Should I use the Auto Heartline Generator and the track smoother?

orangeblue · #1 07-28-2005, 10:33 PM

I was wondering if I should use those tools to help create my roller coasters. If any of you have ridden either of my two coasters, you might have noticed some small bumps, and I think these tools could help correct those. The only problem I have with doing so is that I think that I would feel like I am cheating a bit by not making it smooth by hand. Do you guys agree, or is it acceptable to do so? Also, if I do decide to use them, will they make a great improvement in the overall ride on my coasters?

jimths08 · #2 07-28-2005, 10:58 PM

I have no feeling of "cheating" using these tools. NL is based on the outcome IMO and the better you can make it, the more credit you deserve. I do however feel that saving other peoples elements is cheating.

**Erik Leppen** · #3 07-29-2005, 04:58 AM

I myself don't use the auto heartline generator. I ahve used the track smoother a couple of times, but it mostly results in collisions. You can only use the smoother if your track is very open. On a compact layout, it has no use at all. About using other peoples elements, that's another story. That is actually cheating I guess. Community project weren't allowed, remember?

All I can say is: just try it out on some coasters\elements and judge yourself

redunzelizer · #4 07-29-2005, 08:31 AM

There is another non-obvious use for the TrackSmoother also.

The TrackSmoother won't change much (or even anything at all) in case the track is already (quite) jerk free. So looking at it in a reversed way it may be well used as a "trouble detector".

In any early stage of sketching a track, you might want to run the TrackSmoother over it, looking which of the vertices get moved / distorted a bit / a lot. These "moved spots" (clearly visible by having changed handle lenghts after smoothing) may be seen as troublesome in general. Also take note that Tracksmother only handles jerks at vertices, but not any pumping issues. You have been warned...

It has often been said, but still has to be repeated that one of the initial keys to better track building is the use of (almost) equal segment lenghts as well as equal handle lenghts on both sides of a given vertex.

So do use the TrackSmoother, it will often (but not always!) show you many areas where improvements can and should be done.

redunzelizer

orangeblue · #5 07-29-2005, 09:38 AM

Thanks everyone. I guess it's not cheating if you still have to put in the work in the first place to use the tools and get the best results. I do, however, agree that using an element from another coaster is cheating since your using thier skill to make your coaster better. I do have a question for you guys though. If you were to build a coaster and want to use equal length segments, do you start off making all of the segments equal, or do you use the track splitter again and again, until they are of equal length?

**Erik Leppen** · #6 07-29-2005, 09:55 AM

Splitting a segment does not change the segment itself doesn't. I only use Split segment after a segment is shaped, to better control the banking. Anyhow thanx redunzelizer, I didn't think of that way to use the Track smoother.

redunzelizer · #7 07-29-2005, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangeblue

[...] If you were to build a coaster and want to use equal length segments, do you start off making all of the segments equal, or do you use the track splitter again and again, until they are of equal length?

The latter i'd recommend, with initially trying to already have segment lenghts that are multiples of each other.

For me, with handbuilding, it has also shown that you better not care for segment lengths from the very beginning on, but try to get the overal shaping done first. Then, as a second step, look for lenght mismatches and in case redo a whole section, with the initial modeling as a template.

For example, set "first vertex" to the beginning of troublesome part, open track, and rebuild with now equal segment lenghts while at the same time having the old section in question still there. Then delete old section and close track again.

redunzelizer

orangeblue · #8 07-29-2005, 10:12 AM

The problem I have with using smaller segments is that,especially on hills, I find that the more segments I use, the more minor bumping I get. This is often becasue the angles are not exactly the same at each end of the vertex. Is there an easy way to correct this, or do I just have tweak those spots as much as I can? Right now I am only using the Nolimits editor, not the Elementary.

**Erik Leppen** · #9 07-29-2005, 10:14 AM

What is the problem with a long segment and a short segment next to each other? I mean, I never check segment lengths and I don't encounter problems resulting from that.

redunzelizer · #10 07-29-2005, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik Leppen

What is the problem with a long segment and a short segment next to each other? I mean, I never check segment lengths and I don't encounter problems resulting from that.

You will definitely run into troubles with differing segment lengths whenever banking with con-roll is involved.

Any combination of two segments of different lenghts, having banking at the connecting vertex, will inevitably give you a rotational jerk. The implemented con-roll algorithm is smart with helping you create fluid banking but at the same time very unforgiving for any irregularities in it's input.

This might be seen as a "minor issue" because usually many tracks already have major problems like pumping & jerks which overshadow that effect a lot. Furthermore it's a sad fact that some people (not you) don't even care about pumping and jerks with judgíng a NL track, so it's no wonder that knowledge about this is not widespread.

redunzelizer

Matt M · #11 07-29-2005, 12:36 PM

Sometimes because of what Redunzelizer mentioned your banked area with the really long and really short handle will appear to have a little pump or jerk in it when it really doesn't have one at all, the banking is just messed up as previously stated.

ragan · #12 07-29-2005, 12:42 PM

use tools. it aint cheating, no matter what anyone else says. cheating would be using a tool that made it for you, with out you doing ANY work at all. you still made the track, use tools to make it better.

redunzelizer · #13 07-29-2005, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt M

...to have a little pump or jerk in it when it really doesn't have one at all, ...

Thank you for messing up something i just tried to separate / distinct for better understanding.

As stated, the con-roll will give you a "rotational jerk" (around the banking = handle's axis of course). This even in case the "track path" is absolutely jerk free. one kind of jerk is *not* the other (and vice versa

)

redunzelizer

P.S. and yes, go ahead and use the tools of your choice, handling all the available tools may be as hard and exciting as completely building by hand. your mileage will vary, but in the end only results matter!

[edited for typos]

orangeblue · #14 07-29-2005, 01:23 PM

Thanks again everyone for commenting, I have learned quiet a bit about Nolimits from your posts. I will probaly try using those tools on my next coaster.

**Erik Leppen** · #15 07-29-2005, 02:12 PM

Aha. Yes Redunzelizer,. I do have seen that banking thing before. It was at the lead-in of a barrel roll. The barrel roll was made using Elementary, so it contained realy short segments. The lead-in was just one segment. My solutino was disabling the con roll.
Because, with con roll enabled, there is a kink (is that a word?) in the heartline.

jimths08 · #16 07-29-2005, 02:44 PM

I've never done it but can't you also use AHG to cut up track segments and just tell it not to bank?

RiscIt · #17 07-29-2005, 03:45 PM

Color the spine black for every segment (not the whole track, but every segment - there's a difference). This tells the AHG to use the banking already on the track instead of calculating it.