LocoNet alternative

Moderator: Moderators

Postby rjversluis » 19.08.2013, 09:09

The Open Source alternative to LocoNet is CBus with lots of DIY hardware:
http://wiki.rocrail.net/doku.php?id=cbus:overview-en
Best Regards, Rob.
:!: PS: Do not forget to attach the usual files.
:!: PS: Nicht vergessen die übliche Dateien an zu hängen.
[ macOS - Linux] - [ N: CBus - CAN-GCA ] - [ 0: RocNetNode - GCA-Pi ]
rjversluis
Site Admin
 

Postby mserrano » 19.08.2013, 15:30

Maybe this is a question for Peter...

Is there any way to adapt the loconet boards (MGV-50, MGV101 and MGV124) to CBUS?

This could be interesting for those of us with such boards... I do not know if a replacement of the firmware and maybe some components is feasible.

This could make easier the transfer from loconet to cbus.

Just an idea.

Br,
Manolo
mserrano
 

Postby rjversluis » 19.08.2013, 15:45

Hi Manolo,

sorry, but this is from hardware point of view not possible.

Just wait for the Digitrax proposal; Maybe its OK for us.
JMRI is also Open Source and licensee of LocoNet.
Best Regards, Rob.
:!: PS: Do not forget to attach the usual files.
:!: PS: Nicht vergessen die übliche Dateien an zu hängen.
[ macOS - Linux] - [ N: CBus - CAN-GCA ] - [ 0: RocNetNode - GCA-Pi ]
rjversluis
Site Admin
 

Postby Richard-TX » 19.08.2013, 15:55

The engineer in me has a problem with the CAN bus protocol. I have seen several different protocols over they years but the best way I can describe CAN is that it is a protocol for the clinically paranoid. :roll:

Maybe I am wrong.

For what it's worth.
Richard-TX
 

Postby rjversluis » 20.08.2013, 08:27

CAN is used in every automobile...
Best Regards, Rob.
:!: PS: Do not forget to attach the usual files.
:!: PS: Nicht vergessen die übliche Dateien an zu hängen.
[ macOS - Linux] - [ N: CBus - CAN-GCA ] - [ 0: RocNetNode - GCA-Pi ]
rjversluis
Site Admin
 

Postby Richard-TX » 20.08.2013, 14:17

I know but historically automotive has been a mess. OBD, 5 different OBD-II protocols, and now CAN. CAN is great in a environment like a car where a protocol has to be robust. It is way overkill for model RR stuff and that makes it a protocol for the paranoid.

I am not saying that CAN is a bad protocol, but I am saying it isn't the best choice for model RRs. I have been wrong before and it is possible I am wrong now but I doubt it. I am moving toward tcp/ip ethernet. Time will tell if that was a wise choice. The problem with TCP/IP is that there isn't a DCC controller made that has an ethernet interface that also meets my requirements.
Richard-TX
 

Postby rjversluis » 20.08.2013, 15:45

The CBUS protocol is easy:
http://wiki.rocrail.net/doku.php?id=cbus:protocol

The underlaying hardware is responsible for the CAN protocol.

I thought about ethernet years ago but if there wasn't the hub issue...
http://wiki.rocrail.net/doku.php?id=nic-based-hw-en
Last modified in 2008... ;)

And you need a lot of hardware on each board if not using SMD.
See the ethernet part of:
http://wiki.rocrail.net/doku.php?id=can-gca1e-en

But I like the idea since 2008.
Best Regards, Rob.
:!: PS: Do not forget to attach the usual files.
:!: PS: Nicht vergessen die übliche Dateien an zu hängen.
[ macOS - Linux] - [ N: CBus - CAN-GCA ] - [ 0: RocNetNode - GCA-Pi ]
rjversluis
Site Admin
 

Postby bertc3p0 » 20.08.2013, 17:25

Richard-TX wrote:The problem with TCP/IP is that there isn't a DCC controller made that has an ethernet interface that also meets my requirements.

What about a BeagleBone Black and generating the DCC with the PRUSS ?
IMHO it's should be easy to generate DCC if it's possible to do things like this:
https://github.com/modmaker/BeBoPr/wiki ... e-stepping
with the PRUSS of the BBB.
bertc3p0
 

Ethernet as System Bus

Postby BBC » 13.11.2013, 14:40

Hi,
I'm new on this forum and - maybe - can contribute something to the idea of using Ethernet.

I have been developing a Booster with an Ethernet Interface.
This means the booster gets his data via TCP/IP and generates itself the correct DCC pulses for the rail.
In addition it has a Railcom detector and puts the predecoded data back on Ethernet.

What I'm wondering:
Which protocol should the booster understand to fit into the Rocrail infrastructure, respectively getting its commands from the server?
:idea:
BBC
 

Re: Ethernet as System Bus

Postby rjversluis » 13.11.2013, 14:46

BBC wrote:Which protocol should the booster understand to fit into the Rocrail infrastructure, respectively getting its commands from the server?

RocNet:
http://wiki.rocrail.net/doku.php?id=roc ... netnode-en
Best Regards, Rob.
:!: PS: Do not forget to attach the usual files.
:!: PS: Nicht vergessen die übliche Dateien an zu hängen.
[ macOS - Linux] - [ N: CBus - CAN-GCA ] - [ 0: RocNetNode - GCA-Pi ]
rjversluis
Site Admin
 

Re: Ethernet as System Bus

Postby Richard-TX » 05.02.2014, 15:50

BBC wrote:Hi,

I have been developing a Booster with an Ethernet Interface.
This means the booster gets his data via TCP/IP and generates itself the correct DCC pulses for the rail.
In addition it has a Railcom detector and puts the predecoded data back on Ethernet.


BBC,

Have you completed your project?
Richard
Dallas/Fort Worth
Texas USA
Richard-TX
 


Return to Loconet