[Marci]

Have a nice day!
This is my first post on this forum. I’ve been reading a lot about the traction system lately to improve my own vehicle fleet. Meanwhile, I had a feeling that the ORTS Adhesion Curtius Kniffler system didn’t really fully cover what we wanted to reproduce. I see this problem in both locomotives and multiple units. I was also thinking about how this could be simplified and designed to be generally acceptable. Since traction is affected by these factors, I came up with the following for locomotives and wagons:

For locomotives:

ORTSAdhesion (
ORTSEngineParameters (
ORTSEngineWeight () #comment: vehicle weight
ORTSNumberDriveAxles () #comment: number of driven axes
ORTSNumberAxles () #comment: number of running axes
ORTSStartingTractionForce () #comment: starting traction
ORTSDriveWheelRadius () #comment: wheel diameter of driven axles
ORTSWheelRadius () #comment: wheel diameter of running axles
ORTSTrackFlangeWidth () #comment: width of the wheel tread
ORTSNominalPower () #comment: rated power in kW
)
)

For cars:

ORTSAdhesion (
ORTSWagonParameters (
ORTSNumberAxles () #comment: number of running axes
ORTSWheelRadius () #comment: running wheel diameter
ORTSTrackFlangeWith () #comment: wheel tread width
ORTSWagonWeight () #comment: carriage weight
)
)

Open Rails already uses several of the listed parameters. I think that a simpler but vehicle-specific grip can only be created by generating it from the locomotive / wagon parameters and taking into account the data obtained while the program is running, such as the weather and the weight to be moved.
I see the topic as an opportunity to make vehicle development better and easier for everyone.

Sincerely:
Marci
Postscript: The post was written using Google Translate.

[Weter]

Hello.
Welcome to Active pool.
It seems to me, Your idea does have sense and looking very logical; furthermore, Kurtis-Kniffer factors are out of wrk for tractive units.

[R H Steele]

 Weter, on 08 June 2022 - 11:36 AM, said:

....
Just a single correction: there is underscore usually under ORTS_ prefix for visual separation.

Additional Correction..."ORTS" parameters do not use underscore...example below

Comment ( Dimensions from 4/2/09 BNSF Railway drawing for "Long" Taconite Car BNSF No. 605000 - 605104 )
Comment ( Car Builder - Freight Car American -- Build Date 2008 )
Comment ( Suitable for Ed's Trains Online BNSF Ore Trainset #1 )
Comment ( Capacity - 2328cuft level full -- 2611cuft w/10in heap )
Comment ( Frontal Area == 11.94965 meters squared = 128.625ft^2 )
Comment ( Load Limits - Light Weight = 63200lbs - Load Limit 222800lbs - Gross Rail Load = 286000lbs )
Comment ( Load Limits - Light Weight = 28.66704t - Load Limit 101.0604t - Gross Rail Load = 129.7274t )
Comment ( include ( "..\\..\\..\\..\\..\\Common.inc\\Fleet\\CarBody\\BNSF_ORE_Car.inc" ) )

    ORTSNumberAxles ( 4 )
    ORTSNumberBogies ( 2 )
    ORTSLengthBogieCentre ( 8.9662m )
    ORTSLengthCarBody ( 10.668m )
    ORTSLengthCouplerFace ( 12.7889m )
    ORTSWagonFrontalArea ( 128.625ft^2 )
    ORTSRigidWheelBase ( 1.7272m )  
    ORTSWheelFlangeLength ( 19.1516mm )
    ORTSMaximumWheelFlangeAngle ( 1.308996rad )
    ORTSTrackGauge ( 1435.1mm )
    ORTSUnbalancedSuperelevation ( 65.024mm )

...and when expressing ORTS parameters for locomotives it is important to specify if they belong in the "wag" section of the engine file or the "eng" section.

For example: ORTSNumberAxles is a "wag" section parameter ...and... ORTSNumberDriveAxles is an "eng" section parameter.
Marci to develop and refine your ideas further I would recommend studying this section of the Coals to Newcastle website of OR developer "steamer_ctn"
OR Physics

[Marci]

 R H Steele, on 08 June 2022 - 12:02 PM, said:

Additional Correction..."ORTS" parameters do not use underscore...example below

Comment ( Dimensions from 4/2/09 BNSF Railway drawing for "Long" Taconite Car BNSF No. 605000 - 605104 )
Comment ( Car Builder - Freight Car American -- Build Date 2008 )
Comment ( Suitable for Ed's Trains Online BNSF Ore Trainset #1 )
Comment ( Capacity - 2328cuft level full -- 2611cuft w/10in heap )
Comment ( Frontal Area == 11.94965 meters squared = 128.625ft^2 )
Comment ( Load Limits - Light Weight = 63200lbs - Load Limit 222800lbs - Gross Rail Load = 286000lbs )
Comment ( Load Limits - Light Weight = 28.66704t - Load Limit 101.0604t - Gross Rail Load = 129.7274t )
Comment ( include ( "..\\..\\..\\..\\..\\Common.inc\\Fleet\\CarBody\\BNSF_ORE_Car.inc" ) )

