rec.autos.simulators

I woke up this morning with thoughts of racing SCGT in my head - please
read on ;-)  Then I started to think about how I domintate the AI in the
wet :-(  This turned me to thinking about how to program a better AI.
As we all know, no current AI comes close to the thrill of racing real
humans so I started thinking about how to program my own object oriented
driving/racing simulation using C++.

I know I can't create a super visual and physics model by myself, but
know how to organize projects to allow for others to fill in the gaps
(like Linux :)  For example, I would not start with the graphics.  I
have a BSP display program that would get the job done (from an arcade
view) but someone out there could create a better display routine than
me.  Someone wants OpenGL.. well program it :)  I would build a simple
physics model .. like a go-kart and use simplistic coding for the
objects but allow for the ultimate F1 cars to be simulated as the
objects got more complex.

1. Air
Properties: Temperature, Density

2. Throttle
Properites: Position

3. Fuel
Properties: Octane (ability to make HP), How full the tank is

4. Chassis
Properties: Weight.  Areodynamics would affect weight too.

5. Engine
Inputs: Fuel.Octane, Air.Temperature, Throttle.Position, Chassis.Weight
Outputs: RPMs, Fuel consumption to Fuel object

Properties: RPMs returned through the output shaft based on the
characteristics of the engine.  For my simple model I could use an
electric engine which can provide 100% HP from a standstill.

6. Transmission
Inputs: Engine.RPM
Output: RPM

Properties: Using gears the input RPM will be converted to some output
RPM.  For my simple model, only 1 gear will be used.

7. RearDifferential
Inputs: Transmission.RPM, RearLeftWheel.Grip, RearRightWheel.Grip
Output: RearLeftAxle.RPM, RearRightAxle.RPM

Properties: Converts the input RPMs to appropriate percentage of Left
and Right Axle RPMs.  My simple model will have a locked differential
and only reduce the output RPMs like a gear.

8. FrontLeftTire
Input: FrontLeftSuspension.Camber, FrontLeftSuspension.ToeIn,
Chassis.FrontLeftWeight, Road.Angle, Road.Temp, Road.Friction,
Road.SurfaceType, Road.SurfaceDepth
Output: Traction

Properties: The tire will produce a percentage of perfect traction to
the physics engine.  The road surface could be wet, but with a depth of
5mm to represent a puddle.  If you have slicks on, you will hydro-plane.

9. ... more more more

With the interaction between the objects defined (inputs and outputs), I
can skip some sections to allow for future growth.  For example, a
go-kart has no suspension, nor differential so those can be done later.
This will allow for unlimited modeling of cars, trucks, motorbikes?

I would create a skidpad to test the physics, but with editors for roads
and cars.  You will see more than the 155 new cars like SCGT has or
10-100 tracks that GP2 has.

So am I insane for thinking about this?  Hehe.

Jason.          
--
Jason Monds       "Insert Witty Remark Here"        theCLAPPER in Kali
http://www.racesimcentral.net/;   - My combined gas/brake
setups
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
(Remove 'no spork' when replying)

Hi Jason,

Interesting stuff.

I agree, graphics aren't important at first. However, when you study
the file format of the tracks (and cars) in GPL, you'll see they went
through a lot of trouble to optimize the tracks in favor of graphics
(read framerate). You also should consider the synchronisation between
the physics rate and the graphics. And, don't forget that  the
graphics are the most important feedback for the player.

Is a good idea to start learning, but I believe you should start with
a proper foundation. Physics don't change, you don't have to relearn
that piece of code, unlike graphics/sound/GUI/controller code.
You need a solid physics base, a nice graphics/sound engine, and tools
so others could make the tracks and cars. You could consider a series
designer, where you create the rules for the cars/tracks.

Then people could design their own car, according to the rules. They
should make a compromise between speed and reliability, and the
program should use this parameters (and driver behaviour) to determine
when there is a failure. You can even go so far that they need to
build their own engine. A simulation in a simulation....

<Snip Object & Properties>

Yes, those object and stuff make sense, but it is far from complete,
and the order seems random.

One problem when you start a project as ambitious as this, is that
there is no room for optimalisation. Calculating the contact path of a
tire on a road surface is something different compared to a tire <>
dirt surface. Computers aren't fast enough to build one generic
algoritme for it.

Heck, modelling modern F1 with the same standard as GPL would
possible be too much for the fastest computers available  today.
(Consumer computers, that is. A Cray might do it <g>)

Anyway, I am interested, and would like to be a part of it....

Of course you are, so am I <g>

Remco

available called RARS (Robot Auto Racing Simulator). (see below).

If you have access to a C++ compiler, you can put together
the low level AI routines an create an AI to compete.
It's fun to play with. The graphics included (at the time I looked at it)
were an overhead shot of fairly complex tracks showing the car
positions as the race progressed.

The following is a somewhat dated note from the

giving a basic description and URLs for more info.
A digest of the list goes out several times a month.

