Factorio Forums

I like your design on allowing the trains to pull out of the station and onto the correct side of the double tracks. I will definitely be stealing this for my base. It's because of the double train engines right?


This is my 4-way intersection with Driving on the left. http://puu.sh/i6QBs/24afb54ec0.jpg
I copied this from someone on youtube/reddit (can't remember where)
The important thing is when you place your outbound curves its not joining with the circle, and you need to put a straight track to join it.
Otherwise any left hand turns will do a 1.25 loops (the curves overlap and prevent a left hand turn.)

Read, what I've written about crossings: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... cks#p73635
That is also written into the wiki (also by me, to make clear that this is currently just my opinion): https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... /Deadlocks

ssilk wrote: That is also written into the wiki (also by me, to make clear that this is currently just my opinion): https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... /Deadlocks

It is my opinion aswell. And as far as I've tested it it is correct. That is why i have trouble beliving that junction doesnt deadlock. Just imagine 2 trains coming at the same time from the right angles. They quicky block each other. Now if there were 3 or more trains that would happen much faster.

ssilk wrote:Read, what I've written about crossings: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... cks#p73635
That is also written into the wiki (also by me, to make clear that this is currently just my opinion): https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... /Deadlocks

Those better Crossings are good and will be even better with the upcoming chain-signals. I can wait to use them, because i'm playing OpenTTD very much and already have an idea for some crossings.

I'll post them here, when the signals are in the trunk.

And yea, I also hate these circle-crossings. Everybody is using them and they're just inefficient.

Karosieben wrote:And yea, I also hate these circle-crossings. Everybody is using them and they're just inefficient.

That was my reason to propose the 3-way solution.

I played that a while with really big train networks and all in all the crossings with them look also much more natural.
So I'm keen on seeing more clever solutions for train crossings.

Here is how I split one third of the items of a belt. This back-feeding probably allows more odd proportions.

But don't use splitters too much. Overproduce! Backed up belts are better for sanity than distributing scarcity.

Wow, this is genius.

tobsimon wrote:Here is how I split one third of the items of a belt.

3-way-splitting-annotation.png

This back-feeding probably allows more odd proportions.

But don't use splitters too much. Overproduce! Backed up belts are better for sanity than distributing scarcity.

Thats quite a smooth split. Not sure how much would be on the belts as you're splitting after a bend.

Here's a version I saw on reddit some time ago.


It allows a perfect 1/3 split (well technically 0.3333333~ for each output)

No bends mean you can fully load an express/fast belt in.
By adding a splitter on the input, you can have even more throughput

You 2->3 splitter bad! Look at bottleneck after first splitter.

Udav wrote:You 2->3 splitter bad! Look at bottleneck after first splitter.

Eugh, thats what I get for going online while half asleep. It's meant to be on the other side.

That is also a bottleneck, though smaller. The back-feed has a 2 full belts times 1/3 load. This merged with on full belt in the bottommost splitter, which outputs to one side only, will back up.

Concerning curves, they are on a segment with a 2/3 load. Not sure if this backs up for the inner lane or is just right. I don't really care for the packing loss of curves, all my belts have curves. Also this effect will be gone in the next version.

--[edit]--

After some testing, I found, that the backing up in PiggyWhiskey's last design isn't that bad. If the packing on the incomming belts is not constantly 100% (e.g. some curves beforehand), then it's no problem.

My understanding is the 1/3 and the full lane are split to 2. So it shouldn't be a choke point by the splitter.

On the topic of belts, here's something I came up with that I suppose there's a chance someone else might be interested in. While it is somewhat large and unwieldy due to the extra bits of track needed to cause side-loading, it is smaller than the first two versions I tried. The purpose is to accept items from both sides of the input belt instead of causing one lane to back up while the other empties out, as typically happens with side-loading from a belt with two full lanes, even after a splitter. It would be really nice if you could toggle a belt between a curve and a straight piece instead of having to place more belt next to or behind it to force it to straighten out...

http://imgur.com/MltzQNG

A simple steel smelting setup my friend designed

Tallinu wrote:On the topic of belts, here's something I came up with that I suppose there's a chance someone else might be interested in. While it is somewhat large and unwieldy due to the extra bits of track needed to cause side-loading, it is smaller than the first two versions I tried. The purpose is to accept items from both sides of the input belt instead of causing one lane to back up while the other empties out, as typically happens with side-loading from a belt with two full lanes, even after a splitter.

Drink Me

It would be really nice if you could toggle a belt between a curve and a straight piece instead of having to place more belt next to or behind it to force it to straighten out...

This is a great solution to a problem I have always had, but never really knew how to fix....

