Announcement

**baldwin** · 10-25-2017, 14:04

Originally posted by TGM View Post

Hi Jason,
I just noticed in Conbuilder that without the engines the mass of the loaded train (100 cars) is 13098.99 and the weight is 14670.86 US tons.
My question is: would 3 dash 8 engines (of roughly 4000 hp) be enough to move this train at a descent speed.

I tried the train on the Sandpatch grade starting at Roddy's spur(which is a 1 % grade) heading up hill. It wouldn't move an inch. I then changed the engines to three engines on the front 2 GEVOs and an AC44CW and 2 AC44CWs on the rear. This works out to about 1.75 hp per ton. I managed to get it up the hill but only at about 12-13 mph.

What do you think? is the train underpowered? or is it just the way it is with MSTS and open rails?

regards Tom

If you are using normal MSTS eng files in OR, then the train is definitely underpowered even with those 5 locos. OR requires the MaxPower to be exactly that. The maximum power of the prime mover with nothing subtracted for transmission resistances.

**R. Steele** · 10-25-2017, 14:25

Maybe the ethanol trainset offered by TS were originally run on routes with a gradient less than 1.00%.
Payware providers that offer trainsets should consider specifying the gradient for which the set was designed.

Using OR native physics (use of OpenRails folder in engine and wagon parent folders, and a "Common.Std" [Common OR Standards] folder for *.inc files and testing on Peter Newell's Test Route (http://www.coalstonewcastle.com.au/physics/route/) - here's the results with screenshots.

I invite comments, I'm learning this stuff, like many others, and sensible critique, comments, and advice from the experienced hands should help all of us make progress.

The trainset with power as delivered will not move on a 1.00% grade**.
**(assuming the Std_Eng_C40-8W.inc file is in the ballpark, maybe in left field, but hopefully IN the park)
Level grade - it will move, make speed (around 40mph) after about 10 minutes or so.
Couplers set to break at approx. the settings Jason provided...anything lower and they will break in this situation.

Engine file in OpenRails folder (identical for all three locomotives, with exception of name in 1st include line)

Code:

include ( "..\\CSX_C40-8w_7805.eng" )
Wagon (
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Type-F_Coupler.inc" )
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Eng_BrakesTS.inc" )
	ORTSAdhesion ( ORTSCurtius_Kniffler ( 7.5 44 0.161 0.7 ) )
    ORTSAdhesion ( ORTSSlipWarningThreshold ( 70 ) )
	ORTSBearingType ( Roller )
	ORTSDavis_A ( 1907.92 )
	ORTSDavis_B ( 58.5380 )
	ORTSDavis_C ( 8.452647 )
    Comment( == Assumptions -Locomotive diesel/electric - speed - 65mph (105km/h), Roller Bearing, 6 axles, frontal area - 14.7m2, WagonWeight - 177.9 ton (metric), Drag 1.0 == )
)
Engine (
	Effects
	(
		DieselSpecialEffects
		(
		Exhaust1
			(
                    0 4.72 -3.515
				0 1 0
				0.17
			)
		)
	)
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Eng_C40-8W.inc" )
	Antislip ( 1 )
    ORTS( ORTSEmergencyCausesThrottleDown( 1 ) )
    ORTSMainResChargingRate ( 0.750 )
	ORTSBrakePipeChargingRate ( 30 )
	ORTSEngineBrakeReleaseRate ( 38 )
	ORTSEngineBrakeApplicationRate ( 34 )
	ORTSBrakePipeTimeFactor ( 0.003 )
	ORTSBrakeEmergencyTimeFactor ( 0.15 )
	ORTSBrakeServiceTimeFactor ( 1.46 )
	ORTSAirBrakeMainresvolume ( 11 )
)

ORTS Diesel Engines file referenced in above engine file

Code:

Comment ( Standard ORTS Diesel Engine for C40-8W  )
Comment ( include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Eng_C40-8W.inc" ) )

