The "What Are You Working On?" Thread

[William Levesque]

Fun thing with the bi-plane wing cars is that raising the angle of the lower foil actually pushes the aero CoP forward in most cases (opposite of typical effect). You can take off a very large amount of downforce just from adjusting that wing, which pulls air from the diffuser, essentially acting as an extension to it. The reason for the forward shift is that the center of pressure of the diffuser itself was actually forward of the CoG, and since the downforce numbers those cars were generating from those diffusers were so high, the actual downforce loss from the rear wing couldn't compensate for the difference.

Another is the 9000+ lbs of downforce (10k claimed, 8k confirmed for the xjr-14 at least. TS010 reportedly had over a 6:1 lift to drag ratio. I'm not sure if that was more downforce or just less drag, as the data for the xjr only shows around 4-5:1) at 200 mph, which despite rather slippery tires (tire design didn't seem to really pick up until a few years later), allows for even higher cornering speeds than modern LMP1 in some cases (for point of reference, brief testing so far has yielded 140mph vs. 132mph minimum speed through Sebring T1 for TS010 vs. LMP1).

Also no third springs, so massive spring rates on the corners to deal with the loads. Though it would be nice if there was more reference for this available...I've been told the 905 was effectively running a solid front axle because of the spring and ARB stiffness, and have reference for a period Nissan running absurdly stiff springs, but don't particularly see why they would have done so...the Nissan for example could have run half of that spring rate without bottoming out, though potentially it could have been to help avoid porpoising.

If iRacing is of any accuracy regarding that, the Nissan ZX-T GTP (much older of course) ran upwards of 3000lbs/in rates, at least on the rear. Apparantly also said to have run toe out on the rear lol.

 

[garyjpaterson]

...though potentially it could have been to help avoid porpoising.

Really interesting, love reading stuff like that - But whats porpoising?

 

[Fat-Alfie]

In boating terms, it's when the bow lifts and falls in a rhythmic pattern. The motor is not providing enough thrust to keep the bow up continuously.

Presumably, in aero terms, it is a rhythmical pattern in the downforce, or the air available to flow over the wing.

 

[formulaHEINE]

Really interesting, love reading stuff like that - But whats porpoising?

Simply spoken the is boucing, like fast boats in rough see.
It's a sort of resonace in the car suspension due to movement of the center of pressure at various speeds, read the wiki here.
Mercedes did have a similiar issues with thier DTM cars boucing near topspeeds, e.g. at the Hockenheimring in the last couple of years. That resonace could be caused by bumps, but the results are similar.

 

[mclarenf1papa]

If iRacing is of any accuracy regarding that, the Nissan ZX-T GTP (much older of course) ran upwards of 3000lbs/in rates, at least on the rear. Apparantly also said to have run toe out on the rear lol.

IDK their Corvette DP is 10-20 mph too slow through T1 at Sebring as far as I can tell, so I'm not sure how much to trust it now. But yeah the Nissan I mentioned was the Electramotive 1986 car. They ran 5500# springs at the front (only 35-40% downforce so unnecessary unless to avoid some unique aerodynamic characteristics) at one point. A later car ran 7000# at the front This is all mentioned in Dan Bink's and Norm Dewitt's book, "Making it Faster", which I highly recommend to anyone interested in technical talk regarding GTP, GT2, IndyCar, F1, MotoGP, or modern LMP cars.

Really interesting, love reading stuff like that - But whats porpoising?

formulaHEINE and the rest have explained it fairly well. It's essentially the car bouncing due to inconsistent flow to a given aero part (99% of the time it has to do with a stalling of the front splitter/diffuser/wing).

 

[Deleted member 130869]

If someone would like to.. i could do a peugeot 905 model or another group c car.
The peugeot 1991 models looks cool. I kinda find that model awsome.


I have seen the later model avaible at some other places. So i guess someone else did the 92-93 model? Probobly an rip.

But someone else will have to add it ingame.. i enjoy doing 3d work but so far i dont know alot about adding cars ingame.
Im an amauture artist but i really would like to contribute to the community..


I kinda got hooked now on the group c era.
I got some requests at other places.. i should be able to creat a cougar version of the courage c36. Wich feauters a coupe roof.
Cougar c28s. that cant be bad?

Ideally the more cars of the same season would be good. So far the Sauber C9 only has the 962C as a direct competitor. The 962C competes against the Mazda 787B as well. However the C9 we were given was only the Le Mans version, very disappointingly, so it often can't compete on twisty tracks. An all-course version of it would be extremely welcome.

The XJR-9 is from 1988 but Sauber theoretically competed against it, just they didn't enter the car due to last-minute problems where the car wouldn't be safe to enter. The Jaguar is also iconic and a Le Mans winner, so extremely welcome (and it would have the 962C as a competitor too). Then there's the beautiful Toyota 88C or the 89C-V, which has grunts of power and is beautiful. With the XJR-9, 962C, and 88C we can fill the first 12 finishing spots for the 1988 race.

For 1989, we'd need more variety. Jaguar XJR-9, Mazda 767B, Aston Martin AMR1. Then there's the beautiful Nissan R89C.

