When I clicked the video I thought this was just gonna be a brief explanation on why circular loops can cause whiplashes, and thus they use more egg-shaped designs. But mad respect for the incredibly detailed and in-depth explanation given!
Also this gives me flashbacks to the intense math and physics classes from the one year I studied industrial engineering, god if only I were smart enough to finish that education :/
The trick to any kind of higher-level education is to use as many resources as possible. That way if you don’t get it in class you still have an alternative. I’m a CS major and I plan to graduate knowing more that I was taught in lectures, so to aid with that I use non-curriculum textbooks and the internet (such as TH-cam videos). Yes that’s more expensive but SO worth it in the long run I imagine.
@@jameshall5171 yeah seriously if you're not 'cheating' then you're just doing yourself dirty, its so hard to learn everything just from lectures especially in physics math and engineering unless you're insanely intelligent I guess
@@ItsNoelle. true and sometimes even the written lesson given online isn't explained well so that's another reason to cheat. Uni just provides you a structure, a routine because you'd probably never study it by yourself anyways and then it's your job to do the rest, that's how I see it. And the degree of course but that's obviously expected.
There are easier ways to do this where you can have more freedom of design. In college I was able to do this in excel, fairly similar to your approach but with more freedom in regards to design and g forces desired
Well, depends on what you mean by 'real world'. I've studied computer game development for most of my adult life (in an amateur context), and there's a lot of things that come up very frequently. Physics engines are, unsurprisingly, full of calculus. But, a 3d rendering engine will be full of geometry, vectors, matrix multiplication, and a whole bunch of methods of creating discrete plots of various functions. I hope you know your line and circle equations... And all their various forms. XD - because different forms are useful for different things. Especially when trying to optimise. Parametric equations are especially useful. Ever wondered how collision detection works? There are simpler forms that are easier to calculate, but the most general form is based around the intersection of two line segments (vector dot product), with the parametric form giving you the actual point of intersection. Alternatively, in 3d space it's more likely to be the parametric value of a line intersecting a plane. (even just being able to calculate the intersection of a line segment with an infinite plane is extremely useful.) Yeah... I guess calling that 'real world' is arguable, but I learnt way more mathematics from trying to write actual code to do these things than I ever did from formal mathematics or physics classes...
Quick note! If you are going through the math in this video yourself, please note that the derivation at 13:03 contains an error. The first equation for "G" has the "g" term in the wrong place, and the correct equation for "G" is shown at 3:50. The resulting equation for "r" should have g*[G - cos(theta)] as the denominator. I hope this helps if you're trying to replicate the plots and it doesn't work properly.
back in college I made a excel spreadsheet similar to your approach, I used a workaround for the calculus, using extremely small time increments (for graphing purposes on excel). The result is you can input your desired g forces as a function of time and excel will output the shape as a graph. (also works for hills or anything really) you can come up with some pretty interesting track elements
It's not possible to get an equation because the differential equations cannot be solved analytically. Excel or any other software can only plot the solution by solving the equations numerically.
Thats why Tony Hawks first Skateboard Looping attempt was a total failure...he build a circular loop, which caused the high changes in g forces making it also extremly dofficult to ride.
Dude, that is so observant. I saw that video too. I never realized. Also, I never though they’d have to consult with an engineer to design the shape of the loop. I could see him fighting the g forces at the bottom of the loop.
@Pizza Pie wrong. Differential equations don't solve for variables, they solve for a set of all possible variables... or equations. You're taking one possible example (f=ma) and using that to represent ALL diff eq. If diff eq was so easy, then why are some problems unsolvable? Don't bother answering, it was rhetorical.
I’m taking algebra 2 right now in high school and have wanted to be a roller coaster engineer since I could remember. I love this explanation. I can’t *comprehend* it, but I kind of understand it. This makes me want to engineer roller coasters even more. Mathematics is a fascinating subject.
Finally an excellent video to showcase this matter! Not only does it explain the maths, but it also dives into other aspects of a loop as well. Very very good job. /engineer
Holy Math, Batman! That was an amazing video. As a software developer and coaster/theme park enthusiast, I've often gone "I want to play Roller Coaster Tycoon, Parkitect, Planet Coaster, No Limits, etc." but once I hit the limitation of them, gone "what is needed to make my own version of these games?" but get stuck at the math. I don't have the time to make such games, and don't know how they came up with their calculations or similar, but to see the math that is needed just to do a loop is awesome. It makes me want to try and make my own game (again... no time...), but it's so interesting to see. Also interesting to think about how early designs such as Arrow and Schwarzkopf were done before computers really had the computational capabilities to make such designs, and to think how many limitations of the formula come from "the train doesn't have enough flex to be able to do that tight of a loop" and still needing it to fit within safety calculations.
AgateBrick97792 While in PlanCo you can build a roller coaster, it’s a lot harder than in FVD and NL2. To build a realistic coaster you have to spend 10 hours building it.
@@bleeve9425 I agree 100% it is harder to get a realistic coaster. Smoothing in PlanCo is the worst culprit in this task. I think part of it is just how the PlanCo editor works in general. NL2 has a bigger learning curve in using the editor at least Imo.
No kidding, the most interesting video I've ever watched. I hope that you ll make more videos in the future that shows the practical use of mathematics. Keep doing!!!
It’s good because then you at least know the concepts and how to apply them and that’s the end goal of teaching. The how is less important than the what and why.
I sometimes deal with the clothoid or Euler spiral in highway surveying and heard a while back that they were also used in roller coaster loop design. Very good explanation, and major kudos for pronouncing Leonhard Euler's last name correctly.