    ORTSNumberAxles ( 4 )
    ORTSNumberBogies ( 2 )
    ORTSLengthBogieCentre ( 8.9662m )
    ORTSLengthCarBody ( 10.668m )
    ORTSLengthCouplerFace ( 12.7889m )
    ORTSWagonFrontalArea ( 128.625ft^2 )
    ORTSRigidWheelBase ( 1.7272m )  
    ORTSWheelFlangeLength ( 19.1516mm )
    ORTSMaximumWheelFlangeAngle ( 1.308996rad )
    ORTSTrackGauge ( 1435.1mm )
    ORTSUnbalancedSuperelevation ( 65.024mm )

...and when expressing ORTS parameters for locomotives it is important to specify if they belong in the "wag" section of the engine file or the "eng" section.

For example: ORTSNumberAxles is a "wag" section parameter ...and... ORTSNumberDriveAxles is an "eng" section parameter.
Marci to develop and refine your ideas further I would recommend studying this section of the Coals to Newcastle website of OR developer "steamer_ctn"
OR Physics

If there was an underline in my writing, sorry, it was not intentional. I am pretty much aware of which parameters belong to which sections in the vehicles. (Since I use some of these.) The parameters are written for illustrative purposes only, I intended them as an example to start with, but then I'll pay more attention to the next example. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Of course, I will take your comment into account in my other ideas as well.I will further develop my idea, of course I will try to take into account the given description, at most I will not give a parameter name to the things where I am having a problem.
Sincerely:
Marci

[engmod]

Be aware that an AC traction module is on the way, this may change your ideas!

[Weter]

Let's base on real-life formulae, so it would be needed only to specify those parameters, which consist every said equation.
I'll search info for that with time.

[Marci]

 engmod, on 08 June 2022 - 02:18 PM, said:

Be aware that an AC traction module is on the way, this may change your ideas!

If the AC system is understood to be on the overhead line, it will affect the power that can be taken from the mains.
Sincerely:
Marci

[Marci]

 Weter, on 08 June 2022 - 09:01 PM, said:

I think, Derek have meant César Benito Lamata's current work on enhancement of modern AC/AC diesel-electric transmission's functionality. (Asynchronous tractive motors)
It includes anti-slip and tractive force control modules, so implementation in ORTS would demand re-working of adhesion and traction physics model, used in program.
If so, behavior of trains, controlled by player would change more or less, so Your impression may change after that as well. Electric locomotives use similar equipment.

Talking about contact wire... (Maybe Your neighbor Laci told that idea?) there was a question, whether it may be implemented, that voltage will drop, if one or even more locomotives currently consume large amount of power on traction.

The suggestion is legitimate. But as soon as we think about train engines and traction solutions, the following should be taken into account: There are plenty of DC-powered locomotives, even among electric locomotives, except for a few well-known examples, the MÁV V43 series or the MÁV V63 series. , or even a diesel-electric locomotive running under the M62 serial number in several European countries. Overall, in this case, a system should be developed that adapts to locomotives running on AC or DC traction motors. But then something has to be worked out for locomotives with a hydraulic system as well.

I can support Laci's suggestion regarding the overhead line system.

Sincerely:
Marci

[Weter]

I only have meant, that said work will cause whole ORTS adhesion physics revision, which will affect overall traction attitude.
Certainly, Sili Electric engines (V43?) as well as Masha M62 have more simple anti-slip automatics, due to their construction era. No VFD, but only DC motors and relay control.
What about hydraulic transmission... Peter Newell works on mechanic gearboxes (I'd recommend You to find discussion thread to know actual situation, and maybe, to offer some ideas), so with time, it can be extended for covering Hydro-mechanical transmission's physics.
If talk about pure-hydraulic transmission (are there such cases on powerful locomotives?), it's attitude can be simulated by electric transmission settings, however, it contradicts ORTS idea to give to developers an opportunity to operate real and true values, instead of MSTS-like cheats.

[Laci1959]

Hello.

ORTSNominalPower is not good because auxiliary plants also lose power. Although if I think about not using the power of the air compressor and not subtracting the power of the electric heater, it doesn’t really matter what I type for the power.

In our case, the type descriptions used in the training give wheel circumferential traction and traction coefficient. The latter is 250N / kN for diesel locomotives and 250N / kN for electric locomotives. There are 1A drive cars where this value is 130N / kN.
Due to translation errors:
Diesel = 250N / kN
Electric = 270N / kN
For one type of locomotive, several conditions were examined and the values ​​were given in a table. The average was 310N / kN. If this value is equal to the value of Curtius-Kniffler C then Curtius-Kniffler can be used well.
But for users who do not know the railway at such depths, but only love it, a simpler solution would be good. I meant simplicity to the values ​​that appear in the eng file.

Quote

Be aware that an AC traction module is on the way, this may change your ideas!

But for users who do not know the railway at such depths, but only love it, a simpler solution would be good. I meant simplicity to the values ​​that appear in the eng file.
Is this to be understood as meaning that the current more or less well reflects the behavior of the DC series motor? Or do you just compare it?