Intamin Tracks

[Worm]

I've noticed that different types of intamin ocaster have different tracks like example: TTD - Square
MF - Triangle

When is it like TTD and when like MF?
Is it because of the speed it can handle?

I've noticed Storm Runner starts with the square and in the twisty part its a triangle! Whats the reason for this?

[Matt M]

Intamin also has the two rail spine, and a ton of the coasters they make do that. It's because the box spine is the strongest, triangle second strongest, and the double rail thing the least strong. They're trying to save the buyer money by not forcing them to use incredibly strong track for just a straight section or a slow turn or something, which is something that doesn't have many G's.

[medieval]

The box section is also used for the launches.

[jimths08]

I'm not 100% sure but I think it has to do with laterals. If the track has alot of stress on it, like in an overbank or something similar, they usually make it 4 rod or 3 rod. Another factor is supports. If the area they're working in is cramped and they don't want to have to cut down trees or have supports going into paths, they use the 3 or 4 rod track since it can have longer gaps between supports.

Compare [url=http://rcdb.com/ig541.htm?picture=7]this[/url] to [url=http://rcdb.com/ig2498.htm?picture=20]this[/url] to [url=http://rcdb.com/ig1896.htm?picture=48]this[/url] and note the difference in support spacing.

[medieval]

I believe your right. The box section of track can hold more stress better then the other 2.

[Hammy2003]

Yeah, I'd compare it to Vekoma ... or is it Arrow ... using two spines like at the top of a loop, or something like that.

Definitely has to do with supports.

[jimths08]

Yea, thats Vekoma mostly. But Arrow did do it on X.

[Dan G]

Yeah, on Vekoma's invertigo coasters they have double spines on the loops and the boomerang elements so I think it has more to do with the stress than the supports. But, keep in mind that the triangle is the strongest shape, so would the box be more strong? I noticed on Millennium Force that the turns are three spined where the bunny hills are box spine, so I would say it would have to do with the stress put on the track.

[Hammy2003]

Here's my thinking .... as far as stress goes, the triangle (shape in general) can take the most stress.

But, if we're concerned with spreading that stress over longer stretches, the box-style track does a better job.

??? Maybe. :confused:

[Marc]

That is false. The Rectangular track is stronger than the triangular track. Forget what you learned in school, it's not 100% correct.

For one thing, rectangular track has more steel. The other factor is it's larger and therefore more rigid.

The reason for the differences in design is cost. It's more costly to build supports for triangle or flat track at heights than to use rectangular track and less supporting. When closer to the ground, it cost more to use larger track than needed. In many cases, the foundation is a trench with footers sticking up at interval. That is cheaper than having hefty rail and footers at a larger interval.

[go_me]

Why would larger track be more rigid?

[Cephas]

This whole thing is common sense, I understood this concept when I rode MF in 4th grade-

[B]More Steel: Stronger.[/B]

The whole thing about a triangle being stronger would only be true if we were discussing theoretical 2-dimensional forces. We are discussing pragmatic 3-dimensional forces, meaning the fact that the cross section of some track may be triangular is almost completely irrevalent. Also notice how the bracing in the box section track creates triangles.

Both the triangular and square track bend in the same way, but the square track has more bracing and therefore will not bend as easily. Is it easier to bend 3 tubes, or 4?

[quote]Why would larger track be more rigid?[/quote]

turn you brain on.

[Chip]

As far as I know, Millennium Force and Storm Runner are the only Intamins with two-rail, triangle and box track.

Intamin switches the track on their coasters depending on height and stress levels.

[khmerone804]

Volcano starts off with a flat track and as it starts to enter the launch tunnel the track is triangular from start to finish until it returns back into the station. Therefor I belive

Boxed Track - Strongest
Triangular Track - Medium
Flat Track - Weakest

[JordanMullins]

4 rail-strongest - Cost the most - handles pos. g's best - for extreme speed

3 rail-stronger - Cost is in the middle - handles pos. g's well - fast speed

2 rail-strong - Cost the least - Dosnt handle pos. g's very well -for slower parts

[Cephas]

[quote]2 rail-strong - Cost the least - Dosnt handle pos. g's very well -for slow parts[/quote]

Is S:ROS's helix slow? ;)

In general though, your on the right 'track.'

[SheiKra]

And why is there box track at the top of Millie's 3rd hill? Your only going around 20mph over that hill...

[meames]

The changing track style may be to do with weight, forces, etc but I must admit I have started to agree with a work mate who says Intamin track is the best looking out there at the moment, just looks like a really big knot of steel, and sometimes find it hard to work out which side of the track the train runs on.

[Marc]

[QUOTE=go_me]Why would larger track be more rigid?[/QUOTE]

Have you ever tried to push something with a cable? A very short cable might be able to, but add length and it doesn't work.

The same is true for a thin solid tube verses a larger hollow tube. A longer distance and the thin tube collapses. The larger tube is more rigid in that it can handle a larger compression for the amount of steel used when longer distances are needed.