ORTSDieselEngines ( 1
		Diesel(
			IdleRPM ( 315 )
			MaxRPM ( 1050 )
			StartingRPM ( 255 )
			StartingConfirmRPM ( 315 )
			ChangeUpRPMpS ( 90 )
			ChangeDownRPMpS ( 45 )
			RateOfChangeUpRPMpSS ( 10 )
			RateOfChangeDownRPMpSS ( 5 )
			MaximalPower ( 3083.469kW )
			IdleExhaust ( 1 )
			MaxExhaust ( 3 )
			ExhaustDynamics ( 2 )
			ExhaustDynamicsDown ( 0.5 )
			ExhaustColor ( 206B787D )
			ExhaustTransientColor ( 40212324 )
			DieselPowerTab (
				  0	0
				315	0
				407	385434
				499	770867
				591	1156301
				683	1541735
				775	1927168
				867	2312602
				959	2698035
			   1050	3083469
			)
			DieselConsumptionTab (
				0    0
				315  4.6
				1050 195
			)
			ThrottleRPMTab (
				0   315
				12.5  407
				25  499
				37.5  591
				50  683
				62.5  775
				75  867
				87.5  959
				100  1050
			)
			DieselTorqueTab (
				0     0
				315  60385
			    1050 483077
			)
			MinOilPressure ( 20 )
			MaxOilPressure ( 50 )
			MaxTemperature ( 120 )
			Cooling ( 3 )
			TempTimeConstant ( 720 )
			OptTemperature ( 71 )
			IdleTemperature ( 55 )
		)
	)

Tanker car OpenRails file (paths to couplings and brakes found in Common.Std folder)

Code:

include ( "..\\DBUX_302740_26K_TANK_LD.wag" )
Wagon (
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Std_Safety_Coupler.inc" )
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Single_Pipe_AB_BrakesLD.inc" )
	ORTSAdhesion ( ORTSCurtius_Kniffler ( 7.5 44 0.161 0.7 ) )
	ORTSBearingType ( Roller )
	ORTSDavis_A ( 1447.26 )
	ORTSDavis_B ( 21.5534 )
	ORTSDavis_C ( 1.197900 )
	Comment( == Assumptions -FreightCar Standard - speed - 65mph (105km/h), Roller Bearing, 4 axles, frontal area - 10.0m2, WagonWeight - 131.0 ton (metric) == )
	Sound ( "..\\..\\Common.Snd\\TT_Freight_Sound\\TT_welded4.sms" )
)

**R. Steele** · 10-25-2017, 18:34

After 40 minutes on the level inner loop of the test track the ethanol train reaches approx. 60mph.

**CSRX** · 11-04-2017, 09:43

As someone mentioned.. Most typical freight cars are sitting at around 131 tons loaded, and around 31 tons empty. Most major railroads can handle cars up to 286k pounds, which is roughly 143 tons. I know that CPRail can handle that, not sure of others.

Could be something that is making the ethonal train difficult to run? Not sure. I don't run it much, though I did put 6 GP40-2/GP38-2 units together and about 80 loaded cars, running on the DAR and it was fine. shrugs. 14,000hp with 10,480 tons, on a 1-2% grade.

**geepster775** · 11-05-2017, 19:30

Originally posted by jdilworth View Post

Break ( 1112kN 1112kN ) - We use this setting for standard cars using a typical Type E coupler, assuming that typical coupler strength is about 250K lb/f

Break ( 1868kN 1868kN ) - We use this setting for locos, passenger cars, and newer coal and grain cars. This value is to represent a Type F coupler with the assumed ability to withstrand up to 420K lb/f

Jason@Trainsimulations

I think your figures are low. Your type E numbers are grade B steel numbers (probably found on some museum pieces somewhere).

The AAR car construction manual states that a freight car shall be designed for a sustained (continuous) buff and draft load of 350,000 pounds. This is the minimum requirement for the car body. Some railroads have timetable rules that involve a continuous drawbar pull limit of 360,000 pounds, but these could involve unit trains of the same car design (no 'lesser car' weak link somewhere) equipped with the slightly stronger Type F's.

Couplers are made to AAR M-211 steel specs. M-211 requires static tension tests.

grade C knuckle, 300,000 lbs, and grade C coupler 450,000 lbs;

grade E knuckle, 400,000 lbs, and grade E coupler 700,000 lbs.

