Tyre wear and grip profiles for each tyre type (Excel sheet released) .

R_Scandura schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> then it looks more comprehensible to call it "air
> penetration factor" than "air resistance"

Hmm.. i think to call it "air resistance" is okay.. the natur shows, if you got less "air resistance", you got faster.. look at the evolution of some animals like sharks or engineers building planes or cars... they try to get less air resistance also to gain speed...

But.. more important than giving this value a name is to know what it does...

But - how to judge the value?? Why should i increase/decrease the value?

meanmc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RRRReméééédiooo schrieb:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe this factor is not really "air
> resistance".
>
>
> hmm, why not?! I think it is - just the values are
> "reversed"!
>
> If you got less "air resistance", you got faster -
> vice versa!! I think that makes sence and the
> value behaves like it is "air resistance"!

If you get more air resistance, you are slower in straights and faster in corners. If you got less air resistance you are faster in straights and slower in corners. By your description you say that increasing this factor you are getting more top speed and slightly better corner speed. So it's no really air resistance.

Extra thought: air resistance change depending on the track altitude. So, we have lower air resistance in Interlagos, the track with the higher altitude in F1. This value is low for original Interlagos magic data. That said, having lower air resistance decreases downforce efficiency (making the car faster in straights and slower in corners) but it also decreases engine efficiency, because there's less air available for burning the fuel. This in fact decreases the engine power and they say that the engine power at Interlagos is around 8% lower than at sea level.

This value is 15465 for Interlagos and 16892 for Monaco (Interlagos is 91,5% of Monaco). So maybe this is it. Not the aerodynamic effect of air resistance (like I expected, because that what it does in GP2), but the effect of air pressure in the engine.

Just a shot, but who knows?

meanmc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But - how to judge the value?? Why should i
> increase/decrease the value?

Yes, I suppose that's the important question.

Are the effects consistent between players and ccs (having the same effect on both, including the same gains/losses of speed for both)? If they are not, this value will be useful to balance top speed, as cc power factor fails badly. If they are, then you can get more "theoretical" and use it to get the correct top speeds with the correct downforce loads (both physical and/or setup wise, you choose).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2013 05:05PM by RRRReméééédiooo.

Air resistance: if you increase it, you get higher top speed. It affects both human and CC. This is sure. Tested.
If you decrease the value, you get slower top speed. So yes, it affects top speed, it is useful to have higher speed without using a very low rear wing value.
But as it affects human and CC, you can't use it to balance top speed.
So, if you increase the value, you have a higher air "penetration", actually you have less air resistance and you can reach a higher top speed.
And the car seems to have more downforce.
So i think this value affects different aspects of the car behaviour,as for other values.
Bye

RRRReméééédiooo schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------

> If you get more air resistance, you are slower in
> straights and faster in corners. If you got less
> air resistance you are faster in straights and
> slower in corners. By your description you say
> that increasing this factor you are getting more
> top speed and slightly better corner speed. So
> it's no really air resistance.


Therefore i wrote "it is just reversed"! But anyway...

My point is that, reversed or not, when the effect is positive for top speed, it's negative for corner speed and vice versa. With this factor, the effect is positive or negative for both at the same time, unlike the aerodynamic effect of the air on a racing car. A reversed factor should be reversed for both, not just top speed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2013 10:42PM by RRRReméééédiooo.

@meanmc: are you making all your tests with GP3 2000 only? I've got my tool finally working in GP3 1.13, I don't know how much time it will take to convert it for GP3 2000. There's an interesting factor which can help you choose values for tyre wear and cc suffler (at least I think it will, considering your description of their effects).

BTW...there 300 values in the GP3 car struct (300 for each car), currently the tool shows only a few of them (4 or 5) logged each time a car crosses the finish line. How would you guys like to have these logs?

For instance, here is a line of the log from my lastest test:

#11 Lap: 01 Pos: 14 field_A0: 16384 field_A2: 16103 pSeg: 5790676

#11 is the car number, field_A0 is one of the several unknown values, field_A2 too (but this one I already know the meaning, is the current grip, or performance value, on the moment of the logging), pSeg is the position of the car on track (of course I will convert this to a more readable value).

Should it log every available factor?

Well. I decided that the tool will make two logs, one with selected factors and one (very large) with all the factors.

I've made this sheet to show you the available factors. The factor names are the same that what sent to me by René. The second column shows comments about the factors, most of them are from the documentation sent to me by René. The ones in italic were written by me.

This sheet if for you to decide if you want any particular factor logged in the smaller log.

Some factors were omitted, these are tables about car parts and tyres.

About the tool behavior, it is logging only when the cars cross the line, I'll add an option to log at other moments. I hope to upload it for testing until Saturday.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/09/2013 06:33PM by RRRReméééédiooo.

RRRReméééédiooo schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @meanmc: are you making all your tests with GP3
> 2000 only? I've got my tool finally working in GP3
> 1.13, I don't know how much time it will take to
> convert it for GP3 2000. There's an interesting
> factor which can help you choose values for tyre
> wear and cc suffler (at least I think it will,
> considering your description of their effects).

Hi...

Yes, i just drive GP3 2000...

Thank you very much for your work... i hope i understand all the "values and figures"...

meanmc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi...
>
> Yes, i just drive GP3 2000...
>
> Thank you very much for your work... i hope i
> understand all the "values and figures"...

I'll convert it to GP3 2000 as soon as I know what values to keep a closer track.

That sheet is a mess to understand. The problem is that there are so many values and we know next to nothing about the majority of them. But I know that some of them may be helpful. For instance, with the value field_A0 I could confirm your description of the "cc suffler" factor and after you have the tools it will be much easier for you to pick the correct value for the effect you want for each track because you will be able to check of the cc suffler in the long run, even running a race in "accelerated mode".

Hey guys! Sorry for the delay. The program is sort of ready to be tested, but I'm having some computer problems. I hope to post it here at the weekend.

I got a question but it's not about the tyre wear. Is there a way to change to have pit stop more fast??? I would like to have pit stop like 2009 (6-7 seconds for a 3 stops strategy, 8 seconds for a 2 stops stategy and 10 seconds for a one stop stategy).

Ok, I've uploaded my small program, you can get it here. Instructions included in the zip file.

I hope it works and it's useful for something. Any questions, just ask. In the future you will be able to configure its outputs.

I think I'm doing something wrong.

The compound editor doesn't export data.

I configured the gp 3 1.13 path correctly, and I can export/import data without (apparent) problems.

However, when I import data from gp3 I receive the same original data, without my updates.

What am I doing wrong?

degas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think I'm doing something wrong.
>
> The compound editor doesn't export data.
>
> I configured the gp 3 1.13 path correctly, and I
> can export/import data without (apparent)
> problems.
>
> However, when I import data from gp3 I receive the
> same original data, without my updates.
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
>


hi,
sorry it's not your problem but my mistake. i forgot to fix something passing from version 0.0 to 0.1
please try to download it again and see if it works. i added a feature to export or print to file all or single tyres

-------------------------------




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2013 08:53PM by R_Scandura.

I have a question!

In magic data there is cc schuffler, and this value in GP3 2000 if was low, the AI cars makes fastest lap before the pits. In GP3 1.13 for me reverse, if the value is high the AI cars makes fastest lap before pits, but not same like in gp3 2000( in gp3 2000 first lap slower then faster, faster, faster, until fastest lap what was last lap before pits, but i n gp3 1.13 second lap slower, 3rd lap faster then little bit slower then faster again and in fastest 2 laps before pits but last lap was slower again)
Why ?
And what value i have to put, to i have same AI than Gp3 2000?

In Gp3 2000 i use belini melbourne and 800 cc schuffler

in Gp3 1.1.3 belini melbourne(with new GPXPatch) i use 8000 CC schuffler but i have this situation what i already wrote above

Pls help me and sorry for my bad English