I don't know how I hadn't seen your videos before, they fit perfectly with my viewing history. This is my favorite kind of video, basic math and engineering to explain things I hadn't really thought about. Please keep making awesome and informative videos.
Neat. I’m in calculus right now and watched this when it first came out but didn’t understand it then. I still wished you did more math to explain what was happening when you were doing partial derivatives
Thank you very much for giving us an insight into these mathematical derivations. It gives me a better insight into how engineers work out a design of a specific task. I hope you will keep up doing more good contents like this!
TLDR: sit in the middle for the most consistent experience; sit on the ends of the cart for more extreme Gs amazing derivations and explanation of the topic, would love to see more :D
I always thought that Nessie at Hansa Park had a circular loop (and yes it's a Schwarzkopf), but looking at pictures that include the bottom, you can see that only the top section is circular: www.webstagram.one/media/BS-e6Blh352 Nearly 40 years and still running.
@@artya - The Mind Bender in West Edmonton Mall in 🇨🇦 is a Schwarzkopf and has perfectly circular loops I can confirm the Gs wiki says over 5 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindbender_(Galaxyland)
@@CoasterCrafter662 - Much more circular than clothoidal they're more intense than anything at Cedar Point or Canada's Wonderland I know from experience
Enjoyed the video and it was very insightful, however at 12:50 I think it was G=(v^2/(r*g))+cos(θ) and not G=(v^2/r)+g*cos(θ), then multiplying both sides by g gives g*G=((v^2)/r)+g*cos(θ), then the expression for r becomes r=((v_0^2)-2*g*y)/g(G-cos(θ))
You know the way we figured out Circular loops were dangerous is when we tried to add one to a roller coaster, few knock outs and broken bones later, they decided not to....yeeeahhhhh
I would love to see your analysis on the roller coaster that kills people with g-forces. Also about unusual shapes, like an infinity shaped loop or wide ovals, or a small loop at the top of another loop. Or what it would look like to make a ride that was always just this side of within the acceptable limits of the standards for force & speed, etc. Great series!!
This is a most excellent analysis! But there are other loop variations you should cover in another video. The first (and most important) is the helical loop, stretched out along the axis of the "circle". This permits reducing G-loads while maintaining the circular path of the loop (viewed from the axial direction). An example of this is the coaster that was at Knott's Berry Farm "Corkscrew" (which was the first coaster to take riders upside down). The second (less elegant) way to do this is to tilt the plane of the "vertical" loop at an angle. (In the extreme, the loop is horizontal!) An example of this is Knoebel's amusement resort's "Twister".
I got my degree in meteorology ( atmospheric/engineering science) way back in 82. It took forever, if ever, to figure out why I had to have 4 semesters of calculus including Dif EQ. Especially since I went into television and not research. The $$$$ you know. Lol. Thanks. Much enjoyed.
That's very interesting about all the different formulas for the different shapes of loops, as well as friction energy losses and positions of the cars. Those are much more precise than what we learned in school.
Roller Coaster Tycoon Death Coaster design tips! I appreciated this reminder of physics calculations that I haven't done in, umm, a few years. edit: Thanks for the analytical solution to the "front or back row?" question.
Yes. Just..... just...... Yes. Whatever this is, whatever it was, whatever it wants to be, to all those: Yes. Just.... more.. ok? More. Please and Thank you!!
Thanks for that video, and THANKS for not saying loops should always give more than 1g at the top otherwise the car would fall... Damn you, physics books. 6:56 - That jerk (derivative of acceleration) is actually the only reason against circular loops, admiting the entrance and exit are a flat plane. You can think about the curves like a car ride : You can't turn the wheel instantly - well that motion is your transition (lead-in, lead-out). Otherwise, circular loops are perfectly feasible and actually great. Unlike constant g-force loops that are disgusting because they feel unatural. I feel like the inner ear plays a major role about how you feel g-forces: 3g while at the bottom of a valley is fine and expected, but 3g at the apex of a loop is just wrong and forced. I wonder why Revolution is considered the first non-circular loop while this cleary isn't: columbusneighborhoods.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/looploop_at_olentangy_park.jpg Granted the top might be circular, but... so is Revolution and other Schwarzkoft loops (and that's why they're great). The reason why Arrow's loop are lowered and not reduced in size (11:56) is because they used cookie cutter elements, so they only had to do the math (by hand) once instead of re-doing it all the time, and the production was also made easier. A quick note tho, while the video is correct, I don't think coaster designers still see coasters as a serie of elements put together, but rather as a whole. That makes the specific math used here irrelevent since they use broader algorythms that allows them to make any 3D shapes they want, and with a friction loss constantly took into account.
According to my department, classical mechanics is unofficially titled “why amusement parks are a scam” because the professor brings up amusement park rides a lot and how they’re boring. But this is quite interesting and makes me more terrified for taking classical. I thought I was stretching it by using ODEs for Minecraft but how about PDEs to do something more practical
Comment about your analysis and how longer trains affect the results: you address longer trains, but only from the standpoint of the rider not being in the center of the train (and how this tends to skew and increase the peak G-force experienced), but still treat the train's mass "being at a point" as far as speed is concerned. I think you have not accounted for the length of the train's affecting the speed because the mass is distributed in a way that lowers the train's CG. To explain, I will assume perfect circular track and no friction losses, as you did initially. Case 1: train "very long compared to the circumference of the loop". In this case (taken to extreme), the train's velocity does not change at all from loop entry speed because most of the train remains at loop entry height. You have a constant centripetal acceleration toward the center, and the rider experiences 2 more G's at the bottom than at the top, like your case of the constant centripetal acceleration loop with a short train. (This is the same as many vertically spinning "flat rides".) Case 2: train length equal to the loop's circumference: centripetal acceleration varies by 2 G's toward the center (the train's CG only rises to the center of the circle as train crests the top), and rider's G's vary by 4 G's bottom-to-top. Case 3: train length is 1/2 the circle's circumference: centripetal acceleration varies by ~3 G's toward the center (the train's CG only rises ~ midway between top and center of circle), and rider's G's vary by ~5 G's bottom-to-top. By combining a longer train with the loop profiles you describe (along with helical loops), it is possible to make "more circular" loops with tolerable G-forces.
