2003 F1 physics released

Please post your comments
It's very important to improve this work!

Is anyone interested to make a 2003 performance pack with me? I have all magic data almost done (cc setup and so on, according to the physics).
I need more detailed data about pit stops and speed traps.

Thank you.

See ya

What sort of data about pit stops? If you need it, I can give you the rough schedule for when stops should be made (2, 3 stops etc)

I just need the laps when each driver made his pit stops in each race. With that info I can edit the magic data and set the pit stop windows.

I have Suzuka data:
(the times are not necessary)

Rubens Barrichello: 28s552 (12), 28s590 (26), 28s425 (40)
Kimi Raikkonen: 30s416 (13), 30s230 (33)
David Coulthard: 28s157 (12), 28s537 (26), 27s104 (41)
Jenson Button: 30s374 (16), 31s624 (33)
Jarno Trulli: 29s224 (11), 30s476 (32)
Takuma Sato: 30s197 (15), 31s563 (32)
Cristiano da Matta: 27s991 (10), 28s294 (24), 27s874 (38)
Michael Schumacher: 41s400 (6), 28s286 (24), 28s786 (37)
Nick Heidfeld: 29s560 (15), 30s119 (33)
Olivier Panis: 28s836 (11), 28s613 (25), 28s125 (39)
Mark Webber: 28s377 (10), 28s998 (22), 29s867 (35)
Ralf Schumacher: 28s666 (14), 27s517 (24), 28s522 (38), 38s255 (41)
Justin Wilson: 29s081 (9), 28s356 (21), 30s688 (34)
Ralph Firman: 40s333 (13), 35s895 (25)
Jos Verstappen: 30s858 (19), 29s803 (37)
Nicolas Kiesa: 38s377 (11), 36s367 (31)
Giancarlo Fisichella: 31s141 (14)
Fernando Alonso: 28s640 (12)
Heinz-Harald Frentzen: 36s905 (9)

Of course I have to deduce a conventional pit stop strategy for the drives who have retired or had troubles and made a lot of pits.

Thanks.

See ya

Here is my 1st attempt at performance editing...

It's the qualify for Melbourne 2003.
I'm using my 2003 physics and a new cc setup (because of the higher BHP).

cc setup:
171 ; fw (20)
169 ; rw (18)
179 ; 1st (28)
185 ; 2nd (34)
191 ; 3rd (40)
197 ; 4th (46)
203 ; 5th (52)
210 ; 6th (59)

Speed trap is accurate (something around 320 km/h)

other changes:
16744 ; tyre wear
9960 ; cc power factor (ace)
10000 ; cc grip factor (ace)
9960 ; cc power factor (semi-pro)
9480 ; cc grip factor (semi-pro)
6 ; sectors to pit in 2 (actualy it is sectors to pit out!)
6 ; rain chance
3724 ; failure chance : suspension
0 ; failure chance : loosewheel
0 ; failure chance : puncture
0 ; failure chance : engine
1862 ; failure chance : transmission
0 ; failure chance : oilleak/waterleak
0 ; failure chance : throttle/brake
1862 ; failure chance : electrics


Performance (generic BHP values and specific "driver" performance for Melbourne's qualify):
obs: Arrows is the 11th team, with Massa and Bernoldi.

Team BHP
Williams BMW 920
Ferrari 916
McLaren Mercedes 912
Renault 888
BAR Honda 880
Toyota 876
Sauber Petronas 860
Jaguar Cosworth 852
Jordan Ford 848
Minardi Cosworth 840
Arrows Cosworth 836


Driver Performance
M Schumacher 16384
R Barrichello 16264
JP Montoya 15888
R Schumacher 15528
D Coulthard 15472
K Raikkonen 15296
J Trulli 15708
F Alonso 15812
N Heidfeld 16328
HH Frentzen 16424
G Fisichella 16020
R Firman 15084
M Webber 15964
A Pizzonia 14808
J Villeneuve 16144
J Button 16016
J Wilson 14832
J Verstappen 14884
O Panis 16248
C da Matta 15636
F Massa 14828
E Bernoldi 14774

I think the results are very nice. The pole position time is around 1:25.8, just like the track record (in 2002 by Barrichello).
My main intention is to change not the original gp3 difficult level and be competitive using the same basic setups that cc cars do.
Also, I want realistic top speeds and acceptable lap times.
I don't care if lap times are not absolutely realistic.
I think I reached what I wanted

Here are some cc setups for other tracks (fw, rw, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6):

Monza 8 6 30 37 44 51 59 68
Indianapolis 14 12 28 34 40 47 55 64
Interlagos 16 14 28 34 40 47 54 61
Suzuka 18 16 28 34 40 47 54 61
Hungaroring 20 20 32 37 42 47 52 57

Speed trap is always accurate (just needs a fine tune with air resistance)

Please fell free to test that performance and give your suggestions!

See ya

Any comments?

Well, I'm working on a generic 2003 performance pack. Physics, md files and the performance.
I dislike specific performance files because it's not funny racing when you already know who is gonna win.

See ya

I had not time to test your figures (still running the 2001 season), but keep on the great work! Now that a lot of performance editor are working for GP4 your commitment is greatly appreciated!!!

BTW I completely agree with you about the specific performances, even if you can do it lesser boring by using comparatevely high range values. My idea is to calculate these ranges for season (the same range value for every driver, according how much consistent he was during the whole season) or for race (different range values for every race and every driver, calculated on the base of his consistence during the last years races in the same location).
I hope I was clear. What do you think about?



Post Edited (10-20-03 14:08)

It's a great idea, but too much hard to do! I'd have to search all results since... since when? 1990?

That's what I am doing:

Best default performance is 16368.
So, pole position and race winner for each race will be always 16368, if they are running with Williams (BMW = 920 bhp, the best engine).
If they are running with other engine (with less power), I have to give more performance, proportional to what they lose with power.

Team BHP
Williams BMW 920
Ferrari 916
McLaren Mercedes 912
Renault 888
BAR Honda 880
Toyota 876
Sauber Petronas 860
Jaguar Cosworth 852
Jordan Ford 848
Minardi Cosworth 840
Arrows Cosworth 836

Inserting these bhp values in gp3edit and giving the same performance for all drivers, I found the "BHP GAP" in %. Of course it's an estimated GAP, but it works fine in the game.

I made some math's in Excel:

Team Code / Team Name / BHP GAP % / BHP GAP Performance / Performance
1 Williams 0,00% 0 16368
2 Ferrari 0,10% 16 16384
3 McLaren 0,19% 31 16399
4 Renault 0,77% 126 16494
5 BAR 0,96% 157 16525
6 Toyota 1,06% 174 16542
7 Sauber 1,45% 237 16605
8 Jaguar 1,64% 268 16636
9 Jordan 1,74% 285 16653
10 Minardi 1,93% 316 16684
11 Arrows 2,03% 332 16700

"BHP GAP Performance" means how much performance I have to add to a team with a worst engine.

Example:

Renault won the Hungarian GP.
Winner have 16368 of performance, but I have to make the Renault more competitive because of its engine. Renault loses something around 0,77% in the engine (gp3edit says it)

With GP3edit I found that I have to increase 126 points of performance to Renault, so the it runs with the same performance of the Williams/920bhp with 16368.

It's hard to explain in English... :/

btw, It's working fine.

If Williams is pole or winner, performance = 16368
If Ferrari is pole or winner, performance = 16384
And so on, like you can see in the table above.

Next step...

