I really like the idea of layout editor based on graphical input for the real layouts recreation.
Unfortunately this version is old and has some bugs that are limiting its usage.

I made a revision with following improvements to extend the possibilities.
The workflow with the tool is the same.

Tested with LFS06R and Incscape 0.92.3

Improvements:

• Accuracy of object placement now better than 0.07m. Before it was > 1m
  
• Now supports heading of objects.
  
• Logs redesigned.
  

Now the tool can be used for 90% of the layout work if following the tips. The tool is still not robust as .SVG parser is simple and partial. Therefore you need to use predefined template / workflow to create layouts without issues.

Except the listed problems by Gutholz there are few problematic things not mentioned:

• Placement on layer that is not positioned at [0,0] and of size 2560x2560 will yield bad results.
  Mostly invalid object positions. Be careful with clicking on different layer and read the tips.
  
• Bad rectangle size. Use the rectangle size of the object you are trying to place.
  

Hope this helps. I personally use the tool for Formula Student race tracks recreation.

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

Marek

Last edited by L@gger, Thu, 21 Jun 2018 17:10.

Thanks. It really works without that.

I deleted linking of libpthreadGC2.a
pthread.h

And it builts and works. Great!

Hello, I am trying to fix one project using InSim but cant get it built. Tried your event control project for the reference but just cant build it either. (I even downloaded codeblocks to have the least IDE work but somehow there is still a lot of IDE/compiler work to just build it)

Iam using:
-Win 10
-code::blocks
-MinGW using TDM32 installer

I am getting problems around pthread. I am getting warnings of redefined pthread.h definitions as there is one pthread / libpthreadGC2.a related to project and one in search directory of compiler. it looks like it always conflicts. Conflicting struct definitions result in errors

How you setup your compiler / IDE to compile your projects?

Thank you.

Last edited by L@gger, Sat, 16 Jun 2018 10:27.

Yep, my mistake. Didnt saw the heading. Its possible.

Thank you.

The RAF format is well explained but I see some data are no there like yaw rate which could be nice to see.

I didnt know about the TORCS but it looks really good for this purpose.

Hello,

I have no experience with insim and outsim. I know that there are possibilities to get data out of the simulator and into simulator.

I am wondering if anybody have experience or atleast have some clue if following things are possible:

-Using lfs physics with simulink. Something like changing the vehicle parameters on run through the insim? Or changing the driver input?

-Using lfs graphic so sending position and heading of the car from simulink and lfs would only animate it.

I would like to make vehicle dynamics control so I am wondering what are the options here if there are any.

Thanks.

Marek

@Gabox There is a time in development when you overcome most challanges and the challanges remaining are too much time consuming without big effect or just not interesting enough.
I think thats what is happening as Scawen working on this sim for years pretty much personally. I think he already overcome his biggest challanges so isnt as motivated. This isnt his main job also. Thats my opinion.

Wow. keep up the good work Scawen

The antialising does a very good impression. Such a small detail. Its nice to see lfs on dx9.0 now

Okay but I was talking about specific model of tire that comes from a bench model. It doesnt have all calculations because of speed optimalization. Not because they are unusable but can be optimalizated or the effect is just too low to be counted in. Bench model may be more universal.

@ F1 thermal camera.
Finally! Maybe F1 teams just dont want to have different scale because other teams could make some assumptions?

These models could be very slow. They take all possible parameters maybe some that later wont be calculated as their effect wont be noticeable.
It can take minutes to hours to calculate models that reflect maybe few seconds to lfs because the bench model should be physical based and optimalization isnt much priority.

You cant just use a bench model to run real time and want gpu to calculate it. There can be so much time wasting mathematical operations that arent really noticeable in the result.

You can make similar models in some mathematical programs and the c code implementation is more like mathematics and coding play.

Last edited by L@gger, Sun, 8 Sep 2013 10:58.

Quote from col :

Look-up-table(LUT) based systems are notoriously crap at covering the complete range of situations. They're great for a simulation where expected behaviour stays away from the physical limits of the system being modeled, each variable staying within a small range of stable fairly linear values, e.g. simulating a passenger jet in a flight sim where you don't go even close to stalling etc.
A racing sim is the worst possible for LUTs, a driver spends the whole time as close to the physical limits of the system as possible - for this to work well with a thorough LUT system without fudging, you would need astronomical amounts of data. That's why LUT based systems have unnatural feel during physical state transitions. LFS may not always seem 'realistic', but it always feels organic, 'natural' and predictable.
Scawen wants more realism without losing the natural feel. Can't do that with LUTs

LUTs are theoretically unusable as you said because they have spaces in coverage but model needs to be at 20kHz (if thats true, it has alot less than 50ms to calculate because others calculations needs to be done also in the meantime) so I doubt he have much time to do some serious math. Still he can use a lot of memory so he can make pretty decent LUTs for the calculation. Also some interpolation can be used.

