UC said:
It really wouldn't make a difference - on continuous strips, I believe it's the initial deceleration that causes the forward jolt of your body - after that, there is no acceleration/deceleration (because the ratio of braking to forward motion by the train is direct, so once the initial jolt hits there is a constant deceleration and thus no force felt by your body [when Acceleration=constant, it can be taken as A=0, and F=MA where A=0 means F=0]). In this respect, spacing the brake fins out may actually increase the need for the OTSRs, because you'd actually be constantly accelerating/decelerating as you hit each strip of brakes, instead of the single, initial jolt the continuous strip gives.
I don't believe no one's picked you up on this bit. It's almost totally incorrect.
Yes, I do agree that braking in jerky motions will be more uncomfortable for the rider, but that's for a different reason.
You said, when acceleration = constant, a=0. There is a big different between constant and nought. 1 million is a constant, 0 is 0.
Acceleration is the rate of change of speed over time. If acceleration is 0, there is a constant (but not necessarily 0) value of speed, and a 0 value of acceleration.
What you are talking about is change in acceleration. If change in acceleration = 0, then acceleration will be constant, but not necessarily 0.
And since acceleration is constant, and in the case of brakes, not 0, then there's always some acceleration, so there's always force until you have reached a constant speed, whereupon the forces will be in equilibrium (but not 0, because you still have upthrust counterbalancing gravity).
Basically, constants are not always 0. Sorry if I sounded patronizing by taking so long over it, it just annoyed the future mechanical engineer in me
I do agree though, that a change in acceleration can make it even more uncomfortable, because each time there is a change, your body has to tense to cope with the new level of acceleration.
-------------------------------------------------------
...onto the topic of why I don't like the OTSR's
Basically, I'd prefer corkscrew's restraints to intamin's. The foam shoulder straps cut into my neck on rita (the only ride I've been on with them on) which made the roughness feel really bad. I have to wrench the foam away from my neck each time I go on that, and it's because there's a space between my neck and the foam, allowing my head to rattle around more between it. Also, the lap bar component is completely flat, and somehow manages to kill almost any sensation of airtime I get from the hills on rita.
And I even thought of some other solutions (apart from replacing them with corkscrew's restraints!
1) Impurify the magnets - basically what everyone else has said, decrease the amount of anti magnetic material in the brakes so that there is not so much force in braking.
2) A different type of harness, like 'under the shoulder', so around your torso, would stop your chest flying forwards but not restrict your arms or head.
3) A sloped brake run. This is already seen a tiny bit on rita, but is angled downwards, so that the train will not stop on the track or roll backwards. For the start of the brake run, use brakes positioned in an upwards slope. The advantage is that a 2g deceleration at horizontal, would become a (2-1) 1g deceleration at vertical, or in between, at an angle x, 2g - g sin x. So less force felt, for the same amount of deceleration, and then once the train has crested the brake hill, use slower brakes to bring it to a stop. Sort of like an exaggerated version of kingda ka's brakes, with more of the brake on the up section.
Wow, long post.
Just before I leave it, there's always one question that's been bugging me - Do parks use the electrical current generated from the ant magnetic brakes to help launch the next ride? If not why not. They could save so much energy and power, as launch coasters are pretty power consuming.