Most machines that are designed to test the strength of type E couplers fresh off the production line regularly see them pop between 700,000 and 750,000 lbs

The freight car gets progressively stronger, with the knuckle being the weakest. The coupler is stronger than the knuckle, the yoke is stronger than the coupler, the draft lugs are stronger than the yoke, and the center sill is stronger than the draft lugs. A modern center sill probably has a tensile strength of 1,000,000 lbs.

The Bombardier bi-level fiasco involving the car order from many state DOT agencies required the car superstructure passing an 800,000 lb compression test, with the pre-production samples that failed the test crushing at 797,000 pounds.

You most definitely have things set to break knuckles on tank cars and gons in the 250k range. I just assert that your new default 'standard values' are too low. Starting on a 0.8% upgrade with no helper or DPU, I cannot move the steel slab train higher than notch 4, going to 5 breaks a knuckle. For the CSX ethanol train with DC traction power on the same 0.8% grade, it's the 5th notch max and breaking at notch 6.

**R. Steele** · 11-05-2017, 22:54

TS NS Steel Slab Gon Trainset
Here's the results running on the CTN Test Track, 1.00% grade, with consist as supplied, Locomotives and Wagons using OpenRails folders with include files. Posted below.
Slack taken out, at T5 - 63% train moves, and at 10mph notch up the throttle, approx. 20mph is achieved on the grade.
Note: Test Track on level grade train moves at T3

OpenRails files

Engine

Code:

include ( "..\\NS_SD70ACe_1091.eng" )
Wagon (
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_TypeF_Coupler.inc" )
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Eng_BrakesTS.inc" )
	ORTSAdhesion ( ORTSCurtius_Kniffler ( 7.5 44 0.161 0.7 ) )
        ORTSAdhesion ( ORTSSlipWarningThreshold ( 70 ) )
	ORTSBearingType ( Roller )
	ORTSDavis_A ( 2138.03 )
	ORTSDavis_B ( 70.4167 )
	ORTSDavis_C ( 8.337645 )
        Comment( == Assumptions -Locomotive diesel/electric - speed - 65mph (105km/h), Roller Bearing, 6 axles, frontal area - 14.5m2, WagonWeight - 214.0 ton (metric), Drag 1.0 == )
)
Engine (
	Effects
	(
		DieselSpecialEffects
		(
		Exhaust1
			(
                0 4.781 0.912
				0 1 0
				0.17
			)
		)
    )
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Eng_SD70ACe.inc" )
 	ORTS ( ORTSWheelSlipCausesThrottleDown ( 1 ) )
 	ORTS ( ORTSEmergencyCausesThrottleDown ( 1 ) )
	ORTSMainResChargingRate ( 0.750 )
	ORTSBrakePipeChargingRate ( 30 )
	ORTSEngineBrakeReleaseRate ( 38 )
	ORTSEngineBrakeApplicationRate ( 34 )
	ORTSBrakePipeTimeFactor ( 0.003 )
	ORTSBrakeEmergencyTimeFactor ( 0.15 )
	ORTSBrakeServiceTimeFactor ( 1.46 )
	ORTSAirBrakeMainresvolume ( 11 )
)

ORTS Diesel Engines Block

Code:

Comment ( Standard ORTS Diesel Engine for EMD SD70ACe  )
Comment ( include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_Eng_SD70ACe.inc" ) )

ORTSDieselEngines ( 1
		Diesel(
		    IdleRPM ( 310 )
			MaxRPM ( 915 )
			StartingRPM ( 255 )
			StartingConfirmRPM ( 310 )
			ChangeUpRPMpS ( 75 )
			ChangeDownRPMpS ( 35 )
			RateOfChangeUpRPMpSS ( 5 )
			RateOfChangeDownRPMpSS ( 5 )
			MaximalPower ( 3206.509kW )
			IdleExhaust ( 0.15 )
			MaxExhaust ( 0.05 )
			ExhaustDynamics ( 0.05 )
			ExhaustDynamicsDown ( 0.05 )
			ExhaustColor ( 206B787D )
			ExhaustTransientColor ( 40212324 )
			DieselPowerTab (
				  0	0
				310	0
				385  400814
                                460	801627
				535	1202441
				610	1603255
				685	2004068
				760	2404882
				835	2805695
			        915  3206509
			)
			DieselConsumptionTab (
				0      0
				310   3.9
				915   124
			)
			ThrottleRPMTab (
				0   310
				12.5  385
				25  460
				37.5  535
				50  610
				62.5  685
				75  760
				87.5  835
				100 915
			)
			DieselTorqueTab (
				0       0
				310   87269
				915   698371
			)
			MinOilPressure ( 20 )
			MaxOilPressure ( 50 )
			MaxTemperature ( 120 )
			Cooling ( 3 )
			TempTimeConstant ( 720 )
			OptTemperature ( 71 )
			IdleTemperature ( 55 )
		)
	)