Maybe Iam wrong but I think that it uses some conditions, precalculations, LUTS and then calculations and conditions to get the result.

This way it can be really fast but it can be only an aproximation of the bench model he uses.

Last edited by L@gger, Sun, 8 Sep 2013 10:21.

Because your reacting looked pretty fast. So you use small degrees of rotations maybe?

Yes, view options makes a difference. I found out that using smaller fov makes me little bit more confident on track and faster. Also changing the g-force camera tilt and movement can give you some better feeling of the car.

But in fact the fastest sets are oversteer. For new players its hard to control them.

Someone who can drive 33s on bl gp can drive oversteer setup.

It says wheel but I think you are driving mouse, right?

You are driving pretty good but maybe you should use more kerbs especially in the first schikane and drive smoother. You need to practice and get a consistent setup.

Thats nice guys but I was rather interested in your camera dynamics and fov settings than LCD configurations.

Thanks jatimc for screen.

Last edited by L@gger, Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:29.

in cfg.txt I have only: start windowed.

By view settings I mean everything. Acceleration tilt, move, camera movements.

Last edited by L@gger, Wed, 26 Jun 2013 07:50.

Hello, Recently I reinstalled LFS and I cant drive anymore I found out that settings influence my car feeling much.

I would like experienced drivers to post their view settings screenshot.

Also I would like to know where LFS view settings are saved? I couldnt find it.

LFS doesnt live but community does
until TVE is here

Thank you guys.

Yes I am calculating with slip and made some simple Pacejka tire.

Quote from Bob Smith :

You want to divide the axle torque by the wheel radius, to get you force (neglecting inertial effects from the wheels, though it sounds like you're not worrying about slip). Multiply this force by the height of the center of gravity and you're back at a torque. Then divide this by your wheelbase and you're back at a force.

Didnt saw this equation yet. I am going to try that.

Hello guys. I am modeling a car in simulink. I got into problems with weight transfer. The models I found all calculate weight transfer just from CG high and wheels base. I think that in weight transfer there should be also added aerodynamic drag weight transfer and maybe a weight transfer due to torque? Torque opposite to torque that is at the driven axle. Problem is that if I add the torque weight transfer Iam getting negative normal force at front so car would actually flip. Not sure if the torque calculation is right.

My equanation for it: Fnormal_T = Torque/wheel_base

That value Iam substracting from front axle and adding to rear axle.

Last edited by L@gger, Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:41.

The situation is really bad in lfs nowadays. If I want to race, cargame is only option. There are few racers training on empty hosts but majority is drifting or cruising.
If I want something different to race I can choose only demo. But demo is now more about hotlapping than racing. It isnt even sprint what is called a race at demo these days. 3-4 laps on reversed order.
This is just losing point of racing for me.

I think this isnt about hosts. It is about lack of specific racing people.

Last edited by L@gger, Mon, 4 Feb 2013 00:30.

Everyday:
Rolls-Royce Phantom
BMW 750
Aston Martin DB9
bugatti veyron

Fun:
BMW M3
Caterham 7
Tesla roadster
Nissan GTR

In case of apocalypse
Humvee H1

only 9 cars

Quote from RevengeR :

Nice, it looks so much better than I expected it would Maybe mounting it higher and a bit further back would give a better perspective, but of course messing up the handling.

Yes. Handling was laready pretty bad
I was experimenting with camera angles and I thought this is the best height and angle. If it was more further back you would see so much of body and not actually see arms good.

Quote from Dennis93 :

What camera is that? (:
And epic driving, And insane Caster angle

Its Gopro hero hd 2. Yes we are using 25-30 deg caster for buggies

Made a cut of 1 lap me racing at our local track

http://youtu.be/8RcyPzo-2WI

Hello,

After 0.6E update I am having strange issue with servers list. I cant see many servers anymore in the list but I can connect to them directly. But if I want to connect to them directly first connection fails and seconds works. After that I can see these servers in the list. Any ideas?

Thank You

Yes I can join it but I cant see it with everything selected.

EDIT: Now after first join i can already see it. Maybe this should be reported as bug?
Wondering how many s2 servers i cant see and they are online.