(i) certain waytypes only
I think the current discussion is about railways. In the first place, the 4th power theory is for paved road, and if you think about it, you will see contradictions on the entire road. For example, damage to a bridge uses a completely different formula (12th power) and requires more maintenance. What data do you have for damage to none paved (such as dirt and gravel) roads?
(2) whether any additional data representing a way's susceptibility to speed as opposed to weight would need to be added to the ways' .dat files to simulate this accurately;
I don't think it needs to add anything. Speed affects, and the influence of axle load on the railway is even stronger. Overall, the durability reduction amount at high speed is increased, and at low speed, the durability reduction amount is adjusted to be decreased.
(3) to what extent that this mechanic can be simulated by simply having waytypes with a lower maximum speed and greater durability without changing the wear algorithm, and, if so:
(a) whether the UI for downgrading a way needs to change; and
(b) if so, to precisely what it needs to change; and
You will be able to simulate more correctly the fact that high speed trains require a lot of cost to maintain. However, the original aim is that those with slow actual speeds do not unduly reduce durability.
(4) if a formula (with or without additional data per waytype) be used, precisely how to communicate this formula to players.
Isn't it an existing "way wear factor"? (Or a new one that is substituted for it)
do you simply mean that this should be summed for each vehicle in a convoy?
I quoted it from the sentence of the person who was explaining the formula, but it seems to be a constant for converting to the wear index. When used in code, it is the same as having to multiply by a constant to adjust the durability to reduce.
Regarding units:
The important thing here is that it is proportional to the square of velocity and the fourth power of the axis weight. Even if they are m/s or km/h, they are finally adjustable by a constant.
Does this apply equally to roads, monorails, maglevs and trams? These are all things that we would need to know in order to implement this system in the game and have it balance properly.
As said above, I think that the fourth power theory itself currently used can not be applied to all roads. This is mainly used to estimate by car owners how much they damaged the road and use it as an excuse to take taxes and tolls, but it is not a real figure. There will be no problems in that example.
As to the proposed UI changes, may I ask in detail how you imagine that these might work?
The player is warned of the reason why the overwrite can not be performed. like
"It can not be overwritten as durability decreases. If you want to overwrite forcibly, please execute while holding ctrl key."
If the player is informed that durability will be reduced, you can interrupt it before performing the overwrite, but if nothing is informed you may overwrite it without knowing it. It is his responsibility if he knows and did it.
And this warning message tells the fact that holding ctrl can overwrite lower orbits.
I think that there is no problem if only the maximum speed is reduced. However, players may be puzzled if due to durability.
About that formula,
I thought that it was an open fact, as I saw everywhere that the orbit wears out in proportion to the fourth power of the axle and the second power of the speed. So I asked about that first in this thread.
All of them are traced back to the source of the 200km / h and 300km / h comparative demonstration articles I showed above.
That is to compare the amount of track breakage of series 500 with 15t axles weight at a maximum speed of 200 km/h and series 500 with 10t axles weight at a maximum speed of 300 km/h.
(10^4*300^2)/(15^4*200^2)=0.44444
According to the above formula from the data, they seem to say that the Series 500 has succeeded in reducing the consumption of the track to less than half.
It is said that the Shinkansen had a hard time in maintenance work because it destroyed the track than originally expected.
It should be noted that the 15t axle weight is lighter than many Japanese steam locomotives before the arrival of the Shinkansen.
And Shinkansen used a different reinforced rail than usual. It was a 50T rail, but was later replaced by a 60kg rail.
So what do you think was the cause of damage to Shinkansen tracks more than with conventional locomotives? It is said that it has made maintenance work hard for a long time.
Yes, if you use the axles weight ^ 2 calculation, you get the same result as that calculation.
10^2 / 15^2 = 0.44444
However, does the passing speed of the vehicle not really affect the track?
The shelling example listed above denies it. Look at an example of a long-standing side line and the yard.
Yes, this is a very complex issue.
http://hosenwiki.com/index.php?title=%E3%82%B7%E3%82%A7%E3%83%AA%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B0The fact that shelling has an impact on speed is documented everywhere. However, the details are not completely understood.
The train speed was raised from 120 km/h to 210 km/h by the Shinkansen in Japan.
If it is proportional to the square of velocity,
210^2/120^2=3.0625
The decrease in endurance is expected to increase threefold.
I think this represents a reasonable number.
What is the meaning of track durability in simutrans extended? Rail durability? Or durability of rail + ballast + sleeper? I thought that was the latter.
As mentioned earlier, the wear rates of rail, ballast and sleeper are different and the exchange cycles are also different. Therefore, much of the literature is only about the wear of each, and there is little to be said about their totals. The only thing that is found, and that is currently spoken of as a fact, is the V ^ 2 * Axles ^ 4 formula.
I thought that wear was proportional to the square might be wear of the rail, but I could not find such an article.
about balancing issue:
it might be useful, for example, for branch lines serving only freight of a type (e.g. bulk freight) where speed is of little importance, or for track leading to depots.
Yes, this is the part I care most about.
In the real world, sidelines and tracks around depots are not updated frequently. Maintenance is also not considered important. You will often find that the old low standards rails are used for a long time there.
Because it is not a track for the main route. The train never pass at high speed on it.
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B7%9A%E8%B7%AF%E7%AD%89%E7%B4%9AIn Japan's rules, the rules for tracks used in such places are very loose.
Pakset(Britain-Ex) balancing issue:
track：Maximum speed, maintenance and allowable axles weight are proportional. That means, if you choose a vehicle with a high axle weight, you have to choose a track with high top speed and high maintenance costs.
train：there are 95km/h freight wagons with 22t axle weight, 120km/h freight wagons with 26t axle weight, and 100km/h steam locomotives with 20t axle weight
To give a concrete example, please start the game in 1971. At that time, there are only wagons that can carry bulk goods with a axles weight of 22t. There are only wagons that can carry oil with axles weights 21t and 22t.
The only track it can pass is for the most expensive high-speed railways. This means that all the ore and oil transport line must be expensive tracks for high speed railways.
Was the real world really so? Did those wagons actually damage the track like a high-speed train on a high-grade track? Were those wagons which for ore and oil operated only on high-speed track in the UK? Also the yard and side line and pull-in line?
I understand that it is hard to implement a mechanism in which the speed of the vehicle affects the trajectory. The speed of the vehicle passing over the tiles is not always constant.