This will be making an appearance in my next factory somewhere I'm sure!

Tallinu wrote:On the topic of belts, here's something I came up with that I suppose there's a chance someone else might be interested in. While it is somewhat large and unwieldy due to the extra bits of track needed to cause side-loading, it is smaller than the first two versions I tried. The purpose is to accept items from both sides of the input belt instead of causing one lane to back up while the other empties out, as typically happens with side-loading from a belt with two full lanes, even after a splitter.

Drink Me

It would be really nice if you could toggle a belt between a curve and a straight piece instead of having to place more belt next to or behind it to force it to straighten out...

Slight upgrade (I think....I've been wrong before)

A bit more compact.
Uses a pair of underground belts and an extra splitter.
Also doesn't bounce up before sending the line down allowing streamlining the output that you want/need. Although it is 1 block longer at the bottom, and 1 shorter at the top. (although the entire layout could be pushed down 1 just as easily.

PiggyWhiskey wrote:Slight upgrade (I think....I've been wrong before)

A bit more compact.
Uses a pair of underground belts and an extra splitter.
Also doesn't bounce up before sending the line down allowing streamlining the output that you want/need. Although it is 1 block longer at the bottom, and 1 shorter at the top. (although the entire layout could be pushed down 1 just as easily.

I just tested this. Unfortunately, it doesn't accomplish the goal, at least when the input belt is completely packed. The underground belt is guaranteed to only take input from the left side, but the side-loading belt will also take input from the left side of the input belt due to the items on the belt blocking the right side. Maybe that issue doesn't show up with just two fast inserters unloading onto each side of the belt? This one seems to give one side of the belt priority over the other, just like a simple side-loading arrangement.

When I first tested mine, it seemed to guarantee that both sides of the belt proceeded at equal rates, alternating between taking an item from one side and the other. I just now tried putting different items on different sides, and the result was not a predictable 1 to 1 interleaving, and instead seemed almost random despite the input belt being completely packed. Maybe it behaves differently when constructed in different orientations? Ugh...


On a less frustrating note, here's a nice modular advanced circuit factory that produces exactly enough basic circuits and wire for its needs in a neat, compact fashion, easily tiled with single belts for each input resource. Upgrading to fast or express input belts (carrying sufficiently increased resources) would easily allow two or three of these, chained in a vertical row, to operate at full speed.

http://imgur.com/JCewooG

The loading of plastic and circuits onto the belts at the right could be adjusted to make it even more compact (or allow better chaining), such as moving the fast inserters unloading the circuits to send them up and down instead of right, but then getting the plastic onto the left side of the bottom belt would've been awkward. If your plastic factories were just to the right of this, you could have them load two seperate belts properly instead of splitting one line, which would avoid that. I have four of them a little ways north, which is probably overkill - I haven't calculated their production rate, but it's definitely more than the 3 per second this requires.

Tallinu wrote:On the topic of belts, here's something I came up with that I suppose there's a chance someone else might be interested in. While it is somewhat large and unwieldy due to the extra bits of track needed to cause side-loading, it is smaller than the first two versions I tried. The purpose is to accept items from both sides of the input belt instead of causing one lane to back up while the other empties out, as typically happens with side-loading from a belt with two full lanes, even after a splitter.

Drink Me

It would be really nice if you could toggle a belt between a curve and a straight piece instead of having to place more belt next to or behind it to force it to straighten out...

Gah... it's 1am, and you just totally nerd-sniped me with this one.

On the bright side, I think I managed to shrink it (slightly) without it preferring one side over the other (ignore the superfluous belt with blue circuits):

That is exactly, what is described in the wiki: https://forums.factorio.com/wiki/inde ... s/Priority

If you use two express splitters directly in row it is guaranteed, that the both rows are joined together 50/50. Or you can try, if it works.

SpeedDaemon wrote:

Tallinu wrote:On the topic of belts, here's something I came up with that I suppose there's a chance someone else might be interested in. While it is somewhat large and unwieldy due to the extra bits of track needed to cause side-loading, it is smaller than the first two versions I tried. The purpose is to accept items from both sides of the input belt instead of causing one lane to back up while the other empties out, as typically happens with side-loading from a belt with two full lanes, even after a splitter.

Drink Me

It would be really nice if you could toggle a belt between a curve and a straight piece instead of having to place more belt next to or behind it to force it to straighten out...

Gah... it's 1am, and you just totally nerd-sniped me with this one.

On the bright side, I think I managed to shrink it (slightly) without it preferring one side over the other (ignore the superfluous belt with blue circuits):

Viola

You could shrink it another 1/2 tile in width by using outward pushing underground belts of two different types.