Excellent explanation of the shapes of roller coaster loops. Also, this video demonstrates why advanced math skills are essential to an engineering career.
I wished this was a problem in my engineering courses. Instead I had to solve double pendulums and a 2D cart with springs, dampers, and rotation about its axis(prob 6 degrees of freedom) as it goes over obstacles. That was the only time I had to solve nonlinear DE's or PDE's in the case of vibration theory. This video would serve as a great problem to solve after learning some of this stuff and allow for good writing and analysis. Good job.
i'm not gonna pretend to understand any of this, cause i don't. but it makes me appreciate the guys who design roller coasters in a way that makes me enjoy them and not get whiplash or die
I think I got it. Centrip force = (mv^2) / r. The car has the highest velocity at the bottom of the loop (both on entering and exiting the loop). With a very high velocity at the bottom of the track to cause a very high g force, you need to negate that by raising “r” in the denominator. Then, the car has lost most of it’s velocity at the top of the loop, (having converted its KE into potential energy) so you need to lower the radius to maintain the same g force. Gravity will also counter g force at the top. So, rearranging the equation and ignoring m, as you did, you get r = v^2 / Force. V is known (from KE minus potential energy) so you could possibly plug in whatever g force you want (say 3) then that will give you the desired radius for each part of the track (whilst adding or subtracting the gravity vector - add the gravity vector for the bottom half and subtract gravity from the top half of the loop). Granted, it’s more primitive and clunky, but may work for those of us that don’t know how to apply calc yet (most of us). Chain bear talks about F1 turns with increasing and decreasing radius. Except those loops are flat and not vertical. Your channel is like his - only cooler with more math. With respect to him, he had my favourite channel up until now.
Whoa. This actually really explains why I love pretty much every coaster I've ever been on with the exception of Scorpion at Busch Gardens. The one loop on that ride is a near perfect circle, which explains the massive headache I get after riding. 😩
Alrighty young man. I've never been interested in math but I honestly enjoyed this video. Thanks for explaining how roller coasters work and keep it up. Your a very talented and smart young man.☺
Faxmachine.mp3 Awesome vid! Really didn’t know there was... THIS much math behind a ‘simple’ loop! *Good to remember for my backyard rollercoaster that I can’t build yet*
@Eric Thomason No young, I'm 16 and I live in Belgium so I don't have a gigantic lawn like americans have 😂 mine is +- 20x15m. But my poney and my moms horse are standing there in winter.
Huge coaster fan here, glad to hear, see, and try to understand the crazy amount of physics involved. It was my dream one day to design these, unfortunately, the amount of engineering exceeds what my brain can handle. I have no problem admitting that this math was way too complex for me. I'll stick with my career in fire protection (sprinkler) systems, where I at least get to use Gravity (elevation, pressure, head, friction loss) to some extent. Awesome video dude! I've copied the link for this video into one of the FB groups I'm in, which denies gravity exists (yes, they are flatt Earthers... It's ok to point & laugh at them, we all do...). I can't wait to see them squirm at the amount of calculations that are required, which supposedly don't exist because it's all "fake math and physics".
Some more things to take into consideration: There is essentially a minimum radius before your trains cannot handle it any smaller. For instance, the top of the carts would be pushed into each other due to the curvature. Why you would choose one shape over the other. Blue Fire in Europa Park is an excellent example, using its shape to create hangtime at the top to create thrill. Obviously this is much more subjective, but still interesting.
I would love to see this kind of mathematical break down of sidways loops, like cork screws, barrel rolls, heart line rolls, and how changing the point of rotation changes the way you experience a curve, and also how sitting on different sides of the train would feel. I guess that's a lot 😅 but do whatever you want.
Hi ! It's me again ! I rewatched your video multiple times, and I still had some questions, and unfortunatly, I haven't been able to find the answers on my own. 1. at 3:47 you define G =Fn/mg. How do you find/calculate this formula ? In my project, we calculated the centripetal acceleration with v**2/r for the circular loop (which you talked about later during the non circular loops design) , and the result was similar, but instead of a 6g difference between the lowest and highest value, we only had a 4g difference. In a more broad question : What is difference here between centripetal acceleration (ac) and G ? 2. at 14:50 when you designed a loop using half a clothoid, and then plotted the G force graph, how did you do that last part ? Were you able to determine the function of G with variables ?
1. So G represents the net g-force that a passenger will experience on the ride as a multiple of g (9.81 m/s^2) i.e. G = 1 if the train is stationary on flat ground. Centripetal acceleration is one of the components that makes up G, and gravity is the other. The net force acting on a passenger is Fn, and dividing that by (m*g) gives the net acceleration in terms of g (i.e. g-force). 2. The clothoid loop is generated using numerical integration, and it's possible to back-calculate the g-force at the end of each step once the geometry is known (x, y, theta). You can calculate the speed and radius of curvature at each point, which can then be used to calculate centripetal acceleration and g-force. I hope this helps clarify!
