NMRAnet CAN bus trains.

[Ted84]

Hi to everyone!

I am currently trying to develop a system based on the NMRAnet CAN bus standard. Do you know for example what kind of a message should i use in order to control lights of the circuit?? Would that be based on Producer/Consumer Signaling?? Or maybe a Data Streaming based signal??Is there any kind of "proper" way to implement the coding according to the standard??

[jdtornto]

Hi Ted,

I see nobody has responded to you.

In fact as yet their is NO NMRAnet standard. One was proposed by a group in the US north-west but was withdrawn as it had never been put to the working group. An attempt was made by the working group to put forward a physical layer proposal, which can be seen here, but which ended up being modified by internal NMRA people and was never approved by the board and has now been at least temporarily withdrawn.

Currently the situation is really murky. Didrik Voss, the Standards and Compliance Manager for the NMRA has closed down the working group Yahoo list. He is not responding to queries or emails. Because the NMRA, in the person of Di Voss, created a derivative work based on that created and copyrighted by members of the working group their is now an ugly copyright situation.

The members of OpenLCB have been the prime movers behind the NMRAnet effort with contributions from some manufacturers and other interested parties. But the NMRA process seems to be broken right now. At present we are in contact with the NMRA board of directors through individual members, their legal counsel and some of the elected officers. We have been invited to make a presentation to the board in July in Sacramento, California, at the National Convention.

OpenLCB as a distinct effort only arouse out of the breakdown of the NMRAnet process itself back in 2008 and has always been focussed on moving forward with a comprehensive and viable standard. In July 2010 in Milwaukee we felt that NMRAnet could once again move forward as an NMRA sponsored process, but in the run-up to the mid-term board meeting in February 2011 the process once again broke down. I think I can speak for my colleagues at the core of the OpenLCB project when I say that we hope that NMRAnet can once again move forward in the near future.

In the meantime, their are currently two aspirants for standardization as NMRAnet, OpenLCB which is called S9.6 on the NMRAnet site and CBUS. Another group, S9.5 is mentioned on the website also, but they have not taken the opportunity to update their material or include full protocol specs in some time.

I know this muddies the water a little, but I hope you might look at OpenLCB and see if it fulfills your needs. There is a Yahoo group ( OpenLCB ) where you will find a number of software and hardware developers as well as the core protocol developers.

Kindly, John

[Mike_B]

Originally Posted by Ted84

Hi to everyone!

I am currently trying to develop a system based on the NMRAnet CAN bus standard. Do you know for example what kind of a message should i use in order to control lights of the circuit?? Would that be based on Producer/Consumer Signaling?? Or maybe a Data Streaming based signal??Is there any kind of "proper" way to implement the coding according to the standard??

Ted

As John D replied, there is no 'NMRAnet CAN bus standard.' While John is an advocate of the 'openLCB' protocol, he did mention CBUS which is an alternative scheme which is well tried and tested. This has been developed (before openLCB existed) in conjunction with MERG (Model Railway Electronics Group) which is an international organisation devoted to the promotion and development of electronics for Railway Modelling. CBUS is also based on CAN but uses a different approach and protocol to openLCB. A full range of kits for modules and DCC control is available to MERG members. Basic information is available from the main MERG website but we have a Yahoo group (mergcbus) with a lot more information. CBUS is fully supported in JMRI and other groups and commercial organisations have software that can be used with it. Like openLCB, CBUS is an 'open' standard available for anyone to use.

CBUS is in regular use on many layouts and your questions have been implemented by many users who could advise you.

http://www.merg.org.uk/merg_resources/cbus.php

CBUS is one of two proposals for a NMRAnet. No decisions have been reached yet.

Regards

Mike_B (MERG)

[David Harris]

NMRAnet is to be based on the work of the OpenLCB group and labeled as S-9.7. The last two NMRA magazines had brief notices:

"NMRANET standard adopted
The board heard updated presentations for two versions of the definition of the physical layer of the layout control bus called NMRANET. In a change from its position at the winter BOD meeting, the Board selected S-9.6.1, but the final approval must await Board review of the final wording of the new Standard.
The Board thanked the developers of both versions, which were led by Don Voss and Bob Jacobsen. They and their teams contributed countless hours of development work toward NMRANET, and Digital Command Control users as well as the model railroad industry as a whole will greatly benefit from their efforts. Several manufacturers have been waiting for this new Standard so they can adopt it for their product lines. "

and

Stephen Priest writes in Observation Car:
"
Train Hibernation Time
....
Changing gears a little, I want to thank the members of the NMRANet team that I am privileged to be working with. The BOD had enough faith in me to make me co-chair with Karl Kobel of the NMRANet working group. We are tasked with taking the working groups drafts, concerns and progress to the board. For those wondering what in the world I am talking about, NMRANet is a communications protocol (system) that can be used to control most non-train devices on your model railroad. The idea is to split off turnout control, signal operations, and the like onto a separrate bus to free up train control and onboard sound. Currently identified as Standard 9.7, this is an ongoing open effort to pool resources, minds, and ideas. The working group creates documents that are then approved by the BOD as Standards and Recommended Practices. This cooperation is occuring between NMRA and the OpenLCB group. The effort is being driven by people who have been involved academically and professionally in designing networks that are intended to scale and intended to be flexible enough to serve for many years to come. "

As part of the OpenLCB effort, I would welcome comment, ideas, or help from this group.

David