Loco coupler inc file Break should be raised to approx 1800, I was getting breaks if I notched the throttle up too fast.**

Code:

    Comment ( Standard Grade F Couplers for Diesel Locomotives  )
	Comment ( include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Engines\\Std_TypeF_Coupler.inc" ) )

	Coupling (
		Type ( Automatic )
		Spring (
			Stiffness ( 4e2N/m 6e6N/m )
			Damping ( 5e6N/m/s 5e6N/m/s )
			Break ( 1650kN 1650kN )
			r0 ( 12cm 15cm )
		)
		CouplingHasRigidConnection ( 1 )
		Velocity ( 0.2m/s )
	)
	Comment ( front coupling )
	Coupling (
		Type ( Automatic )
		Spring (
			Stiffness ( 4e2N/m 6e6N/m )
			Damping ( 5e6N/m/s 5e6N/m/s )
			Break ( 1650kN 1650kN )
			r0 ( 12cm 15cm )
		)
		Comment ( CouplingHasRigidConnection ( 1 ) )
		Velocity ( -0.2m/s )
	)
	Buffers (
		Spring (
			Stiffness ( 1e6N/m 5e6N/m )
			Damping ( 1e6N/m/s 1e6N/m/s )
			r0 ( 0m 1e9 )
		)
		Centre ( 0.5 )
		Radius ( 1 )
		Angle ( 0.5deg )
	)

Steel Slab Gon

Code:

include ( "..\\NS_STEEL_SLAB_GON_197309.wag" )
Wagon (
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Std_Type-F_Coupler_Slack.inc" )
	include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\SinglePipeAB_BrakesHeavyLD.inc" )
	comment ( 28.5t empty, 118t full )
	ORTSAdhesion ( ORTSCurtius_Kniffler ( 7.5 44 0.161 0.7 ) )
	ORTSBearingType ( Roller )
	ORTSDavis_A ( 1136.70 )
	ORTSDavis_B ( 18.2135 )
	ORTSDavis_C ( 1.197900 )
	Comment( == Assumptions -FreightCar Standard - speed - 65mph (105km/h), Roller Bearing, 4 axles, frontal area - 10.0m2, WagonWeight - 110.7 ton (metric) == )
)

Slab Gon Coupler

Code:

Comment ( include ( "..\\..\\Common.Std\\Std_Type-F_Coupler_Slack.inc" ) )
Comment ( Standard Grade F Couplers  )

 	Coupling (
		Type ( Automatic )
		Spring (
			Stiffness ( 0 5e6N/m )
			Damping ( 2e6N/m/s 2e6N/m/s )
			Break ( 1850kN 1850kN )
			r0 ( 7.62cm 15.24cm )
		 )
		Velocity ( 0.2m/s )
	)
	Comment ( front coupling )
	Coupling (
		Type ( Automatic )
		Spring (
			Stiffness ( 0 5e6N/m )
			Damping ( 2e6N/m/s 2e6N/m/s )
			Break ( 1850kN 1850kN )
			r0 ( 7.62cm 15.24cm )
		 )
		Velocity ( -0.2m/s )
	)
	Buffers (
		Spring (
			Stiffness ( 5e6N/m 8e6N/m )
			Damping ( 1e6N/m/s 1e6N/m/s )
			r0 ( 0m 1e9 )
		)
		Centre ( 0.5 )
		Radius ( 1 )
		Angle ( 0.5deg )
	)

**Good Coupler information geepster, thank you.

**CSRX** · 11-06-2017, 09:06

118 tons full?
Seems like they are still a little light on their weights. Only a few times I've seen a car with less than 120 tons, and that was a Barley Feed car..

**R. Steele** · 11-06-2017, 11:32

Maybe the slabs are aluminum?