Outside of 1988/1989, we have two 1991 cars. Since we're already getting a 1991 Toyota, and there is expectation Patrik will build another car, we would have 4 cars for the year... though potentially 2 of those would be paid DLC thumbsdown. So building something like the XJR-12, or even the Cougar C2S or Spice SE89 (ton of entrants) or 90, though not the winners like the 1992 car, it would still add to the grid. The Peugeot 905 struggled with reliability but ... It's not like we can run endurance races, much less run adequately with AI in single-player or era tracks, so long-stint pace doesn't matter.

But if you are willing to make content, the best would be to bolster the competitors for what we have in the game. It's the only hope to have leagues or online servers. If mclarenpapa is willing to do physics, I'm willing to do liveries to help make this thing real.


ps: I'll always ask about possibility of allowing quality ports to rFactor2 . It would be a dream to have all the good cars available on both games.

 

[GT VIRUS]

To bring it back down to my level, testing some kerbs

We are using assetto corsa to test various things, at the moment attempting to get kerbs sorted for the whole track.

 

[David Dominguez]

 

[AccAkut]

Ideally the more cars of the same season would be good. So far the Sauber C9 only has the 962C as a direct competitor. The 962C competes against the Mazda 787B as well. However the C9 we were given was only the Le Mans version, very disappointingly, so it often can't compete on twisty tracks. An all-course version of it would be extremely welcome.

The XJR-9 is from 1988 but Sauber theoretically competed against it, just they didn't enter the car due to last-minute problems where the car wouldn't be safe to enter. The Jaguar is also iconic and a Le Mans winner, so extremely welcome (and it would have the 962C as a competitor too). Then there's the beautiful Toyota 88C or the 89C-V, which has grunts of power and is beautiful. With the XJR-9, 962C, and 88C we can fill the first 12 finishing spots for the 1988 race.

For 1989, we'd need more variety. Jaguar XJR-9, Mazda 767B, Aston Martin AMR1. Then there's the beautiful Nissan R89C.

Outside of 1988/1989, we have two 1991 cars. Since we're already getting a 1991 Toyota, and there is expectation Patrik will build another car, we would have 4 cars for the year... though potentially 2 of those would be paid DLC thumbsdown. So building something like the XJR-12, or even the Cougar C2S or Spice SE89 (ton of entrants) or 90, though not the winners like the 1992 car, it would still add to the grid. The Peugeot 905 struggled with reliability but ... It's not like we can run endurance races, much less run adequately with AI in single-player or era tracks, so long-stint pace doesn't matter.

But if you are willing to make content, the best would be to bolster the competitors for what we have in the game. It's the only hope to have leagues or online servers. If mclarenpapa is willing to do physics, I'm willing to do liveries to help make this thing real.


ps: I'll always ask about possibility of allowing quality ports to rFactor2 . It would be a dream to have all the good cars available on both games.

I agree with every point, but you make it sound like plopping out car mods is a matter of days - most of us amateurs here take very long for a single car

 

[Deleted member 130869]

Haha, I wish it was so easy! I'd be surprised if a quality Group C car took less than 10 months. The extensive write-up is just to point out the possibilities and options taking into account the three different people who will be working on Group C cars .

 

[garyjpaterson]

Generic 2017 F1 car?

What sort of lift coefficients are you getting/going for? About 4ish? Should be pretty amazing to experience!

 

[Qazdar Karim]

4- 4.2 is what 2016 cars have

 

[garyjpaterson]

4- 4.2 is what 2016 cars have

That much? I thought the 2015 cars were around 3, and assumed the 2016 cars would only be 10% or so more...

 

[Qazdar Karim]

2015 cars are probably around 3.7-3.9

Man, just take a look to the 2016 quali laps especially: Monaco, Silverstone, Abu Dhabi

 

[garyjpaterson]

2015 cars are probably around 3.7-3.9

Man, just take a look to the 2016 quali laps especially: Monaco, Silverstone, Abu Dhabi

The SF15-T in AC with the default setup is around 3 I think, so perhaps its a bit conservative? With wings cranked up its around 3.5, not sure how accurate that is.

 

[burrito]

The SF15-T in AC with the default setup is around 3 I think, so perhaps its a bit conservative? With wings cranked up its around 3.5, not sure how accurate that is.

It's massively conservative. It makes up laptime with very grippy tyres.

 

[Qazdar Karim]

I don't think a F1 car downforce has ever been under 3 since mid 80s.

 

[garyjpaterson]

Damn, I've trusting the Kunos numbers all this time...

 

[mclarenf1papa]

Damn, I've trusting the Kunos numbers all this time...

Tbh I wouldn't really trust Kunos DF numbers on any cars...the 919 is also rather far off and also makes up for it with overly grippy tires at high loads...

 

[AccAkut]

To bring it back down to my level, testing some kerbs
View attachment 163606

We are using assetto corsa to test various things, at the moment attempting to get kerbs sorted for the whole track.

So you are part of a group developing a real track, and you test the design first in AC?