This is the data from Melbourne qualify:

Pos. Car # Time GAP %
01º 01 01:27,173 1,0000
02º 02 01:27,418 1,0028
03º 03 01:28,101 1,0106
04º 10 01:28,274 1,0126
05º 20 01:28,288 1,0128
06º 16 01:28,420 1,0143
07º 09 01:28,464 1,0148
08º 17 01:28,682 1,0173
09º 04 01:28,830 1,0190
10º 08 01:28,928 1,0201
11º 05 01:29,105 1,0222
12º 07 01:29,136 1,0225
13º 11 01:29,344 1,0249
14º 14 01:29,367 1,0252
15º 06 01:29,470 1,0263
16º 21 01:29,538 1,0271
17º 12 01:31,242 1,0467
18º 15 01:31,723 1,0522

1,0000 = 0%
1,0028 = 0,28%
etc.

Now I have to search a performance that gives me the correct GAP %.
I did that for Mlbourne qualify and works very very nice.

Melbourne and Sepang's data are already done (qual and race).

When all qual/race performance are done, I'll calculate the average.

Example:

If the best Schumacher's performance is 16384 and the worst is 15384:

Performance = 15884
Range = 1000

Of course it's a weird thing.
Now I have to think how to solve this...

btw, It's my first trial at performance editing.
I have things to learn

See ya

Yes, I see, you want to do just what I was thinking (range per driver and season), but take care: a range of 1000 or something like this seems to be too much, even for an example!!! Little range changes can give very different results in game
...more: the range is added and subtracted from the driver's performances in a way that SDI explained in an old thread of his forum (do a little research if you want). If I well remember, the algorithm is skew, but without too much complications (unless you are a mathematician!), you can roughly divide the 1000 of your example by 2 to obtain a range of ± 500, wich is more acceptable.

Also remeber that if you settle with the physic file a max RPM higher than the GP3 standard one, you has to decrease consequently the BHP settings of every team according to the GP3s virtual engine torque, to obtain the effective correct values (the APE can be of some help in this respect).

Last: if you want I buildt an excel spreadsheet for the performance calculation. I think it isn't still complete (it is long time I don't work on it and I can't remember how far I was gone with its development) but maybe it can be useful. Better: some times ago Matteo Nunziati and Schubert Cardozo did release a very good and complete performance editor, able to calculate both generic and race specific performances on the base of the seasonal results. Give it a try: you'll find it in the utilty section of this site.
It's all for now.

Best regards

the range is added and subtracted from the driver's performances in a way that SDI explained in an old thread of his forum (do a little research if you want).

Ok, I will search this topic!
I did some simple tests and I think it's something like I posted above.
If:
Performance = 16500
Range = 100
The worst performance will be 16450 and the best will be 16550 (half range down and half range up).
I'll search for more info.

---

you can roughly divide the 1000 of your example by 2 to obtain a range of ± 500, wich is more acceptable.

That's exactly what I was thinking some minutes ago! lol
Let's get back to Shumacher's example...

If the best Schumacher's performance is 16384 and the worst is 15384:
Range = 1000

dividing by 2...
Range = 500

If the best must be 16384, the performance must be 16386 - 250 = 16136
It's a acceptable value

---

Also remeber that if you settle with the physic file a max RPM higher than the GP3 standard one, you has to decrease consequently the BHP settings of every team according to the GP3s virtual engine torque, to obtain the effective correct values (the APE can be of some help in this respect).

Yes, GP3APE shows the actual power when you change the RPM. GP3APE help file says that the (best) bhp in the carset must be something around (it meant equal) the human power in the physics file.
I got it right?
btw, F1 engines are reving above 19000 RPM nowadays!!!
If I set RPM higher than 18100 the sound of the engine gets VERY disgusting.
So I think the best thing to do is edit the sounds...
Also, it will not change the fuel consumption.

Well, a little observation about bhp:

At Monza, the highest speed was 369 km/h by Michael's Ferrari, running with a little less rear wing than Williams-BMW.
The "lower" was 345 km/h by Minardi.

To make the Minardi reach top speed of 345 km/h, I had to give it less than 800 bhp!
Is this accurate???
Maybe it's because the top teams have a very very better aerodinamic performance and the aerodinamic drag is lower.