@@ArtofEngineering It clarifies so much, thank you once again ! I think it sums up all the things I needed to know, thank you again, and great video if I didn't say it before !
There are still modern roller coasters with a partially circular loop, as this shape gives great hangtime (the feeling of falling "up" while the train is upside down). On the other side, constant G shapes are used, if the desired effect is an intense, but smooth loop. It depends on the manufacturer, what effect they want (eg. Gerstlauer and Mack Rides seem to favor Hangtime, while old-school B&Ms are very intense).
Hey man, really really insightful and informative. Although I may not have made it past algebra 2 in high school and thus don’t really understand most of these equations, I was still able to follow along all the way through and understand the message you were trying to convey pretty easily. Well done!
to add to that, copperhead strike has a circular loop because the soul purpose of that loop is to give hangtime, this is done by sending the trains through really slowly which wouldn't normally be done because of the massive possibility of a stall, but because its a launch coaster it doesn't matter if it stalls, it can just roll back and be re-launched with slightly more power than before. notice how its second loop which isn't after the launch is slightly clothoid! :)
The title: The *Real Physics* of Roller Coaster Loops Me, for some reason: Oh boy I hope this is explained in a simple way that even I can understand despite barely passing high school physics. Thank you for this video, though, it encourages me to learn more so I can apply it to interesting things like coasters :)
I design coasters on my pc with fvd and theyre really easy to make. You just have to get positive gs going in, a quartic vertical force section that goes down to 1g-0g at the apex of the loop (thats personal preference weather you want 1g or 0g at the top), and set the quartic section to start and end at the same Y level. then add a quartic roll section that starts a little before the quartic vertical force section and ends a little after it, untill it looks good. set that roll to about 10 degrees, -10 or 10 depending which way you want it to go. it sounds hard but trust me its easy lol
So... Taking that last comment into account, the smoothest experience will be from sitting in the middle of the train, while moving towards the front or back will make it somewhat rougher. (because acceleration changes happen more quickly in some places.) That's a good thing to know about rollercoasters if you ride them, since it means you can get a slightly different experience depending on where you choose to sit...
I don't know about ASTM, but I do know some physics. Normal force is always an upward force, and G-force is basically just the downward force of gravity you feel on sharp turns of roller coasters, and anywhere else. You experience 1G sitting in your room, but on a roller coaster it can be much higher because of the speed involved.
I was able to obtain the 2014 standards through my university. The updated standards are available from the ASTM website but they are fairly expensive. If you're ok with the older version, feel free to reach out to me via e-mail and I may be able to help you out.
When I clicked the video I thought this was just gonna be a brief explanation on why circular loops can cause whiplashes, and thus they use more egg-shaped designs. But mad respect for the incredibly detailed and in-depth explanation given!
Also this gives me flashbacks to the intense math and physics classes from the one year I studied industrial engineering, god if only I were smart enough to finish that education :/
The trick to any kind of higher-level education is to use as many resources as possible. That way if you don’t get it in class you still have an alternative. I’m a CS major and I plan to graduate knowing more that I was taught in lectures, so to aid with that I use non-curriculum textbooks and the internet (such as TH-cam videos). Yes that’s more expensive but SO worth it in the long run I imagine.
@@jameshall5171 yeah seriously if you're not 'cheating' then you're just doing yourself dirty, its so hard to learn everything just from lectures especially in physics math and engineering unless you're insanely intelligent I guess
@@ItsNoelle. true and sometimes even the written lesson given online isn't explained well so that's another reason to cheat. Uni just provides you a structure, a routine because you'd probably never study it by yourself anyways and then it's your job to do the rest, that's how I see it. And the degree of course but that's obviously expected.
I like how so many early engineering designs and inventions were basically just death traps
That’s how we learn around here
A real world application of calculus?! I never thought I'd see the day...
Lol i am doing engineering right now and i never thought i would see calculus in real life............
Lol i am doing engineering right now and i never thought i would see calculus in real life............
There are easier ways to do this where you can have more freedom of design. In college I was able to do this in excel, fairly similar to your approach but with more freedom in regards to design and g forces desired
Well, depends on what you mean by 'real world'.
I've studied computer game development for most of my adult life (in an amateur context), and there's a lot of things that come up very frequently.
Physics engines are, unsurprisingly, full of calculus.
But, a 3d rendering engine will be full of geometry, vectors, matrix multiplication, and a whole bunch of methods of creating discrete plots of various functions.
I hope you know your line and circle equations... And all their various forms. XD - because different forms are useful for different things. Especially when trying to optimise.
Parametric equations are especially useful.
Ever wondered how collision detection works? There are simpler forms that are easier to calculate, but the most general form is based around the intersection of two line segments (vector dot product), with the parametric form giving you the actual point of intersection. Alternatively, in 3d space it's more likely to be the parametric value of a line intersecting a plane. (even just being able to calculate the intersection of a line segment with an infinite plane is extremely useful.)
Yeah... I guess calling that 'real world' is arguable, but I learnt way more mathematics from trying to write actual code to do these things than I ever did from formal mathematics or physics classes...
If it wasnt for calculus you wouldnt be able to share your stupid opinion
Quick note! If you are going through the math in this video yourself, please note that the derivation at 13:03 contains an error. The first equation for "G" has the "g" term in the wrong place, and the correct equation for "G" is shown at 3:50. The resulting equation for "r" should have g*[G - cos(theta)] as the denominator. I hope this helps if you're trying to replicate the plots and it doesn't work properly.
back in college I made a excel spreadsheet similar to your approach, I used a workaround for the calculus, using extremely small time increments (for graphing purposes on excel). The result is you can input your desired g forces as a function of time and excel will output the shape as a graph. (also works for hills or anything really) you can come up with some pretty interesting track elements
Hi, what computer software do you use to plot these?
There are many options available. I used Microsoft Excel but you could also use something like MATLAB or Mathematica.
@@ArtofEngineering Is Microsoft Excel able to give you the equation of the relation generated? or just an image of it?
It's not possible to get an equation because the differential equations cannot be solved analytically. Excel or any other software can only plot the solution by solving the equations numerically.
Thats why Tony Hawks first Skateboard Looping attempt was a total failure...he build a circular loop, which caused the high changes in g forces making it also extremly dofficult to ride.
Dude, that is so observant. I saw that video too. I never realized. Also, I never though they’d have to consult with an engineer to design the shape of the loop. I could see him fighting the g forces at the bottom of the loop.
We'll need to use a little calculus.
* *busts out Diff Eq*
@Pizza Pie wrong. Differential equations don't solve for variables, they solve for a set of all possible variables... or equations. You're taking one possible example (f=ma) and using that to represent ALL diff eq. If diff eq was so easy, then why are some problems unsolvable? Don't bother answering, it was rhetorical.
😁🖒
Always love how informative your videos are! Keep up the amazing work man!
Thanks so much!
I’m taking algebra 2 right now in high school and have wanted to be a roller coaster engineer since I could remember. I love this explanation. I can’t *comprehend* it, but I kind of understand it. This makes me want to engineer roller coasters even more. Mathematics is a fascinating subject.
Mechanical Engineer is what you need to become
Finally an excellent video to showcase this matter! Not only does it explain the maths, but it also dives into other aspects of a loop as well. Very very good job. /engineer
Holy Math, Batman! That was an amazing video. As a software developer and coaster/theme park enthusiast, I've often gone "I want to play Roller Coaster Tycoon, Parkitect, Planet Coaster, No Limits, etc." but once I hit the limitation of them, gone "what is needed to make my own version of these games?" but get stuck at the math. I don't have the time to make such games, and don't know how they came up with their calculations or similar, but to see the math that is needed just to do a loop is awesome. It makes me want to try and make my own game (again... no time...), but it's so interesting to see. Also interesting to think about how early designs such as Arrow and Schwarzkopf were done before computers really had the computational capabilities to make such designs, and to think how many limitations of the formula come from "the train doesn't have enough flex to be able to do that tight of a loop" and still needing it to fit within safety calculations.
This guy really deserves to be appreciated the level of depth in his technical analysis is just amazing! Keep the up the good work man!
This is why us unprofessional coaster designers use FVD and NoLimits2. It spares us from this headache of math.
Bleeve 942 are you a roller coaster designer?
German Lover Unprofessionally, yes. It’s a whole community.
You forgot Planet Coaster.
AgateBrick97792 While in PlanCo you can build a roller coaster, it’s a lot harder than in FVD and NL2. To build a realistic coaster you have to spend 10 hours building it.
@@bleeve9425 I agree 100% it is harder to get a realistic coaster. Smoothing in PlanCo is the worst culprit in this task. I think part of it is just how the PlanCo editor works in general. NL2 has a bigger learning curve in using the editor at least Imo.
Holy shocks, you need an engineer degree to understand this video for real
Well, from my perspective, I need this video to understand getting an engineering degree.
'Well, from my perspective, I need this video to' pass 2nd year mech engg.
No kidding, the most interesting video I've ever watched. I hope that you ll make more videos in the future that shows the practical use of mathematics. Keep doing!!!
Exactly what I had in mind! Keep up the good work, bro!
Love these videos! As an engineering student, it helps me put together all the components I learn!! Thanks!
Once he started talking about calculus my brain checked out
Hey at least the stuff you learned has a purpose
El_Ectric I didn’t learn anything.
I learn more in these videos than I have ever learned in school science class. I sometimes wonder whether that is good or bad.
Oompa Loompa this is beyond me but if I pay attention long enough instead of scrolling through the comments I’d could do it.
It’s good because then you at least know the concepts and how to apply them and that’s the end goal of teaching. The how is less important than the what and why.
Then the chances are too good that your school failed you.
Interest = remembering
I sometimes deal with the clothoid or Euler spiral in highway surveying and heard a while back that they were also used in roller coaster loop design. Very good explanation, and major kudos for pronouncing Leonhard Euler's last name correctly.
I don't know how I hadn't seen your videos before, they fit perfectly with my viewing history. This is my favorite kind of video, basic math and engineering to explain things I hadn't really thought about. Please keep making awesome and informative videos.
THIS is great content
Neat. I’m in calculus right now and watched this when it first came out but didn’t understand it then. I still wished you did more math to explain what was happening when you were doing partial derivatives
Thank you very much for giving us an insight into these mathematical derivations. It gives me a better insight into how engineers work out a design of a specific task. I hope you will keep up doing more good contents like this!
I don’t know shit about physics but I’m stoll fascinated by this video lol
The maths doesn't help if the welder has a hangover
Amazing video! Maybe do one about the physics behind zero-G/heartline rolls?
Looks cool :)
TLDR: sit in the middle for the most consistent experience; sit on the ends of the cart for more extreme Gs
amazing derivations and explanation of the topic, would love to see more :D
AOE : Explaining complex maths
My brain : NEEEED COFFEEEEE
I could use this to study for my engineering exams
Math: circular loops are dangerous for riders
Schwartzkoph: *hold my beer*
I always thought that Nessie at Hansa Park had a circular loop (and yes it's a Schwarzkopf), but looking at pictures that include the bottom, you can see that only the top section is circular: www.webstagram.one/media/BS-e6Blh352 Nearly 40 years and still running.
@@aoeuable its still not circular
@@artya - The Mind Bender in West Edmonton Mall in 🇨🇦 is a Schwarzkopf and has perfectly circular loops I can confirm the Gs wiki says over 5
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindbender_(Galaxyland)
@@PabloGonzalez-hv3td no, Mindbender has a mixup of clothoïdal and circular loop, but it's not 100% circular.
@@CoasterCrafter662 - Much more circular than clothoidal they're more intense than anything at Cedar Point or Canada's Wonderland I know from experience
Enjoyed the video and it was very insightful, however at 12:50 I think it was G=(v^2/(r*g))+cos(θ) and not G=(v^2/r)+g*cos(θ), then multiplying both sides by g gives g*G=((v^2)/r)+g*cos(θ), then the expression for r becomes r=((v_0^2)-2*g*y)/g(G-cos(θ))
Thanks for helping me write some notes down for when I wake to be a roller coaster engineer
I really liked that you got into the meat and the actual equations! :)
You know the way we figured out Circular loops were dangerous is when we tried to add one to a roller coaster, few knock outs and broken bones later, they decided not to....yeeeahhhhh
physics exam tomorrow, mad respect for the vid, really helpful
I would love to see your analysis on the roller coaster that kills people with g-forces.
Also about unusual shapes, like an infinity shaped loop or wide ovals, or a small loop at the top of another loop. Or what it would look like to make a ride that was always just this side of within the acceptable limits of the standards for force & speed, etc.
Great series!!
I’m starting my studies in civil engineering in Quebec in september and your videos inspired me to choose that field of study! So thank you for that!!
I'd love to watch a similar video about camelbacks, zero g rolls and heartlining in general
I was working on a project where you could input g-force and the output was any rollercoaster design element you could think of
This is a most excellent analysis! But there are other loop variations you should cover in another video. The first (and most important) is the helical loop, stretched out along the axis of the "circle". This permits reducing G-loads while maintaining the circular path of the loop (viewed from the axial direction). An example of this is the coaster that was at Knott's Berry Farm "Corkscrew" (which was the first coaster to take riders upside down). The second (less elegant) way to do this is to tilt the plane of the "vertical" loop at an angle. (In the extreme, the loop is horizontal!) An example of this is Knoebel's amusement resort's "Twister".
I got my degree in meteorology ( atmospheric/engineering science) way back in 82. It took forever, if ever, to figure out why I had to have 4 semesters of calculus including Dif EQ. Especially since I went into television and not research. The $$$$ you know. Lol. Thanks. Much enjoyed.
This is a fantastic video. Way to whip out the diffey eques
That's very interesting about all the different formulas for the different shapes of loops, as well as friction energy losses and positions of the cars. Those are much more precise than what we learned in school.
Whoa, didn't expect to stumble into a 3blue1brown video!
Awesome work!
Roller Coaster Tycoon Death Coaster design tips! I appreciated this reminder of physics calculations that I haven't done in, umm, a few years.
edit: Thanks for the analytical solution to the "front or back row?" question.
I came for an explanation, and left with a PhD
Thank you so much for this video!
Wow, designing roller coasters with differential equation. Just stunning!
Your videos are insanely good. Keep going !
Yes. Just..... just...... Yes. Whatever this is, whatever it was, whatever it wants to be, to all those: Yes. Just.... more.. ok? More. Please and Thank you!!
For MATLAB's ODE solver, create a state vector z = [theta, x, y]:
v0 = 20
C = 3
g = 9.8066
z0 = [0 0 0]
dfun = @(s,z) [(C./(v0^2/g-2*z(3))); cos(z(1)); sin(z(1))];
opt = odeset('RelTol',1e-10,'AbsTol',1e-10);
[s,Z] = ode45(dfun, [0 50], z0, opt);
plot(Z(:,2), Z(:,3)); grid on
thank you so much for this.
Is there a way to make it 3D by adding breadth?
This was an amazing indepth explanation of the physics at work here, love it!
Hats off for sucha good and crisp presentation of this fun subject with real physics and math. Got hooked!
Thanks for that video, and THANKS for not saying loops should always give more than 1g at the top otherwise the car would fall... Damn you, physics books.
6:56 - That jerk (derivative of acceleration) is actually the only reason against circular loops, admiting the entrance and exit are a flat plane. You can think about the curves like a car ride : You can't turn the wheel instantly - well that motion is your transition (lead-in, lead-out).
Otherwise, circular loops are perfectly feasible and actually great. Unlike constant g-force loops that are disgusting because they feel unatural. I feel like the inner ear plays a major role about how you feel g-forces: 3g while at the bottom of a valley is fine and expected, but 3g at the apex of a loop is just wrong and forced.
I wonder why Revolution is considered the first non-circular loop while this cleary isn't: columbusneighborhoods.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/looploop_at_olentangy_park.jpg
Granted the top might be circular, but... so is Revolution and other Schwarzkoft loops (and that's why they're great).
The reason why Arrow's loop are lowered and not reduced in size (11:56) is because they used cookie cutter elements, so they only had to do the math (by hand) once instead of re-doing it all the time, and the production was also made easier.
A quick note tho, while the video is correct, I don't think coaster designers still see coasters as a serie of elements put together, but rather as a whole. That makes the specific math used here irrelevent since they use broader algorythms that allows them to make any 3D shapes they want, and with a friction loss constantly took into account.
According to my department, classical mechanics is unofficially titled “why amusement parks are a scam” because the professor brings up amusement park rides a lot and how they’re boring. But this is quite interesting and makes me more terrified for taking classical. I thought I was stretching it by using ODEs for Minecraft but how about PDEs to do something more practical
Comment about your analysis and how longer trains affect the results: you address longer trains, but only from the standpoint of the rider not being in the center of the train (and how this tends to skew and increase the peak G-force experienced), but still treat the train's mass "being at a point" as far as speed is concerned. I think you have not accounted for the length of the train's affecting the speed because the mass is distributed in a way that lowers the train's CG. To explain, I will assume perfect circular track and no friction losses, as you did initially.
Case 1: train "very long compared to the circumference of the loop". In this case (taken to extreme), the train's velocity does not change at all from loop entry speed because most of the train remains at loop entry height. You have a constant centripetal acceleration toward the center, and the rider experiences 2 more G's at the bottom than at the top, like your case of the constant centripetal acceleration loop with a short train. (This is the same as many vertically spinning "flat rides".)
Case 2: train length equal to the loop's circumference: centripetal acceleration varies by 2 G's toward the center (the train's CG only rises to the center of the circle as train crests the top), and rider's G's vary by 4 G's bottom-to-top.
Case 3: train length is 1/2 the circle's circumference: centripetal acceleration varies by ~3 G's toward the center (the train's CG only rises ~ midway between top and center of circle), and rider's G's vary by ~5 G's bottom-to-top.
By combining a longer train with the loop profiles you describe (along with helical loops), it is possible to make "more circular" loops with tolerable G-forces.
17:23 "Medusa" in Six Flags Discovery Kingdom
Excellent explanation of the shapes of roller coaster loops. Also, this video demonstrates why advanced math skills are essential to an engineering career.
Omg man this channel is a banger. I love it!!!
I wished this was a problem in my engineering courses. Instead I had to solve double pendulums and a 2D cart with springs, dampers, and rotation about its axis(prob 6 degrees of freedom) as it goes over obstacles. That was the only time I had to solve nonlinear DE's or PDE's in the case of vibration theory.
This video would serve as a great problem to solve after learning some of this stuff and allow for good writing and analysis. Good job.
Love it!! Wish I found your videos when I was a much younger engineering student!
i'm not gonna pretend to understand any of this, cause i don't. but it makes me appreciate the guys who design roller coasters in a way that makes me enjoy them and not get whiplash or die
I can barely tie my shoes correctly sometimes.
I so wanna try a circular loop just once to feel that sharp change in g's
I think I got it. Centrip force = (mv^2) / r. The car has the highest velocity at the bottom of the loop (both on entering and exiting the loop). With a very high velocity at the bottom of the track to cause a very high g force, you need to negate that by raising “r” in the denominator. Then, the car has lost most of it’s velocity at the top of the loop, (having converted its KE into potential energy) so you need to lower the radius to maintain the same g force. Gravity will also counter g force at the top. So, rearranging the equation and ignoring m, as you did, you get r = v^2 / Force. V is known (from KE minus potential energy) so you could possibly plug in whatever g force you want (say 3) then that will give you the desired radius for each part of the track (whilst adding or subtracting the gravity vector - add the gravity vector for the bottom half and subtract gravity from the top half of the loop). Granted, it’s more primitive and clunky, but may work for those of us that don’t know how to apply calc yet (most of us).
Chain bear talks about F1 turns with increasing and decreasing radius. Except those loops are flat and not vertical. Your channel is like his - only cooler with more math. With respect to him, he had my favourite channel up until now.
great now to apply this to my rides in planet coaster
Makes me love maths and physics all the more
I LOVE the rollercoaster videos. You're doing an amazing job at explaining the engineering behind it.
Whoa. This actually really explains why I love pretty much every coaster I've ever been on with the exception of Scorpion at Busch Gardens. The one loop on that ride is a near perfect circle, which explains the massive headache I get after riding. 😩
Great video. The insight into design aspects of a real coaster is super cool.
I was surprised and a little disappointed that you didnt discuss the differences between a coaster traveling on the outside of the loop vs the inside.
Alrighty young man. I've never been interested in math but I honestly enjoyed this video. Thanks for explaining how roller coasters work and keep it up. Your a very talented and smart young man.☺
Incredible video, very well described mathematics and engineering principles. Thank you
Thank you! It was too good, really. Great explanation. Finally an engineer who is not afraid to show his calculations!
Please make more of these. I love them!!!
Faxmachine.mp3
Awesome vid! Really didn’t know there was... THIS much math behind a ‘simple’ loop!
*Good to remember for my backyard rollercoaster that I can’t build yet*
@Eric Thomason No young, I'm 16 and I live in Belgium so I don't have a gigantic lawn like americans have 😂 mine is +- 20x15m. But my poney and my moms horse are standing there in winter.
Eric Thomason Yes. Yes it does.
I remember the trig names and limits but no Mas, still near vid though
Huge coaster fan here, glad to hear, see, and try to understand the crazy amount of physics involved. It was my dream one day to design these, unfortunately, the amount of engineering exceeds what my brain can handle. I have no problem admitting that this math was way too complex for me. I'll stick with my career in fire protection (sprinkler) systems, where I at least get to use Gravity (elevation, pressure, head, friction loss) to some extent. Awesome video dude!
I've copied the link for this video into one of the FB groups I'm in, which denies gravity exists (yes, they are flatt Earthers... It's ok to point & laugh at them, we all do...). I can't wait to see them squirm at the amount of calculations that are required, which supposedly don't exist because it's all "fake math and physics".
