[scottb613]

Hi Folks,

I know there have been recent discussion on advancing the coupler features - but at present time these are the only Coupler parameters that work for ORTS (obtained from Peter’s site) ? Buffers aren’t needed - correct ?

• CouplingHasRigidConnection
  
• Spring - Stifness
  
• Spring - Break
  
• Spring - r0

Thanks...

Regards,
Scott

[Genma Saotome]

Peter kindly pointed out to me the other day that OR uses only one block of coupler data, not two, and does not use the block for buffer data at all so if you are crafting an OR only .eng or .eng those blocks can be safely removed. WRT anything else, I don't know.

[scottb613]

Hi Dave,

Thanks so much - yeah - I’ve crossed the threshold - ORTS only from here on out - removing the legacy MSTS stuff from my files...

Regards,
Scott

[Genma Saotome]

scottb613, on 30 May 2019 - 11:47 AM, said:

Hi Dave,

Thanks so much - yeah - I’ve crossed the threshold - ORTS only from here on out - removing the legacy MSTS stuff from my files...

Regards,
Scott

Congratulations! AFAIK that makes two of us.

[DirtyRam]

I think there may be a couple r more of us maybe
Mike

[dforrest]

Genma Saotome, on 30 May 2019 - 11:33 AM, said:

Peter kindly pointed out to me the other day that OR uses only one block of coupler data, not two, and does not use the block for buffer data at all so if you are crafting an OR only .eng or .eng those blocks can be safely removed. WRT anything else, I don't know.

Is this the way it is intended that it will remain in OR?

I will give problems with certain British configurations, for example locos with tenders, where the coupling between the loco and the tender should not be able to be uncoupled in general use.

[scottb613]

dforrest, on 01 June 2019 - 01:00 PM, said:

Is this the way it is intended that it will remain in OR?

I will give problems with certain British configurations, for example locos with tenders, where the coupling between the loco and the tender should not be able to be uncoupled in general use.

Hi David,

I think Peter is working on a completely new coupler setup - IIRC - the thread is "Advanced Couplers" and it was pretty recent...

Regards,
Scott

[scottb613]

Hi Folks,

Here is what I've distilled an - ORTS only "wag" - down to - feedback welcome... I really don't know how to calculate coupler stiffness or break - pulled the values from a "plainsman" file... If anything else can be removed (MSTS legacy parameter) - or I omitted something important - please let me know...

USRA 40 Foot Wooden Box with Friction Bearings - ORTS Only

SIMISA@@@@@@@@@@JINX0D0t______

Comment ( ########## WAGON SECTION ########## )
Wagon ( SCO_USXM4_ATSF1_LD
	Type ( Freight ) 
	WagonShape ( SCO_USXM4_ATSF1.S ) 
	Size ( 3.1m 4.6m 13.25m )
	CentreOfGravity ( 0m 1.90m -5m )
	Comment ( Loaded 68t | Empty 21.7t )
	Mass ( 61.7t ) 
	InertiaTensor ( Box ( 3.1m 4.6m 13.211m ) )
	WheelRadius ( 33in/2 ) 
	NumWheels ( 4 ) 	
	
Comment ( ##### COUPLING ##### )
	Coupling ( 
		Type ( Automatic ) 
		Spring ( 
			Stiffness ( 9.0e4N/m 4.6e6N/m )
			Break ( 1.28e6N 1.29e6N ) 
			r0 ( 19cm 27cm )
		)
	)
	
Comment ( ##### FRICTION ##### )	
	ORTSBearingType ( Friction )
	ORTSDavis_A ( 196.20lb ) 
	ORTSDavis_B ( 2.7765lbf/mph ) 
	ORTSDavis_C ( 0.039999lbf/mph^2 ) 
	CentreOfGravity_Y ( 1.4 )