Well, drag is the same for all cars in GP3. So I think there's no problem in giving a poor engine to some teams to reach realistic speeds.
These poor values would simulate the power itself and the aerodinamic drag. But always reaching the right top speeds.

I need too much the speed trap data from Monza!!!

---

Last: if you want I buildt an excel spreadsheet for the performance calculation. I think it isn't still complete (it is long time I don't work on it and I can't remember how far I was gone with its development) but maybe it can be useful. Better: some times ago Matteo Nunziati and Schubert Cardozo did release a very good and complete performance editor, able to calculate both generic and race specific performances on the base of the seasonal results. Give it a try: you'll find it in the utilty section of this site.
It's all for now.

Please send to me your excel file
supersonicgp3@ig.com.br
I downloaded the performance editor, but I couldn't get it to work right
My fault. I think I need some practice with this great tool :P

---

Best regards

Gabriele

Thanks a lot dude!
Guys like you make this forum be the best about GPx!

See ya



Post Edited (10-20-03 22:59)

If you want to make a season performance package for GP3, then it really should include magic data files with proper car setups, fuel consumption, car failure, track grip, etc., for all of the 2003 tracks, as well as a performance file and a physics file.

Incidentally, in your physics file, the downforce for the cars really should be considerably higher than the original default GP3 one.

(I know that I used that for all of the years of my old GP3 performance pack, but that was quite some time ago, and I am currently working on a new version that will have considerably different physics in this regard for all years. The downforce for my 2002 cars will be about 2200, for example. This is more than compensated by the track grip being an average of about 15400 for all tracks in all years, in comparison with the original average GP3 track grip of about 16500, which was way too high and resulted in those outrageously unrealistic 1:44 1998 Spa-Francorchamps laptimes, for example.)

If you want to make a season performance package for GP3, then it really should include magic data files with proper car setups, fuel consumption, car failure, track grip, etc., for all of the 2003 tracks, as well as a performance file and a physics file.

Yes, cc setup are already done (wings and gear ratios). The wings are set to make the car reach acceptable top speeds. At Monza, I chose 8/6 (front/rear).
Other that I remember now:
Melbourne: 20/18
Interlagos: 16/14
Suzuka: 18/16
Indy and Montreal: 14/12
Monaco and Hungaroring: 20/20 of course.

The 6th gear don't reach the limit so the cars can take advantage of the void (is this the right word?).

---

Incidentally, in your physics file, the downforce for the cars really should be considerably higher than the original default GP3 one.

I made another physics file (not released) that has 2250 kg of downforce. It makes the car feel very nice, but too much fast at corners (and crazy lap times).

But...
No one knows exaclty how much downforce a F1 car can generate.
No one knows exaclty if the downforce coefficient in gp3 is taken with 20/20 wings or 1/1 wings, at 300 km/h, or 320 km/h, or whatever.

And all articles I read never says that the downforce is higher than 2000 kg.
The highest I found was 1600 kg in a Trulli's interview.

So I get lost and chose to mantain the default downforce.

btw, I completely agree with you that downforce is higher nowadays. It's obvious

I'll try to get back to the 2250 kg and reduce the grip. Let's see how the car handles.

Thanks a lot for your help!

Oh, what do you think about the tires of my physics?

See ya



Post Edited (10-21-03 13:23)

"Oh, what do you think about the tires of my physics? "

They're very close to what I have for the 2002 tyres in my new revised 1995-2002 performance package that I am working on.

lol
I tried to simulate front tires with 4 grooves instead the 3 grooves of the 1998 season.
Maybe I have to adjust the slip angle...

See ya

About the Monza speedtraps: I think the top speed with no slipstreams was about 225mph (361.8kph) from the Ferrari, as I'm sure that record was with a slip.



If you think I'm insane, you should see my alien counterpart!

I have an onboard video of Michael Schumacher's 2003 pole qualifying lap at Monza, with Martin Brundle's commentary, where Brundle says that Schumacher achieves a maximum speed of 227 mph which was the highest achieved by any driver in qualifying. (Just remember that this is a qualifying lap and not one during the actual race.)

The magazine "F1 Racing" publishes the top speedtrap race speed at every Grand Prix in their Grand Prix race reviews, and is the only place that I know of where you can find this information for every Grand Prix. The current issue should probably have the review of the 2003 Italian Grand Prix, which would have had the highest maximum speeds of any Formula One race.



Post Edited (10-23-03 02:01)

Take a look

[ultimosegundo.ig.com.br]
Alemão quebra recorde de velocidade
Warm Up, de Monza
14/09/2003 - 11:35
Michael Schumacher, vencedor do GP da Itália, atingiu 368,8 km/h na reta dos boxes, onde é marcado o trecho de maior velocidade do circuito. Tal número representa a maior velocidade absoluta da história da F-1, superando os 363,2 km/h de Jean Alesi (aqui mesmo em Monza, em 2001) e de Marc Gené (364,4 km/h ontem nos treinos livres).

It says that Schumacher reached 368,8 km/h in the race at Monza (september 14th). Also, it says that it is a new record, faster than Alesi(363,2 km/h) in 2001 and Gené a day before, in the free practice (364,4 km/h).

And this is a rumour that was heard at the USA GP:

[www.estado.estadao.com.br]
Potência revelada
Um dos maiores segredos das equipes e dos fabricantes de motores, que é a potência de cada, pode não ser mais um mistério se for verdadeira a relação que circula pelo paddock de Indianápolis. Segundo esta relação, que diz respeito especificamente à corrida de Monza, o motor de Schumacher, com algumas novidades a mais que o de Barrichello, tinha 905 cavalos. O do piloto brasileiro tinha 895. Os dois Mercedes-Benz, que equipam os carros da McLaren, apresentavam 885 cavalos. Os da Renault, 870.
Os campeões de potência são os BMW, de Montoya e Marc Gene, que chegavam a 920 cavalos.

It says:
BMW = 920 bhp
Ferrari Nº1 = 905 bhp
Ferrari Nº2 = 895 bhp
Mercedes = 885 nhp
Renault = 870 bhp
Of course we cannot trust in these rumours... but I will.
Other rumours say that Honda = 850 bhp... and Toyota is a little bit better.

So this would be my new bhp performance:
Williams BMW 920 bhp
Ferrari 905 bhp
McLaren Mercedes 885 bhp
Renault 870 bhp
Toyota 860 bhp
BAR Honda 850 bhp
Sauber Petronas 830 bhp
Jaguar Cosworth 820 bhp
Jordan Ford 815 bhp
Minardi Cosworth770 bhp
Arrows Cosworth 765 bhp

but...
These poor engines (Sauber, Jaguar, etc) requires a too high performance (grip)... Much higher than the other teams.
And grip is the main important thing. If I let it this way, these small teams will have a great performance at Monaco and a very poor performance at Monza.
I was "studing" the original gp3 performance (1998) and I noted that the difference between the best and the worst engine is not too high...
The best is 800 bhp and the worst is 717 bhp.
So I chose to use this difference (83 bhp) in my performance.

I redefined the bhp performance:
Williams 920
Ferrari 912
McLaren 901
Renault 893
Toyota 888
BAR 883
Sauber 872
Jaguar 866
Jordan 864
Minardi 840
Arrows 837
Now grip won't be so high for the teams with less powered engines.

Realistic or not, I don't care. Just wanna a nice thing to play, with the AI cars not "blowing up" at 6th gear...
I entered in a Excel sheet all 2003 qualify and race times and now I'm working with the performance (% gap).

@ JackiMatra:
I tried to get back to 2250 kg of downforce and reduce the grip. Worked nice Of course I readjusted the drag.

See ya

Supersonic, read this thread:
[1ka.org]

Oh thanks, gap!
A lot to read and try to learn...
Thanks again.

See ya