MATH IS HARD!!!🤪 thank god there are people like you who understand it!!! 🙌
0:16 RIP Dragon Challenge.
DragOFF Challenge
Some more things to take into consideration:
There is essentially a minimum radius before your trains cannot handle it any smaller. For instance, the top of the carts would be pushed into each other due to the curvature.
Why you would choose one shape over the other. Blue Fire in Europa Park is an excellent example, using its shape to create hangtime at the top to create thrill. Obviously this is much more subjective, but still interesting.
I would love to see this kind of mathematical break down of sidways loops, like cork screws, barrel rolls, heart line rolls, and how changing the point of rotation changes the way you experience a curve, and also how sitting on different sides of the train would feel. I guess that's a lot 😅 but do whatever you want.
Hi ! It's me again ! I rewatched your video multiple times, and I still had some questions, and unfortunatly, I haven't been able to find the answers on my own.
1. at 3:47 you define G =Fn/mg. How do you find/calculate this formula ? In my project, we calculated the centripetal acceleration with v**2/r for the circular loop (which you talked about later during the non circular loops design) , and the result was similar, but instead of a 6g difference between the lowest and highest value, we only had a 4g difference.
In a more broad question : What is difference here between centripetal acceleration (ac) and G ?
2. at 14:50 when you designed a loop using half a clothoid, and then plotted the G force graph, how did you do that last part ? Were you able to determine the function of G with variables ?
1. So G represents the net g-force that a passenger will experience on the ride as a multiple of g (9.81 m/s^2) i.e. G = 1 if the train is stationary on flat ground. Centripetal acceleration is one of the components that makes up G, and gravity is the other. The net force acting on a passenger is Fn, and dividing that by (m*g) gives the net acceleration in terms of g (i.e. g-force).
2. The clothoid loop is generated using numerical integration, and it's possible to back-calculate the g-force at the end of each step once the geometry is known (x, y, theta). You can calculate the speed and radius of curvature at each point, which can then be used to calculate centripetal acceleration and g-force.
I hope this helps clarify!
@@ArtofEngineering It clarifies so much, thank you once again !
I think it sums up all the things I needed to know, thank you again, and great video if I didn't say it before !
Awesome video! I feel smarter by watching it!
FANTASTIC VIDEO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We were just talking about this recently in my physics class, and we will be going to six flags on Friday for an end of year trip.
Teachers finding excuses to go to amusement parks with their class, I like that
There are still modern roller coasters with a partially circular loop, as this shape gives great hangtime (the feeling of falling "up" while the train is upside down). On the other side, constant G shapes are used, if the desired effect is an intense, but smooth loop. It depends on the manufacturer, what effect they want (eg. Gerstlauer and Mack Rides seem to favor Hangtime, while old-school B&Ms are very intense).
Hey man, really really insightful and informative. Although I may not have made it past algebra 2 in high school and thus don’t really understand most of these equations, I was still able to follow along all the way through and understand the message you were trying to convey pretty easily. Well done!
"circular loops are not found in modern coasters"
* *laughs in copperhead strike* *
to add to that, copperhead strike has a circular loop because the soul purpose of that loop is to give hangtime, this is done by sending the trains through really slowly which wouldn't normally be done because of the massive possibility of a stall, but because its a launch coaster it doesn't matter if it stalls, it can just roll back and be re-launched with slightly more power than before.
notice how its second loop which isn't after the launch is slightly clothoid! :)
@@DomWPC And even then only ~2/3 of both loops are actually circular
The title: The *Real Physics* of Roller Coaster Loops
Me, for some reason: Oh boy I hope this is explained in a simple way that even I can understand despite barely passing high school physics.
Thank you for this video, though, it encourages me to learn more so I can apply it to interesting things like coasters :)
Awesome video! You earned my suscription lol
Amazing video man!! As soon as i saw it i open matlab to create my little coaster editor and it is coming along really nice :)
I design coasters on my pc with fvd and theyre really easy to make. You just have to get positive gs going in, a quartic vertical force section that goes down to 1g-0g at the apex of the loop (thats personal preference weather you want 1g or 0g at the top), and set the quartic section to start and end at the same Y level. then add a quartic roll section that starts a little before the quartic vertical force section and ends a little after it, untill it looks good. set that roll to about 10 degrees, -10 or 10 depending which way you want it to go.
it sounds hard but trust me its easy lol
Thank you so much for this video. Can't find many others explaining Rollercoaster G forces
So... Taking that last comment into account, the smoothest experience will be from sitting in the middle of the train, while moving towards the front or back will make it somewhat rougher. (because acceleration changes happen more quickly in some places.)
That's a good thing to know about rollercoasters if you ride them, since it means you can get a slightly different experience depending on where you choose to sit...
Awesome video!!
Great video. Just to be clear. Does the ASTM consider the G-force as you are? I mean, are the G-force and the normal force the same?
I don't know about ASTM, but I do know some physics. Normal force is always an upward force, and G-force is basically just the downward force of gravity you feel on sharp turns of roller coasters, and anywhere else. You experience 1G sitting in your room, but on a roller coaster it can be much higher because of the speed involved.
loops scare me. lol. but this was interesting.
So happy to see the Batman ride at SFOG
Thanks, now I know how to make ideal loops on planet coaster using this concept!
Where did you get the ASTM F24 standards? I really could use that for FVD++ Concepts.
I was able to obtain the 2014 standards through my university. The updated standards are available from the ASTM website but they are fairly expensive. If you're ok with the older version, feel free to reach out to me via e-mail and I may be able to help you out.
Really good and in-depth video!