Millennium Forces return hill from the island uses this concept. It's partially for asthetics and because it's over water and they wanted to share footers with the other hill.

[James]

[QUOTE=Chip]As far as I know, Millennium Force and Storm Runner are the only Intamins with two-rail, triangle and box track.[/QUOTE]
Add GeForce to the list
[url]http://rcdb.com/ig977.htm?picture=28[/url]

And I think Thorpe Parks new coaster uses all 3 rails to

[Marc]

I think S:ROS @ SFNE has some rectangular track too.

[][ntamin22]

please note:

triangle > square. just go grab some magnetic rods and try it. it takes less force to crush a square than a triangle, less for a cube than a triangular pyramid.

HOWEVER: i would think that in this situation, square would be stronger. why? because of weight and force distribution. with a triangular support, the force is channeled to the third beam, directly beneath the running rails.

lots of force, 1 rail.

with a square support, the force is channeled to BOTH lower beams, so:

same amount of force, but divided between two rails, so less stress on supports.

therefore, longer unsupported stretches with square than triangle, etc.

[Brian P]

^ I agree. Simple engineering will show that a triangle is strongest, but for some reason I believe that the box shape is strongest in this situation. Look on Millie, for example, for the drop and lift they use box...where it is cheapest to space the supports out furthest.

[JordanMullins]

On the 4 rail track system, there are several triangles on the top and sides of the rails that connect them together. So its just a lot more triangles making it stronger

EDIT: While looking at rcdb I saw that goliath has the 4, 3, and 2 rail tracks.

[Marc]

[QUOTE=Chip]As far as I know, Millennium Force and Storm Runner are the only Intamins with two-rail, triangle and box track.

Intamin switches the track on their coasters depending on height and stress levels.[/QUOTE]



Thunder Dolphin: [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig1845.htm?picture=20"]Pic1[/URL] [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig1845.htm?picture=23"]Pic2[/URL]
Goliath: [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig1565.htm?picture=9"]Pic1[/URL] [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig1565.htm?picture=13"]Pic2[/URL]
Superman Escape [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig2999.htm?picture=8"]Pic1[/URL] [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig2999.htm?picture=5"]Pic2[/URL]
Kanonen [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig2905.htm?picture=3"]Pic[/URL]
Storm Runner: [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig2498.htm?picture=13"]Pic1[/URL] [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig2498.htm?picture=16"]Pic2[/URL]
Tornado: [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig1076.htm?picture=12"]Pic1[/URL] [URL="http://www.rcdb.com/ig1076.htm?picture=14"]Pic2[/URL] I'm sure there is flat in the station.

[James]

[QUOTE=Marc]I think S:ROS @ SFNE has some rectangular track too.[/QUOTE]
No it doesnt. I use to think it did... But it doesnt.

[Marc]

I couldn't find any photos of it, I simply just heard about it. Bad information I guess.

[][ntamin22]

[QUOTE=JordanMullins]On the 4 rail track system, there are several triangles on the top and sides of the rails that connect them together. So its just a lot more triangles making it stronger

EDIT: While looking at rcdb I saw that goliath has the 4, 3, and 2 rail tracks.[/QUOTE]


that would certainly lend credance to the square supports = better theory. absolutely glorious.

[Marc]

A triangle is able to take up to 9 times as much force as a square. It's in a specific set of for oreintations that it is so strong. There are oreintations where triangles are the weakest shape, cylinders being one.

The problem isn't in the actual shape of the track cross section where a triangle is the strongest. The track is far stronger than needed in that aspect for either the triangular or rectangular shape. The problem is caused by tension and compression along the length of the track section as well as torsion in 2 axes. The larger size of the rectangular track is able to deal with the forces over a longer length between supports. It also has a more resilient connection to supports. This is a common failure point for triangular track.

As for more steel, rectangular track has nearly double the steel than triangular track. Flat track has about half the steel as triangular track. Rectangular is close to having 4 times the steel as flat track.

[Hammy2003]

[QUOTE='][ntamin22']... with a square support, the force is channeled to BOTH lower beams, so:

same amount of force, but divided between two rails, so less stress on supports.

therefore, longer unsupported stretches with square than triangle, etc.[/QUOTE]

No, no, no. Not less stress on the supports, if anything MORE stress overall, considering the extra weight of the track!

I see what you're saying, though. All those itty bitty triangles in between those two "base rails" spread the weight over larger area, causing less stress for the rails themselves, not for the supports. The supports are still [I]supporting[/I] all that weight, spread out or not.

But yeah, I see what ya'll are saying.

It's all these concepts at the same time. I look at it like this now. It's like breaking 2, 3, and 4 toothpicks at a time. Which one is hardest to do ... obviously the 4. Four main rails with more triangles in between make for an incredibly rigid design.

Schwarzkopf's Mindbender at SFOG kinda has that thing goin' on. Interesting how that older design carried over into modern day, with a different designer/manufacturer.