Comment ( ##### BRAKES ##### )
	BrakeEquipmentType( "Handbrake, Triple_valve, Auxilary_reservoir, Emergency_brake_reservoir" ) 
	BrakeSystemType ( "Air_single_pipe" ) 
	MaxBrakeForce ( 164.681kN ) 
	MaxHandbrakeForce ( 54.894kN ) 
	NumberOfHandbrakeLeverSteps ( 100 ) 
	TripleValveRatio ( 2.5 ) 
	MaxReleaseRate( 0.935 )
	MaxApplicationRate( 0.515 )
	MaxAuxilaryChargingRate( 0.84 )
	EmergencyResCapacity( 2.1 )
	EmergencyResChargingRate( 0.79 )
	BrakeCylinderPressureForMaxBrakeBrakeForce( 57 )
	EmergencyBrakeResMaxPressure( 80 )
	
Comment ( ##### MISC WAGON #####  )
	Sound ( "genfreightwag14.sms" ) 
	Name ( "SCO USRA XM40 ATSF1 Loaded" ) 
)

Thanks...

Regards,
Scott

[steamer_ctn]

scottb613, on 01 June 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

Here is what I've distilled an - ORTS only "wag" - down to - feedback welcome... I really don't know how to calculate coupler stiffness or break - pulled the values from a "plainsman" file... If anything else can be removed (MSTS legacy parameter) - or I omitted something important - please let me know...

As has been suggested I am doing some changes on the coupler code to allow it to operate in a more representative fashion with slack, but I am waiting for some test stock to be configured and testing to commence.

Under the new code the handling of stiffness will change.

I don't believe that the stiffness has a large impact upon the current code, but this would need to be confirmed through some testing.

[Genma Saotome]

scottb613, on 01 June 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

Scott, the use of the Include statement allows us to break up .wag amd .eng files into multiple commonly shared blocks. What remains in the .eng or .wag are just those parameters that could be edited to produce something unique. For example. almost all of my OR-only .wags look like this:

Wagon ( XM_SPS_10164_Animal_Feed_LD

WagonShape ( SP&S_Box_10164.s )
FreightAnim ( USRA_50t_parts.s 1 1 1 )
Include ( "..\\Common.Inc\\Models\\Tim_Muir\\USRA_DS_Boxcar\\XM_USRA_DS_Empty_Car.inc" )
Include ( "..\\Common.Inc\\Models\\Tim_Muir\\USRA_DS_Boxcar\\XM_USRA_DS_Animal_Feed_Ld.inc" )
Include ( "..\\Common.inc\\Fleet\\DHNelson\\Std_Type_D_Coupler_Generic_Draft_Gear.inc" )
Include ( "..\\Common.inc\\Fleet\\DHNelson\\Single_Pipe_AB_Brakes.inc" )
Sound ( "genfreightwag2.sms" )
Name ( "XM 40' SPS USRA_DS 10164 Animal_Feed Ld 1919-55" )

)

And here is the .wag for a completely different car:
Wagon ( TM_UTLX_55210_Copra_Oil

WagonShape ( UTLX_6K_55210.s )
Include ( "UTLX_Type_V_Empty_Car.inc" )
Include ( "UTLX_Type_V_Linseed_Oil_6k_gal.inc" )
Include ( "..\\Common.inc\\Fleet\\DHNelson\\Std_Type_E_Coupler_Generic_Draft_Gear.inc" )
Include ( "..\\Common.inc\\Fleet\\DHNelson\\Single_Pipe_KC_Brakes.inc" )
Sound ( "GenFreightWag1.sms" )
Name ( "TM 6k UTLX Type V 55210 Copra Oil " )

)
It can now be all very standardized.

And in this case the FreightAnim() line might be able to be moved to the Empty_Car.inc file.

What you see there are four Include statements, two with paths to a folder that holds all of .inc files for this specific model from Tim Muir and two to a folder that contains fleet-wide data values defined by myself. The inclusion of peoples names is an attempt to ensure any subsequent from those named persons do not overwrite your own work or that of others.

The point of this is simple -- there is data about this class of cars that is common to all instances of that car in your roster:

• Parameters about the empty car
  
• Parameters about the lading as well as those affected by the lading weight into the second .inc You omit this line for an empty car.

And then there is data that is common to most of your roster/total fleet:

• Parameters about the brake system
  
• Parameters about the couplers

Examine it a bit closer and you'll see that now it is trivial to set up a new .wag for different coupler types or ladings.

As you can see there is not much here that is left for car by car customization. If you want to learn more about this, send me a PM and can clarify as needed.