Here's the a section of the original wag file
SIMISA@@@@@@@@@@JINX0D0t______

Wagon ( NS_STEEL_SLAB_GON_197309
Type ( Freight )
WagonShape ( NS_STEEL_SLAB_GON_197309.s )
Size ( 3.142m 4.483m 16.668m )
comment ( 28.5t empty, 118t full )
Mass ( 122t-us )

The load is actually given in US units - metric weight of 110.7 was used to compute Davis numbers.
Although I don't give the question of weight too much weight...the user can always adjust to suit their ideas or experience.

**greg_davies** · 11-07-2017, 09:48

I really enjoy seeing all of these code examples and how they work. I wish there were more to follow along with. Thanks guys for doing this.

Quick question - Does OR use Buffers in conjunction with the Couplers? I was under the impression that Buffers were not even used in MSTS. Just curious.

Greg Davies

**R. Steele** · 11-07-2017, 13:56

AFAIK, Buffers are not implemented in OR.
I always put them in, because, I expect that sometime they will be implemented, although I'm not sure they will use the msts coupling and buffer format style.

Pleased to hear that someone finds this information helpful. Read all the posts, people have posted some good information.
Thanks to geepster for starting this thread & always good to get insight from Shawn and Baldwin.
OR users should start learning how to implement native ORTS physics, it does make a difference.

**greg_davies** · 11-07-2017, 19:18

Originally posted by R. Steele View Post

OR users should start learning how to implement native ORTS physics, it does make a difference.

Exactly what I am trying to do with all of these code snippets and thanks again for exposing the details.

I did notice one other MSTS function that I am wondering about, AntiSlip(1). I saw it in some of the engine code and was wondering if OR was using it. I believe this was used for AI and Trail units in MSTS although I can see their life span maybe coming to a close in OR. I have stopped using MSTS altogether and in OR have stopped using Trail units. I am not sure that is appropriate, but it works......or at least seems to. It sure makes life simpler.

Greg Davies

**R. Steele** · 11-07-2017, 21:57

Originally posted by greg_davies View Post

Exactly what I am trying to do with all of these code snippets and thanks again for exposing the details.

I did notice one other MSTS function that I am wondering about, AntiSlip(1). I saw it in some of the engine code and was wondering if OR was using it. I believe this was used for AI and Trail units in MSTS although I can see their life span maybe coming to a close in OR. I have stopped using MSTS altogether and in OR have stopped using Trail units. I am not sure that is appropriate, but it works......or at least seems to. It sure makes life simpler.

Greg Davies

Regarding the antislip parameter, there is a disparity between MSTS & ORTS...even confusion as to where to place the antislip parameter (in the Wag or Eng section of the Engine files...OR is looking for it in the eng section, while (I think) MSTS has it in the wag section.
There supposedly was an ORTSAntislip parameter, but I can't find anything further about it or its implementation.
The last threads I can find where two developers talked about working on this problem was in mid 2016, I cannot determine if it was fixed, or what the staus is.
I have not had the time to prowl through all the bug reports to see if there is something about antislip in them.
Believe me, its been confusing for me.
So, I finally decided to put the parameter - set to 1 - to act as some sort of anti wheelslip mechanism in modern locomotives. I do get wheelslip when using it, and the engine does throttle down, if the ORTS wheelslip throttle down is used.
I suppose I should buckle down and do some serious research about this.
You brought up a very valid point.

**derekmorton** · 11-08-2017, 14:49

>I have not had the time to prowl through all the bug reports to see if there is something about antislip in them.

Yes there is, I put them in.
They have not been actioned as we don't have anyone at the moment with the skills to update the code.

**R. Steele** · 11-08-2017, 17:51

Thanks Derek, I'll check the reports under your name...would like to read it. Much appreciated.
Do you happen to know if there is an implemented ORTSAntislip parameter?

**baldwin** · 11-09-2017, 06:45

The old MSTS Antislip did exactly that, prevented wheelslip under any conditions. Not real under any circumstances.

ORTS causes the prime mover to throttle down if wheelslip is detected with the parameter (ORTS (ORTSWheelSlipCausesThrottleDown)) in use the declared action will take place if the conditions are met.

ORTS does not use the old MSTS version AFAIK.

Announcement

CSX Ethanol train physics

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment