rec.autos.simulators

by **Steve Smit** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:51:00

...and that still leaves unanswered the musical question: Which roadies are
counterclockwise, other than Laguna? Badone, Norisring, Roadone, Sandown,
Steel, Surfers, and ????

> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:35:36 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> >Wow, Jason, I did not know that (Ed McMahon voice).

> >I gather that track_dir = 0 indicates roadies w. pre***ly
*righthand*
> >turns (as most are), but that = 1 is for tracks like Laguna that are run
> >counterclockwise. Would that mean = 1 would put harder tires on the
right
> >side of the car?

> This is from the readme for the patch. I don't understand the last
> paragraph, as clearly there is more to it than simply controlling the
> spotter behavior.

> -----
> TRACK DIRECTION SETTING

> There's a new line which can be added the TRACK.INI near where you
> specify chassis and track types, called "track_dir". A setting of "1"
> means the track turns left or counter-clockwise only, so the normal
> "inside=left" and "outside=right" spotter is used, and tires are
> mounted on the car for turning left. A setting of "-1" means it's a
> right or clockwise track, so a reversed "outside=left" and
> "inside=right" spotter is used, and the tires are mounted on opposite
> sides than a left track. A setting of "0" means the track turns both
> left and right, so the spotter will only refer to "left" and "right"
> instead of "inside" and "outside", and only "outside" tires are
> mounted on the car so it can turn in both directions equally.

> Note that by default the game assumes a track is a left-hand oval, so
> for most tracks this setting will be absent. Additionally using
> "track_type=5" to specify a road course automatically turns on the
> "left/right" spotter behavior, so you should only need to use the
> "track_dir=0" if you had a left/right track that you did not want to
> be counted as a road course (i.e. single-file restarts only, road
> course Sierra.com ratings, etc.).
> -----

> Jason

by **Haqsa** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:10:33

Is it possible this is due to crown in the road? If you run down the
straight at LeMans on the left side of the track do you see different RF
temps than when running down the right side of the straight?

by **Haqsa** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:12:35

The way I read it you want a 1 for tracks that turn *exclusively* left, a -1
for tracks that turn *exclusively* right, and a 0 for any track that turns
both ways. IOW all roadies should be set to 0.

by **Steve Smit** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:17:18

I ran some tests at Badone, which, IMO, puts the most stress on the RF tire
of any road circuit. I left the setup (which, admittedly, has a lot of
weight bias, wedge, jacking, etc, 'cuz of the extreme nature of the circuit)
alone, and only changed the track_dir value from 1 (which it's supposed to
be, since it's a counterclockwise circuit, kinda like a roller coaster ver.
of the Norisring) to -1 and back again. With it set to -1, the diff betw.
the LF and RF temps was *less* than when it was set to 1, which is screwy,
that is, the opposite of what it should be...theoretically.

Also tried the same test at Le Mans (where the setup values are far less
extreme), but the results were inconclusive, it part because Mulsanne is
like I-10 across Arizona (the tires should be cooling off here), and in part
because there is only one left turn (why do you think it's called
"Indianapolis"?). Like Ron, I was annoyed to see the RF heating up faster
than the LF on the Mulsanne straight (which is also screwy), no matter which
way the track_dir number was, but I noted that, either way, the tire temps
were more-or-less even L to R and F to R at the end of the long righthander
under the Dunlop bridge, which is where I want my setup to be. (Also
more-or-less equalized exiting the Esses.) IOW, it may be irritatingly
illogical to have an unpovoked temp diff on the straight, but it really
doesn't matter as long as it's even where it counts - in the majority of the
turns (e.g., lefts at Laguna, etc., and rights at the Sarthe, etc.).

I was too busy watching the tire temps to try for fast laps, but I somehow
doubt that changing the track_dir value from -1 to 1 or 0 makes that much
difference. I may experiment further here....

> > You *do* have the patch, doncha? It makes a big difference to tire
> temps,
> > both as to the dynamics (how quickly it heats up) and the max
temp...and,
> of
> > course, the accuracy.

> Hi Steve,

> Yeah, I have the latest patch installed.
> Like I said earlier, it can be dialled out, but to do so, it requires
> un-realistic settings to achieve even temp readings across the four
wheels.
> I shouldn't have to compromise the handling and chassis response to reduce
> the tire heat build-up on the RF.
> This is definitely a problem with the physics engine and one I think needs
> to be addressed before the roadies can be taken serious in NR2003.
> Just try a trip down Le Mans, or any other long straight on a road
circuit,
> the RF will heat up, even if no lateral weight transfer is happening, so
> something ain't quite right..
> I even tried 0.00 settings of toe, in case there was a flaw in the
> calculations on the RF when applied to toe settings (not even sure if heat
> build-up due to excessive toe settings is modelled in NR2003), but no
dice.
> A trip down Le Mans straight will soon show a 15-20 degree higher RF tire
> heat reading than the LF. That's using a neutral setting.
> If I really wanted to dial most of it out, I can achieve a reasonable
> success rate using wedge, suspension settings and tire pressure changes,
> but that is just hiding the fact there is something wrong with the physics
> engine in the calculation of tire heat build-up on the RF. It also
> compromises the chassis response when we need to adjust the settings to
> un-real specs just to achieve even tire temps on a road circuit like Le
> Mans, where the LF should actually get hotter than the RF, not the other
> way around. :)

> Cheers,
> Ron

by **Matthew Jessic** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:07:25

> ...and that still leaves unanswered the musical question: Which roadies are
> counterclockwise, other than Laguna? Badone, Norisring, Roadone, Sandown,
> Steel, Surfers, and ????