Subject:
        RARS Race results for 26-9
   Date:
        Sun, 26 Sep 1999 14:51:02 +0100
   From:

     To:

RARS Race Report
     & News About Upcoming Races
       September 26th, 1999

RARS is the Robot Auto Racing Simulation, a competition for
programmers and an on-going challenge for practicioners of Artificial
Intelligence and real-time adaptive optimal control.  It consists of
a simulation of the physics of cars racing on a track, a graphic
display of the race, and a separate control program (robot "driver")
for each car.  All RARS software and activities are free and open to
the public.  It runs on DOS, Windows, OS/2, UNIX, Linux, and several
other platforms.  For more information e-mail to

http://www.ebc.ee/~mremm/rars/rars.htm and
http://home.planetinternet.be/~pascutto/index.html

Also, TD5 and other simplified games are so _unfair_. The AI must get a
chance to win, so what do they do? The police can stop you, but not the
AI. If the AI touches your car, you crash, if you touch the AI, you
crash... All cars handle exactly the same, only with different
acceleration.

My recipes for a good simulation:
1) An _exact_ physical model, as I described above. It would need far
less CPU power than the 3d landscaping.
2) Fair rules. The AI must respond exactly as you do. It must see
exactly what you can see. It must respond to the same rules. Police can
stop anyone, all cars have the stability dictated by their respective
physical models. A Shelby Cobra would handle better than a hemi 'Cuda,
of course, but you would know that when you chose your car.
3) Smarter AI. More reasoning power to the "driver". "He" must be able
to plan according to what he sees of the road. Lack of "brain" power by
the AI should never be compensated by cheating the rules against the
human.
4) Analog control, not keyboard. In TD5 you touch a button on the
keyboard and the steering goes fully to the direction you touched. The
joystick, despite being an analog device, handles exactly the same way
in TD5. What is needed is using the analog capacity of the joystick for
steering and throttle.

The go-kart idea is a stepping stone (using the least number of
"working" objects) so I can feel like I accomplished something.  Once I
have a basic framework of how the objects communicate.  People who
really know suspensions should be able to fix my less than perfect
suspension-object algorithms.  I really don't know all the physics stuff
but will code for weight transfer communication and such.

I was thinking on a triangle driven graphics engine, you can make the
triangle as small/big as you want.  For example SODA had relatively
large triangles, in this graphics engine you could make then small to
produce.. bumps :)  I have a working test bed for this triangle engine,
but you can't get too close to objects or it clips incorrectly.

Sound.. You mean "vrooom vroom" spoken by me won't cut it?  Hehe.  This
is where someone with sound knowledge will be helpful.  Hopefully once
they see the package they will be glad to put sound in.

This is the easy part :)

Now that would be cool.  

You bet, I just spent 10 mins to slap in on electronic paper.  I did say
I just woke up with this idea :D

Then we can have a "contact patch" object to fake this for us.  As long
as we have objects talking to one another any object can be upgraded
when the Desktop Cray is sold :)

A tool could be made so people could customize how a "new" compound
grips the road, ice, dirt, mud.

That's why go-karts is an easy start.. people like results.  Besides
once the go-kart version is done.  The multiplay can get started.  Even
with a 80% GPL engine to work with I think we could all get the driving
sims we want.  I read LeadFoot is going to be more arcade than DTR :-(
Sims are not popular for sales so we can make our own :)

Sounds great.  Email me if you have a speciality.  Maybe you can help
review my object communications?  A solid foundation will make this
soar!

--
Jason Monds       "Insert Witty Remark Here"        theCLAPPER in Kali
http://members.home.net/gpl.mondsj/gpl     - My combined gas/brake
setups
http://members.home.net/stuff.mondsj/n3prc - N3 Pro Racing Club
(Remove 'no spork' when replying)

--
Jason Monds       "Insert Witty Remark Here"        theCLAPPER in Kali
http://members.home.net/gpl.mondsj/gpl     - My combined gas/brake
setups
http://members.home.net/stuff.mondsj/n3prc - N3 Pro Racing Club
(Remove 'no spork' when replying)

Thanks,
Jason.

Jason.

I know other "free racing" projects exist, but I'm not sure what status they
are in.  I'm a good project manager and get the IS programming done around
here so I wanted to start a project that would be a challenge yet fun!  The
physics would not be my strong point, but if I programmed the object
communcations and someone else, like yourself, coded particular physics then
we would have a great sim engine to build any racing game... TD6 or ICR3 or
SODA2.

I will put you on a contact list.
Thanks,
Jason.

--
Jason Monds
http://members.home.net/gpl.mondsj/gpl - For my combined gas/brake setups
http://members.home.net/stuff.mondsj/n3prc - Nascar3 Pro Racing Club
(Please remove 'no extra spork' when replying)

And to me, AI is very important. That would be one of the most fun parts.
Coding truly realistic AI. With very good network code as well for those of you
with fast connections and those of us that hope to get faster connections in
the future. But even with good multiplayer code, playing around with car files
and driver lists like in N3/NL is just plain fun. AI shouldn't be neglected.
Even Carmack wants to do a more single-player-focused game next time around. :)

Jason, if you think you can do it, then do it! We need all the true sims we can
get our hands on especially considering how many companies are publishing
arcade games marketed as sims.

--
-----------------------------------
Morgan Vincent Wooten

http://members.tripod.com/~morganv/
-----------------------------------

Mike

I think I can :-D

I really don't have all the physics knowledge, but I have a basic graphics engine
and the desire to build a car model.  With an open source project like this, once
the foundation is there I'm sure people who know the physics will contribute.
Understand that table driven routines may have to be used for certain objects until
we get desktop Crays :-)

Aside: When driving into work, I was envisioning the "objects" in my real car
interacting.. LOL  This afternoon I was thinking on the layout of a text display
for all the inputs/outputs of the various objects in the simulation.  Oh man, I'm
gonna lose sleep ;-)

Thanks,
Jason.