“ are rfactor2 physics broken” video

cristianuk said:
yes Pawell44 simple tires can re-produce real forces something like tire flex and slip patch and so on
Click to expand...

You don't need to simulate all that to produce correct handling, if you have good enough data or spend enough time testing and adjusting.

You're blindly defending rF2 without understanding the discussion you're replying to.

mantasisg said:
Perhaps by a chance there are any additional real life references to this phenomenon ?
Click to expand...

Watch basically any real life race weekend that starts on a green track.
 
@cristianuk
This is not how grown up people discuss things ( by hurling insults).
We all need to be able to attack a position without attacking the person.
Over 1000 disparate views here and yours is the first that does this.
Bad choice.
 
davidporeilly said:
@cristianuk
This is not how grown up people discuss things ( by hurling insults).
We all need to be able to attack a position without attacking the person.
Over 1000 disparate views here and yours is the first that does this.
Bad choice.
Click to expand...

forget about my insults and explain how Ermin was wrong to call rf2 phisics broken by testing a set up just on one car, "are rf2 phisics broken" are poping everywere i mean really everywere even when you start Rf2 it pops in peoples faces , this guy is just misleding
 
cristianuk said:
forget about my insults and explain how Ermin was wrong to call rf2 phisics broken by testing a set up just on one car, "are rf2 phisics broken" are poping everywere i mean really everywere even when you start Rf2 it pops in peoples faces , this guy is just misleding
Click to expand...
Are you 12? You can't just insult someone and then just say, ignore that. You're disrespectful and not participating in the discussion at all. I reported you (before you are thinking lazza or someone else did that) good luck on the future
 
Remco Majoor said:
Are you 12? You can't just insult someone and then just say, ignore that. You're disrespectful and not participating in the discussion at all. I reported you (before you are thinking lazza or someone else did that) good luck on the future
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    76.5 KB · Views: 253
Lazza said:
Watch basically any real life race weekend that starts on a green track.
Click to expand...

I expected you could offer better reference than that. I don't have time to study multiple hours of racing just to check a little doubt. Not only that, I don't think that reliable observations could be made this way. What should I do ? Watch and estimate how many times and how hard cetain car understeer and oversteer, and then make a graph ? Would it even really answer anything, since any good driver is a major influence if car gets pushed more to oversteer or understeer ?

I hoped you could offer some more precise reference, as you said that phenomenon is "widely known". To check this more reliably one should try it himself IRL, and do it without confirmation bias, and to avoid any placebo. Also helpful would be to find literal evidence by drivers or engineers.

For now, I'll stand by my thinking that mechanical grip balance should remain the same at any dry surface grip levels.

The only mechanical reason I could think of is that higher friction would aid to more body roll, higher centripetal accelerations. So I suppose whichever end experiences more load sensitivity (higher load switch magnitude), could have more impact due to higher cornering forces.
 
Last edited:
mantasisg said:
I expected you could offer better reference than that. I don't have time to study multiple hours of racing just to check a little doubt. Not only that, I don't think that reliable observations could be made this way. What should I do ? Watch and estimate how many times and how hard cetain car understeer and oversteer, and then make a graph ? Would it even really answer anything, since any good driver is a major influence if car gets pushed more to oversteer or understeer ?

I hoped you could offer some more precise reference, as you said that phenomenon is "widely known". To check this more reliably one should try it himself IRL, and do it without confirmation bias, and to avoid any placebo. Also helpful would be to find literal evidence by drivers or engineers.

For now, I'll stand by my thinking that mechanical grip balance should remain the same at any dry surface grip levels.

The only mechanical reason I could think of is that higher friction would aid to more body roll, higher centripetal accelerations. So I suppose whichever end experiences more load sensitivity (higher load switch magnitude), could have more impact due to higher cornering forces.
Click to expand...
I have observed many times in different levels of motorsport this known phenomenon. One that comes to mind is Jensen Button discussing how that in early test session upon arrival at a new circuit that the team is constantly looking to solve oversteer but as the sessions progress the balance just comes back to them.
To help your understanding I even did some google searches and was surprised to see so few references but there were several in karting forums advising to "loosen up" the setup if the track is well rubbered.

I have experienced it IRL as a driver first hand when a test day on Friday yields some oversteer but by Sunday the car is neutral.
Rockingham was low grip and green, all teams needed to change car balance from higher grip track settings.

One very convincing item is that when F1 teams pit to change from a soft tyre to a harder tyre they reduce front wing to match the rear grip. (the harder tyre being a good surrogate for a less grippy surface). Total grip is reduced and the rear suffers more therefore the front grip has to be lowered.
In sim racing we do this also.

Last night in an FSR test race my first soft tyre stint produced even tyre wear, my second stint with same tyre , same fuel load the front tyres slid and wore more (I will screen shot the motec graph). This was due to increased track grip impacting the cars balance.

None of these examples involve the variables that you mention such as differing driver styles.

If you remain unconvinced I suggest you set up a test session at say Nazareth oval. Set realroad at green and progression to a to a multiple. Start the session with a good car balance on the green track and drive. Keep putting on fresh tyres. You will find the car becomes more understeery as the grip improves.

