Lateral G's

What manufactures use lateral g forces on their coasters and which ones do not?

Do: All of them
Don't: None of them

Even bobsleds have lats

I guess my question is more about when to use the laterals in an FVD program like Newton 2 or FVD++.

Not at all a reference to Tyler's post, but as a preemptive strike, I suggest being careful who you listen to...best to try things out and see what works for you in relation to what you see on real rides. I guarantee you people will say completely false things here, so don't take everything as being concrete and accurate.

^^Haha well said.

I guess I would say that B&M and Intamin try to avoid them whilst Gravity Group and GCI woodies incorporate them intentionally.

[mkingy]

Not that simple cause Intamin make woodies too. I'd argue generally that anything with OTSR should aim to limit laterals because otherwise you're exerting force on peoples necks which isn't comfortable. Lapbars allow laterals but people like B&M as you mentioned generally limit laterals through design of their hypers.

I've always been interested in the idea that the ride is designed for the middle cars and such if the first cars are entering into the corner slower (due to it being straight after a drop) you would apply deliberate laterals so that the middle cars experience no laterals and the rear cars (who have gained all the speed from the drop) experience opposite laterals to the first cars. I'm not especially sure its true though it's just always been a theory I've had.

tiepilot35 wrote:

^^Haha well said.

I guess I would say that B&M and Intamin try to avoid them

Intamin has been known to pull up to 1.5 intentionally. Any turning element is bound to have lateral forces, but B&M is one of the few that tries to avoid them at all costs.

Well that's naturally how it turns out, mkingy. The perfect zero lateral constant floater area is exactly in the center of gravity of the train. Everywhere else experiences a little more laterals, a little bit more airtime, etc. You cannot eliminate laterals on the whole train at all times.

[mkingy]

I understand that you will always have laterals and that wasn't what I was meant lol! My point/query was that designing the ride for a car nearer the front to be the perfect 0 lat experience would give a more intense back seat ride - but is this something that a real designer would do?

I would disagree, you can get 0 lats if you do it right. its all in the shaping. there may be a tiny variation but you should be able to keep the front car and back car within .1G of each other.

plantoris wrote:

I would disagree, you can get 0 lats if you do it right. its all in the shaping. there may be a tiny variation but you should be able to keep the front car and back car within .1G of each other.

Simply not possible unless your coaster is basically flat with no hills/drops.

we are talking about lateral G's

plantoris wrote:

we are talking about lateral G's

I know. But with hills comes a change in velocity so the front/back of the train are always going to go through specific points in an element at significantly different speeds and hence different forces on the riders. 0.1G really isn't much of a difference so unless all of your elements and transitions are massively drawn out with low forces (which makes for a boring coaster), there will be fair difference between the front and back cars.

[TTD03]

Intamin uses them and I am so grateful for that, this is why they are my favorite manufacturers/designers.