Railroad Layouts

[Asero]

Looks pretty neat! Going to try them out tonight...

[Neotix]

Looks pretty but is not efficient.
First. It need more space than normal round cross because of space between rails.
Second. You need more resources.
Third. Only one train can cross it at once.

While ago I designed round cross with signals between.


Entire round cross is divided on 8 segments and max 4 trains can pass through at once.

[Cdr.MaS]

Looks pretty but is not efficient.

it's a game, one is not forced to be the most efficent
no offense

[Neotix]

Not taken.
Of course that it's a game and I didn't force anyone. If you want to use it, use it, if you don't want than don't. I just commented about The Lone Wolfling's design, nothing less, nothing more.

[starxplor]

I use the small 4-way circle, and occasionally this modification for high-traffic areas:

High-traffic

(And/or including straight sections too.)

Note that you don't need large parts of the circle if trains won't be turning around.

Just make a blueprint of this and paste all over the open space and it will look like one of those old spirograph drawings(also doable with a compass alone).

[ssilk]

Entire round cross is divided on 8 segments and max 4 trains can pass through at once.

I tried out a couple of those layouts, also exactly this. They have a good chance to go into deadlock. To avoid this, the whole crossing needs to be locked.

In other words: the signals in this circle are a problem. See down for a bit more explanation. To stop this chance of being locked, the signals in the circle must be removed. That won't any longer let pass multiple trains at once, of course. And then the first layout makes suddenly sense, cause the train has shorter ways inside the crossing, and the lock is then shorter.
There is also a good chance to not go into deadlock for the whole game. It depends on so many factors, especially train lengths.

See also https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... ock#p54689

[Neotix]

You're right ssilk. With long trains and with high traffic density it can cause deadlock. Everything depend on what you want to build, how many and how long trains you want to use, how dense the network is, how many crossroads you have, how they're connected etc. Sometimes round cross is not enough or it's more than enough. Thats why that game is so awesome because there is no only one solution for anything.

[DerivePi]

https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... 5408&start - repost

Some of my "rules of thumb" regarding trains:
- Pick a rotation and stick with it. Either run trains counterclockwise on loops (the right way ) or clockwise. When you lay down 2-lane tracks, the signals will all be to the outside (or inside).
- Every decision point should have a signal before it. Ie when a track splits, provide a signal just before the split. If desired, provide another set of signals a full train length after, on both branches.
- For multi-directional circles, let trains own the circle until they leave it. https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =18&t=5434 for further discussion and speculation.
- For multi-lane tracks, pick a line of demarcation and put a signal at each track on that line. For instance, if you have 4 lanes of tracks, provide at least 4 signals (8 if you allow trains to travel in both directions).
- When you have multiple tracks, don't allow trains to travel in both directions.
- Leave space for signals. Especially at spots where space is limited.

[The Lone Wolfling]

There is, in fact, a reason for going beyond the standard circular intersection.

A standard circular intersection has a rather low throughput, and also makes trains do many more turns than is necessary, slowing them down further. This is also the case with your design, Neotix. Look at a train going straight, for example. It'll have to make 4 turns, whereas it doesn't actually need to make any.

Also, Neotix, your design is / will be prone to deadlocks with multiple trains. (Almost) any loop with multiple signal sections will be, which is why we don't do that. And the reason I don't put tracks right beside each other like that is because it becomes very annoying to a) try to put signals in, and b) to run belts / etc across the tracks. (Underground belts stretch 4 underground, which leaves you no leeway in that design)

The below is my standard high-traffic design. (You can compact it slightly if you don't mind trains not being able to turn around. Ditto, you can move the center turns as needed.)

OK.png (508.32 KiB) Viewed 16268 times

[immibis]

Both of your (OP's) intersections look over-complicated, but that is what makes them look awesome

[iklarazu]

If only there were bridges or underground tracks like in TTD

[Xenomorph]

If only there were bridges or underground tracks like in TTD

If they are hills or even mountains in the game, tunnels for the railroad are usefull.

But if you want a underground track like the underground belt it's not practicable, because you can't lower the tracklevel in a short way.
Real trains can handle a gradient of 4%, that means 4m up or down needs a distance of 100m. And 4m aren't enought depth, I think you need 12m, that requires two 300m sections for the chance of the tracklevel.

With 600m traintrack you should find a way around the barrier and maybe you don't need all the 600m tracks.


Bridges would be nice.

[katyal]

@xenomorph: devs could also subtly alter the sprites for trains and tracks so that the rails resemble the rails of a rollercoaster...then gradient wouldn't matter. Factorio already asks us to suspend disbelief over much less believable things than underground trains.

[Deadly-Bagel]

I use a three-way junction:

Junction

This design has never deadlocked on me, on over five games. My current game is rather train-heavy too and I've had some pretty poorly designed outposts from the early game with trains queueing over these junctions and they handled it fine. There are some situations a four-way may be necessary but most of the time I'd recommend this layout. It's solid, efficient, and you can whack another one down on the power pole next to it facing the other direction to give you a sort-of four way junction.I generally end up making a big square with various branches off it.

I'll give a shout out to Descryant for the layout of the rails, though I've heavily modified the signals.

As long as I stick to the power poles, using them as a sort of yard stick, I end up with an accurate grid so if I loop the rail around my base or a large body of water or something it will always meet up on the other side.