of this commercially, and got right through to the beta test stage, but there are regulatory issues relating to businesses selling toys (yes, I know) with powerful magnets, so in the end I chose not to proceed. Similar issues apply to putting it into the public domain, since somebody would inevitably start selling it. I have thought about publishing the designs, and may still do so. The original concept did come from teenytrains (aka IDL Motors), but unfortunately they are not modellers and made some very different design choices with their sectional track system, trying to keep it as easy to use as possible. Their track simply screws together and only needs a single low-power controller for any length of layout, whereas mine has to be soldered together and the power requirements increase with the length of the track. They are limited to handling a single 6 inch train, one way running, no turnouts, poor slow speed control and very expensive track that gets hot in use, while the major limitations with mine are over-wide double track spacing and the complexity of the wiring when turnouts are included.
So you solved the turnout issue. That makes me happy. I wouldn't be hurt if you never publish your work, it's your work, not anyone else's. Strong magnetic fields can be a problem. I didn't know Teenytrains track had no idea their track gets hot. I had considered buying some of their track to play with. I thought it might be cool to incorporate automobile traffic into a T gauge layout. I'm in no rush to do that though, I'm currently in the infancy stage of playing with T gauge. Though I have drawn up a CAD file for a layout based on a local carbonates business where I live. I don't have much space so I took some liberties with the track layout, but I think it'll turn out pretty cool in the end.
