Instal Steam
login
|
bahasa
简体中文 (Tionghoa Sederhana)
繁體中文 (Tionghoa Tradisional)
日本語 (Bahasa Jepang)
한국어 (Bahasa Korea)
ไทย (Bahasa Thai)
Български (Bahasa Bulgaria)
Čeština (Bahasa Ceko)
Dansk (Bahasa Denmark)
Deutsch (Bahasa Jerman)
English (Bahasa Inggris)
Español - España (Bahasa Spanyol - Spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (Bahasa Spanyol - Amerika Latin)
Ελληνικά (Bahasa Yunani)
Français (Bahasa Prancis)
Italiano (Bahasa Italia)
Magyar (Bahasa Hungaria)
Nederlands (Bahasa Belanda)
Norsk (Bahasa Norwegia)
Polski (Bahasa Polandia)
Português (Portugis - Portugal)
Português-Brasil (Bahasa Portugis-Brasil)
Română (Bahasa Rumania)
Русский (Bahasa Rusia)
Suomi (Bahasa Finlandia)
Svenska (Bahasa Swedia)
Türkçe (Bahasa Turki)
Tiếng Việt (Bahasa Vietnam)
Українська (Bahasa Ukraina)
Laporkan kesalahan penerjemahan
Boom, thats your loadlimit for the gradient in question. No calculations required.
They should be really close, but any corners will increase the friction.
Also you've got to consider the lines you lay will likely have some inconsistency.
I'd treat these as the maximum, and realistically you should be giving yourself some wiggle room under them.
Of course with a runup you can make it up slopes you wouldn't be able too from a standstill.
Track design add so many variables I didn't even try to cover them, a windy mountain track will be adding a lot of friction from the curves, that long straight flat section before the hill could let you get high enough speed to clear it when the same grade after a tight curve has you going slow so you have no chance of getting up it, etc.
There are other guides and calculators that include load mass, I have elected not too in order to future proof, and allow for partial loads. Any patches to the load mass or new resources my guide already covers without me needing to do anything.
Maths has rules about the order in which to do operations because you can end up with some very different answers using different orders.
In the case you reference, you need to do the operation for the numerator (the top part of the fraction) and the denominator (the bottom part of the fraction) separately.
I show this in the next stage of the worked example, where the 34,420,000 numerator is over the 25 denominator.
What you have done is use 5 as the denominator, and added the 20 after the fact.
The correct way to express the equation in a single line is (2,000 x 17,210) ÷ (5 + 20 x 1)
The order of operations is to then solve the area inside the parentheses first.