Oval-ish road courses like Pikes Peak, Las Vegas, Texas Motor Speedway,
New Hampshire...

by **Ron Ayto** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 19:06:30

Hi Haqsau,

Makes no difference to the temps wherever you drive on the track, left,
right, normal track direction or reversed track direction.
I thought about camber thrust related problems, including road crown and
toe etc, but it is still the same regardless.
Ah well, i'm sure someone will come up with a fix for the road circuits,
as it's a bit of a bummer having the RF act like it's riding on a lava
flow.. :)

Cheers,
Ron

by **Eric Leblan** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:17:19

Each track you plan on running pta needs to be appropriatly ajusted to the
pta physics.

For Evans, perfections only exist in dreams

EL

by **Steve Smit** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:57:32

Um, by my reckoning, those you mention are ALL ovals (unless you meant the
PP *hillclimb*).

> > ...and that still leaves unanswered the musical question: Which roadies
are
> > counterclockwise, other than Laguna? Badone, Norisring, Roadone,
Sandown,
> > Steel, Surfers, and ????

> Oval-ish road courses like Pikes Peak, Las Vegas, Texas Motor Speedway,
> New Hampshire...

by **Steve Smit** » Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:00:14

Okay, back to the old drawing board...er, text editor.

> The way I read it you want a 1 for tracks that turn *exclusively* left,
a -1
> for tracks that turn *exclusively* right, and a 0 for any track that turns
> both ways. IOW all roadies should be set to 0.

> > This is more complicated than I thought. Now yer saying there are *3*
> > settings: 0, for a track like the Nurburgring, -1 (w. a minus sign) for
a
> > clockwise track like most roadies, and 1 (no plus sign) for
> counterclockwise
> > roadies like Badone with a preponderance of left turns. Izzat correct?

> > Further, I don't understand what the readme means by "outside" tires.
Is
> > this a compound issue (logically, harder tires would be on the outside)
or
> a
> > stagger issue (in the RW, slightly larger-dia. tires would be mounted on
> the
> > RR for ovals)? Or what? I'm confused....

by **J.D. Elli** » Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:02:04

Think infield road course, a la Daytona.

-jde

by **Steve Smit** » Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:48:38

Beneath contempt. Basically a high-banked oval with a gymkhana layout in the
parking lot.

> > Um, by my reckoning, those you mention are ALL ovals (unless you meant
the
> > PP *hillclimb*).

> Think infield road course, a la Daytona.

> -jde

by **Haqsa** » Thu, 01 Jan 2004 06:04:23

Here's a section of the FAQ for TPTCC
(http://www.theuspits.com/sims/nascar_racing/tptcc-faq.html) that may be
relevant:

Q. How can I make a track "TPTCC compatible"?
A. Here are the lines to add to your track.ini. NOTE: Since TPTCC is in it's
early stages, be aware that the AI values may need to be modified. If you
think something needs to be changed, let us know, and tell us why.

[ track_pta ]
track_tire_heat = 0.95
track_tire_wear = 1.20
track_tire_wear_loss = 0.10
track_tire_wear_exp = 1.05
track_asphalt_grip = 1.00
track_concrete_grip = 1.05
This is for the AI track records

[ pta ]
record_lap_time = 52.783
record_holder = Boris Said
This is for the AI

[ ai_track_pta ]
ai_accel_modifier = 1.08
ai_decel_modifier = 0.88
ai_fuel_use = 1.00
ai_grip_modifier = 1.00
ai_drag_modifier = 0.88
ai_qual_modifier = 1.30
ai_tire_wear_left = 0.59
ai_tire_wear_right = 0.61

Note that they made tire wear different for left and right.

by **Matthew Jessic** » Thu, 01 Jan 2004 11:20:25

> Um, by my reckoning, those you mention are ALL ovals (unless you meant the
> PP *hillclimb*).
>>Oval-ish road courses like Pikes Peak, Las Vegas, Texas Motor Speedway,
>>New Hampshire...

They all feature infield road courses (or did at one time).

by **Steve Smit** » Fri, 02 Jan 2004 23:09:30

Lemme put it this way: I'd rather run a race in an underground parking
garage (or a street race in Chernobyl) than any "infield" circuit ever
conceived.

> > Um, by my reckoning, those you mention are ALL ovals (unless you meant
the
> > PP *hillclimb*).

> >>Oval-ish road courses like Pikes Peak, Las Vegas, Texas Motor Speedway,
> >>New Hampshire...

> They all feature infield road courses (or did at one time).

by **Steve Smit** » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:13:39

Or, to paraphrase Rusty Wallace, I wouldn't get out of an electric chair to
race on an infield circuit.

> Lemme put it this way: I'd rather run a race in an underground parking
> garage (or a street race in Chernobyl) than any "infield" circuit ever
> conceived.

> > > Um, by my reckoning, those you mention are ALL ovals (unless you meant
> the
> > > PP *hillclimb*).

> > >>Oval-ish road courses like Pikes Peak, Las Vegas, Texas Motor
Speedway,
> > >>New Hampshire...

> > They all feature infield road courses (or did at one time).

rec.autos.simulators

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?

NR2003 TA Physics Flawed ?