Beyond that I cant make it my career to convince you of this phenomena.
 
cristianuk said:
forget about my insults and explain how Ermin was wrong to call rf2 phisics broken by testing a set up just on one car, "are rf2 phisics broken" are poping everywere i mean really everywere even when you start Rf2 it pops in peoples faces , this guy is just misleding
Click to expand...
Talk to the hand.
 
mantasisg said:
I expected you could offer better reference than that. I don't have time to study multiple hours of racing just to check a little doubt. Not only that, I don't think that reliable observations could be made this way. What should I do ? Watch and estimate how many times and how hard cetain car understeer and oversteer, and then make a graph ? Would it even really answer anything, since any good driver is a major influence if car gets pushed more to oversteer or understeer ?

I hoped you could offer some more precise reference, as you said that phenomenon is "widely known". To check this more reliably one should try it himself IRL, and do it without confirmation bias, and to avoid any placebo. Also helpful would be to find literal evidence by drivers or engineers.

For now, I'll stand by my thinking that mechanical grip balance should remain the same at any dry surface grip levels.

The only mechanical reason I could think of is that higher friction would aid to more body roll, higher centripetal accelerations. So I suppose whichever end experiences more load sensitivity (higher load switch magnitude), could have more impact due to higher cornering forces.
Click to expand...

Pretty much any race weekend in that scenario is filled with 2 practice sessions full of people saying "Have to be careful about chasing car setup here, because car balance will change with track evolution." Possibly in every racing series I've ever watched. Including bikes.
 
@mantasisg I get the analytical thinking, it's a good thing. But sometimes you just start with facts and go from there; most people don't look at the motion of the planets, fail to come up with calculations that predict them, and decide the planets aren't really moving the way they appear. (apparently some do that; luckily scientists gave it a good few goes and eventually got it pretty much right)

As David alluded to, this isn't the sort of thing you really find in reference material. But it's talked about a lot, including in simracing, because it's just a thing that happens. Hence I say it's widely known. Not trying to be flippant or smartarse, it just 'is'.

To relate that to the thread somewhat, for the same reason I'd be cautious about judging physics based on setup changes that "should do this, but do that." The good setup guides I've read use words like generally when describing the effect of setup changes. Too many variables to just come up with rock solid answers.
 
Without ever considering that in complex systems, every changes has secondary effects, and in some circumstances those "secondary" effect may have a significant magnitude. This is true for the most simple basics of driving (braking/accelerating/turning) to the most advanced setup options, where often it is said that a change on a axis has actually effect on the opposed axis.
 
Lazza said:
@mantasisgTo relate that to the thread somewhat, for the same reason I'd be cautious about judging physics based on setup changes that "should do this, but do that." The good setup guides I've read use words like generally when describing the effect of setup changes. Too many variables to just come up with rock solid answers.
Click to expand...

I choose talking about those many variables instead. Otherwise it is not interesting, and not very meaningful. It is a shame that it is also too difficult, too time consuming and not as easy to use as already digested truths. IMO it is much more fun to understand some prinicples that will be universally true, than have to memorize lots of truths that "genrally" fits in limited settings. There are things that comes close as rock solid answers, but those are like small details that comes in combinations when we have to define how some particular system works. Too nerdy... not widely consumable.
 
Wow, thanks, thats 1000% spot on. What an epic channel, definitely subscribing.

Indeed what this engineer said agrees to what Lazza and David are saying. So it must be a lot of truth in it. I like that this engineer shows the awareness of this not being a hard rule, but it sounds like it is mostly true for F1.

It wasn't explained why it happens, appart than "it depends on tires". It would be interesting to get deeper into how that works.

We could accept that it "just is a fact, and it is just somethign that happens", but that would be too easy, and nothing would be learned from that :D

Further in the video the engineers mention ride comfort, and that there is very little suspension travel at front comparing to rear. I think it could be one bit of the reason for this phenomenon. Just assuming that with rubbered track cornering forces are higher and inevitably there is more roll, the front end could run out of travel comparing to the rear, resulting in the shift of grip balance. Anyway... thats just one idea, I suppose there could be lots of different reasons, and combinations of those reasons. It is just an interesting thing to think about.
 
If you listen carefully what he says, he think that the increased grip allow the rear tires to slip less under throttle application, thus being less prone to overheating, and as a consequence, their peak grip can be higher because more easily you can keep them in the optimal range.
 
Another thing he says is that steering more than needed is another way to generate heat at the front, this doesn't generate more turning force ,but increasing slip angle you heat the tire, for the same principle of trying to get to optimal temperature.
This is another tombstone on the idea that alien driver "cheats" because in r/l nobody would do that.
 
Sim_Player said:
So basically this phenomenon will be MOST dependent on drive train type and mostly beneficial at exit phase of cornering.
Rwd will feel less oversteery at exit phase of cornering and fwd will feel less understeery at exit phase of corner.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
In essence the drive wheels will gain the benefit of increased grip the most. So when that's FWD that loss of grip creates understeer and RWD -oversteer.
And yes it's corner exit where it's felt most although mid corner is impacted (whenever cornering forces and throttle both occur).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top