Your long force data just look same us mine. The first first one labeled as "vertical deflection data" must be wrong. it seems look exactly same as the long force data. check your data again. did you get your data from tyre tool? I got from telemetry (10 ms interval data) One lap about 13550 data points.
100Hz all channels, decimal points as shown. Look at the 'current values', visible for all 4 tyres. The long force isn't vertical, it's longitudinal. The rear tyres generate a negative long force under acceleration and positive under braking. Front tyres sit around 0 the whole time except braking, when they also generate a positive long force. Got my data using my DAMPlugin, viewed in motec i2Pro. You can see by the figures that the deflection and load values are not the same.
I found the tire_load column, attached View attachment 17938 which one is your tire deflection data? is the 1st chart? I have no idea why mine is diff from yours. But I still suspect your deflection data, because it exact matches your long force data. It must be wrong though (it does not matter what unit or number are) I use TechAdd plugin.
Then go drive the Cobra in AC or whatever ............better yet drive F1 Eve with beta tyre vs their Lotus' final tyres. It is other developers need help. hehehe Hypothetical , get each physics gurus from every developer to each fine tune a rF2 tyre for a certain car. Would they all end up with the exact same limits, parameters, the same "tables" ? Is it good enough for me that rF2 tyres feel better then anything I ever drove before ?.......... heck yes. If it feels that good don't jinx it I say. p I don't really care if the tyre deformation does not looked visually correct, lol who gives a rats bum as long it feels awesome ? In the end of the day I rather rely on the seat of the pants then data. Like I said same as huds, motec and data, I drive Historics and I do not live in some fairy land where they had Motec and computers. Like some league purists bags you for using aids and no damage while at the same time they trawl through their motec data in 1960 ...lmao talk about hypocrites Time would be better spent directing SMS and Kunos to deficiency in their models so all sims to drive are as good as this.
Tim ! rF2 tyres are very buggy they do this when I smash !! Assetto Corsa and ProjectCars don't do this ! Weeeeeeeee ! p Please take to heart last post what I say from someone likes Historics and since Indy500 for PC have enjoyed driving by the seat of my pants rather then huds and data. I understand the significance of all you talk for Modern Cars and respect and admire all you guys can even understand what you discuss sometimes. lol
Typical Durge, Everytime finds a spot to land some spice in his posts and bash other sims while mentioning that rF2 is better at something. However can't take a single criticism note in the field of rF2 without acting out like a kid.
It looks very similar to your tyre deflection graph, just that the tyre deflection is quantized because of the low precision. I mean the shape is very similar. Top is Tyre Deflection, middle is Tyre Load, bottom is Longitudinal Force. Actually right down the bottom is Corr(ected) Speed, but I cut most of that off when I snipped it. Motec puts the channels used at the top of each graph, and you can see there are thicker separators between the graphs. I agree there is pretty much an exact match between load and deflection (shape), I wouldn't have expected them to be quite so similar. But the values are very very different; the vertical blue line is the currently selected point, and that is the values that are shown next to each channel (I hid all tyres except the RL on the graphs, but it shows all the current values anyway). But as above, I think your deflection data looks pretty much the same as your (correct) load data, if you have access to higher precision deflection values it might be clearer. I think we can put aside long force data now, as it's not relevant (I only showed mine so you could see it matched what you thought was the vertical load). *Oh, and unknwn: If DD bothers you just add him to your ignore list. Your post doesn't add anything more than his probably did (judging by your post, not much).
My chopped off at 3-decimal (0.xxx). I think this is a problem. Update: My data unit is m, yours is mm. As chopped off at 3-decimal, my data lost resolution since data variation within mm range. OK, if the vertical tire deflection is 100% correlated with the vertical load, then the size of contact patch area or the number of "rubber elements" in the contact patch area have to vary as load changes while cornering. So the question I have is still valid. it shall be variable, not pre-fix parameter in their tyre model. Do you agree? Do you know the unit of deflection data and what is the change range, are they too small to be concerned or to be visually seen in deformation? Even with deflection range 1/2 inch, it could yield considerable variation in size of patch contact area, hence affects the friction of tire considerably. To statically test this, just by deflate the tires pressure a little and try to drive to see how much diff we can get. similarly for straight driving with down force added.
If you play with ttool you can see that applying extra load (by moving the 'ground' up) does increase the number of nodes in contact with the surface, as well as changing the load on each node, and the resultant (basic) grip on each node. But, a tyre is not a balloon, where an increase in load will (until very heavy loads, comparatively) result in a nearly linear increase in contact area. The construction of tyres means you don't get such a rapid increase in contact area. However, you do get some, and this is where the higher density tyre nodes (one feature of 'CPM') will make that increase more progressive, more gradual, more subtle. The old version tyres with 100-120 sections (around the tread circumference) and 43-49 nodes (bead to bead) take a surprising change in load before a substantial number of extra nodes are in contact; having 200 sections and 60+ nodes will obviously provide extra resolution for that change. As for the deflection data, mine is mm as shown (1 inch = 25.4mm), that RL tyre was 7mm deflected at rest, 13 with 200kg extra load (440 lbs), and I think 23 or so through a corner where around 8000N load was present (2.5g or thereabouts). So 2/3 of an inch change from rest with my dodgy driving.
Can you confirm that changes in tire pressure works in Rfactor2? No mather how hard i try to change tire pressure, the mid tyre temperature is always the same and the car acts the same.. I spent a lot of time testing this.. even in Motec telemetry.. Testing was done with the CPM tires on a ISI Corvette.. Temperatures taken while entering and exiting right turn View attachment 17942 The lowest tire pressure, look at the mid tyre temp of the left front tire View attachment 17943 The highest tire pressure, look at the mid tyre temp of the left ront tire
You meant Motec? Otherwise I have this mental picture of a murdered hooker being checked with a thermometer by "Quincy" the coroner...
lol Yes, carcass temp is included; it's just a single 'average' of some sort (paraphrasing ISI), but I suppose that's all you need for the carcass... The older telemetry plugin should include it, the DAMPlugin has carcass temps in the Tyres_1 group.
It's important to understand that the rendering of the lookuptable in ttool is pretty much only focused on the actual deformation of the tyre, taking into account all the features of it's design. There are LOTS of variables to define characteristics of the actual thread, it's heating, stiffnes, softness, cooling and wear - most are adjusted based both on real life data (which is also hard) AND subjective feel and evaluation of data during testing in either sim or by using the ttool to simulate certain conditions. These can be changed and tested independant to the lookuptable. I find that temperatures actually CAN be made to act in a more "realistic" or usable way, eliminating most of the excessive variations and extreme temps.
Pressure 123kPa and 220kPa are quite different. The telemetry data showed tire pressure varies during run. I could not get readout of temperature (all zero). Could be unit issue (?) just like I had on tire deflection and suspension deflection data. I will suggest to do the same test with fix pressure but vary the Camber.
Can confirm that I notice a clear difference in tyre pressure. Best to feel with new GTR. Default setup is low pressure and car feels and acts a little bit "wonky" (?lol) as, well as if the tyre pressure where too low! 10 kpa more feels far better.
I haven't played around much with pressures and motec, but my feelings concur with this. I feel the new GTR with cold tires that have less pressure to be more wobbly than with warmed- and pressured up tires.
