I have just checked the RAF file. At 43.00 s the sum of vertical loads is 9544.29 N. At 0.00 s it is 9571.98 N. These are suspension loads taken directly from RAF file. The whole car mass is 1010.90 kg and the unsprung mass is around 50 kg, so the loads seem to be correct.
The image below shows the sum of tyre normal loads calculated with my RAFTyreExtract (I had to fix it because it turned out to be incompatible with FWD car data). These tyre normal loads are approximately the sum of suspension vertical loads, unsprung mass weight and the forces equivalent to wheel vertical accelarations. Again, it looks reasonable, as it oscillates around 10 kN.
The image below shows the sum of tyre normal loads calculated with my RAFTyreExtract (I had to fix it because it turned out to be incompatible with FWD car data). These tyre normal loads are approximately the sum of suspension vertical loads, unsprung mass weight and the forces equivalent to wheel vertical accelarations. Again, it looks reasonable, as it oscillates around 10 kN.
They are suspension loads. Could you attach this RAF file here?
New-generation Skip Barber car at Lime Rock. It's in the interview with Alison Hine, GPL beta tester.
There is some more information on KartSim in this thread http://www.ogre3d.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=270536
Providing proofs of the existence of God is just funny. Religion is not science. If you believe you don't need any proofs.
Even atheists may admit it's possible that our whole universe is just one of the simulations run by some civilization much more advanced than ours. We may be just characters (the dumb AI
) in a computer game used be some kid. If this is true then for any practical purpose (if any) this kid is our god.
Even atheists may admit it's possible that our whole universe is just one of the simulations run by some civilization much more advanced than ours. We may be just characters (the dumb AI
) in a computer game used be some kid. If this is true then for any practical purpose (if any) this kid is our god.In Melbourne after 25 laps he was 1:26,74 behind the leader. I think this shows his real speed with the car he has now.
Looking at this report http://www.fia.com/resources/d ... Race_History_Chart_08.pdf I cannot understand how Bourdais could pit on lap 28 legally, in accordance with regulation 40.6 (http://www.formula1.com/inside ... regulations/6839/fia.html).
Last edited by w126, .
I'm not sure if you are aware that you can obtain what looks like an equivalent of A*Cx*ra/2 from CAR_info.bin files.
http://www.lfs.net/?page=CAR_INFO_BIN
http://www.lfs.net/?page=CAR_INFO_BIN
Try lowering the target framerate in FRAPS (to limit the load it puts on the computer). For example set it to 10 and record the replay slowed down 4 times. Then speed up the captured video and sound (using audio stretch filter in VirtualDub) and get 40 fps video.
There is a mistake in this part of RAF spec, just notice the strange order of offsets. The above code reads forward (Y) forces. Use the offset of 8 inside dynamic wheel info block to get X forces.
Oops, sorry, I guess I've never been interested enough in FWD cars. 
The forces in RAF are oriented alongside car body axes. However, most probably they are all not tyre forces, but the forces between the suspension and the wheels.
There is some discussion of RAF data in this thread http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=4375 .
The order of wheel data is: FL, FR, RL, RR
There is some discussion of RAF data in this thread http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=4375 .
The order of wheel data is: FL, FR, RL, RR
It seems that iRacing may be perfect for all those people posting here that they would pay more for adding developers to LFS team, wanting real tracks and cars in LFS, saying how much they would pay for real tracks and cars, and which, being bored with LFS content because they've spent so much time with it, being unsatisfied with too slow development pace of LFS...
Mentioning console racing games and their marketing tricks in this context just doesn't make any sense. iRacing's product is based on the engine developed by Papyrus, still very good, even regarded as the best by many.
Their cars and tracks may not appeal to people living outside of north America, but this will probably change with time when they extend their content.
Will the price stop these people?
Mentioning console racing games and their marketing tricks in this context just doesn't make any sense. iRacing's product is based on the engine developed by Papyrus, still very good, even regarded as the best by many.
Their cars and tracks may not appeal to people living outside of north America, but this will probably change with time when they extend their content.
Will the price stop these people?
That's probably because fread() changes current position in the file and then you fseek() from that changed position, not from the beginning of a data block.
I have just checked the GTR 2 credits. There are well over 20 people listed in it doing 3D modelling and texturing of cars and tracks, not including their bosses etc. They probably worked on that game for about a year and around 80 % of game content was reused from GTR (1) and GT Legends and only improved.
I think this shows that your statement is exaggerated.
But at least some of racesim developers/publishers appreciate their efforts and sometimes reveal new information through them. Some examples: iRacing info in the last issue, Blimey! Games and Virtual Grand Prix 3 in the previous one. This makes AutoSimSport an interesting resource.
You may not like the writing style of some of their authors (this is my feeling too), they may not be all devoted LFS fans, but why there is so much hostility against them here?
They also say the patch for nK PRO is is guaranteed.
And some of these tracks are going to be ovals.
I admit I haven't tried any RBR modding. It seems the engine simulation fell victim to their release deadline then. I guess the same happened to cockpits and non-Subaru engine sounds.
Richard Burns Rally is probably more advanced than that.
http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/150/4
http://www.bhmotorsports.com/RBR/screenshot/5374
Last edited by w126, .
Maybe it's sound-related? Try switching the sound off (Shift-N) while testing.
But you can still use rigid body equations of motion for wheels but treat them as something simpler for the purpose of collision detection. However, I agree it's possible that wheels are modelled as point masses (particles) with additional one-dimensional rotation.
In LFS the value of wheel moment of intertia is available in CAR_info.bin files. Also the raw vertical load of the wheel (which is part of the force between the car body and the wheel) in RAF files can be negative when the wheel is in the air. Such things may suggest that the wheels are treated as regular rigid bodies in LFS.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG