Automobilista 2 V1.5 Officially RELEASED - Now updated to V1.5.0.5

Conserning the complexity of tire models then it doesnt help if the car and tire behaviour feels like trash.
Even if you call it next-generation something.
An example is iRacings tire model who according to the man responsible for it (Mike Kaemmer) is so advanced that it makes its calculations based on the molecular structure of the tire compound itself.

Because the problem with such a proud saying is that if the outcome (car/tire behaviour) feels awfull then users begin thinking such "facts" have been fabricated by the marketing department.

 

Well...
I see no difference when setting it to 2.0, no frame drop, no frame time alteration, but mostly no visual improvement.
There was a thread and was also discused in the past, it was commonly agrred that it doesn t work. Sorry for not providing the thread but ask in the VR part of this forum.
In the end of the day, if it works for you, thats all you need.

 

For me the resolution and also the performance changes. Without sampling I have 50%+ headcache in the Oculus statistics. With sampling it gets very close to 3-5%. Yes, that's not ideal, but once you have to run 2.0 sampling at 72hz you can impssible go back. Ps: SteamVR no longer runs in the background for me. I don't remember exactly which tool I used for this...I'll take another look at the weekend if I find time....

 

What I posted are studies and development of simulation software. A lot of simracing, even today, use a not very advanced tire model and an example is AC in the first place and secondly, ACC which make use of the Pacejka laws. The truth is that they have a limit as written on the report

"The modeling of tire–road interaction has been a subject of great interest over recent decades. These models are usually classified into two non-hermetic categories: empirical and physical models. The state-of-the-art model is the well-known Pacejka’s magic formula (MF) , which belongs to the first category. This model, valid for quasi-stationary simulations, fits the obtained experimental results reliably on and off the bench. This model has evolved over the years, from the first formulation in 1987 to the current version that belongs to Siemens SimCenter Tire. Since this latest version, it has been included in the Simcenter MF-Tyre/MF-SWIFT package. One of the problems of this current version is that it does not consider any thermal parameters of the road or tire (tread, carcass, air, etc.) and linear speed of the vehicle is marginally considered in the model. Hence, several authors have modified this model to include these parameters

Among these modifications, the following can be highlighted. Mizuno proposed a linear dependence of parameter D with temperature. Sorniotti proposed a linear dependence of the maximum lateral and longitudinal friction coefficient on tread temperature and a linear dependence of longitudinal and transverse stiffness on carcass temperature.

Sakhnevych et al. proposed a modification of Pacejka’s magic formula (MF-evo) that incorporates the influence of temperature and pressure, modifying various coefficients of the MF by adding polynomial terms. The Kelly and Sharp model uses Gaussian functions, modeling the friction coefficient as a function of both temperature and longitudinal velocity. The model of Harsh and Shyrokau slightly modified the Kelly and Sharp model to estimate heat generation due to friction and modified the D and K parameters of the MF. D and K are affected by a quadratic factor for pure longitudinal behavior. D is also affected by a quadratic factor for pure lateral behavior, while K is affected by a more complex expression. Ozerem and Morrey employ the brush model, along with Kelly and Sharp’s contact force formulation for a FSAE vehicle. Calabrese et al. modified MF parameters λμ and λk to consider the influence of temperature in the maximum friction coefficient and cornering stiffness. Cabrera et al. proposed a decreasing exponential dependence of the maximum friction coefficient on linear velocity of the vehicle.


Regarding physical models, the brush model discretizes the contact patch into a series of bristles aiming to understand what happens during tire–road interaction. Romano et al. have employed a modified brush model to investigate transient effects of the tire force generation, including non-linearities. Semi-physical models have also been used to study the influence of vertical load excitation frequency on the generation of contact forces. Recently, with the development of finite element methods, many simulations have been carried out to study mechanical carcass deformation, pressure distribution in the contact footprint, and the generation of tangential forces.The main problem with these methods is their computational cost.Thus, FEM simulations have been relegated to the following applications: tire design by manufacturers, the study of high-frequency behavior (vibration modes) of tires, improving the understanding of mechanical/elastic behavior of tires, and, finally, allowing the generation of simplified finite element models for use in real-time applications.
Based on experimental and FEM results, several software packages analyze tire dynamics in the following ways. The SETA tire model, used in the Project Cars 2 driving simulator, performs three simultaneous simulations: tire deformation, generation of contact forces in the tire tread and contact patch, and heat transfer and generation model. Michelin’s TaMeTirE model also performs three simulations, virtually identical to the SETA model. For the generation of contact forces, it distinguishes two zones: sliding and adherent. Cosin’s FTire model also performs simultaneous simulations: mechanical, thermal, wear, air volume vibration, and the flexible visco-plastic rim one."

ultimately, some simulators use "empirical" models such as the Kunos model, which have their relative limitations, and takes into account a few parameters, while the same PC2 that exposes itself to using a "physical" model, (defined by many users as a sim-cade or arcade) and actually the SETA tire model, takes into account many other parameters, and Michelin itself, the world's largest tire company, in their simulation to develop their IRL tyres, and this should give you an idea of how things are, makes use of a "physical" model similar to PC2's SETA model.

Going back to what "Dicra" said, the problem with this type of advanced model of tires, and developing and calibrating them, and it takes a lot of time on the part of the developers, as opposed to the Empirical models, which are relatively simpler and more widely developed, but they don't tell the truth of how a tire model behaves dynamically.

 

This is a bright example of putting together a technical essay based on facts and papers which the person has studied and understood.
From an engineer, thank you John.

 

Can only disagree and calling a great career mode with a lot of customization and progression a "gimmick" when it covers what motorsport is about ?? Sounds more like you do not like F1 (EDIT) VIDEOGAMES rather than a game mode like that.

 

Thanks for telling me that. I think I need to have a strong talking to with myself then. If I don't like F1 why the hell have I wasted the last 33 years watching it and posting on F1 forums over 20+ years!?

BTW, does anybody know, did Verstappen invest his tokens this year into engine or front wing? It would be good to know, because I want to replicate his strategy in F1 23.

 

Sorry. Dont know what happened with my memory.
His name is DAVE kaemmer.

ByTheWay: Probably a bad memory module.

 

0.675 and 0.275.

With these numbers I don't lose horizontal FOV and see black bars (use glasses) and the vertical FOV is a bit bigger than the AMS 2 helmet view. Reprojection only kick in with headlights and heavy rain, and reprojection at 60 FPS is really ok. Will post later a video with settings, maybe help someone.

I tweak settings more than I race in this thing... It's funny after 50s...

 

I can also manage 0.275 with the helmet, but at 0.6 I see clear bars on the edge. Can you set SupetSampling in the game? For some this doesn't seem to work. And here's another trick to increase the sharpness. Day & night difference!

 

With anything below 0.675 I can see horizontal bars inside. I'm using the larger IPD in Quest 2.

Supersampling works ok in OculusTrayTool, but I don't use It for performance.

The settings that works nice with 3060Ti and R7 5800X:

Fixed 120FPS with any cars and any track, full grids, without headlights on and/or heavy particles (dirt or heavy water spray). In heavy scenarios never goes bellow 60FPS, and ASW kick in is fluid in 120FPS to 60FPS at 120Hz.

 

I meant F1 VIDEOGAMES, since that was what we were talking about at the beginning of the single player / career topic ?

 

since fake 106..

 

Yes, very important to change the settings in that file for more sharpness, however don't overdo it because that will introduce a lot of shimmering. Play a bit with that setting up and downs until you find your sweetspot. Another thing I just explored is to add a tiny (1-5) bit of head movement when in VR in open seaters. It gives a bit more feeling of speed somehow. Suggest to try it, you can always turn it down again if it makes you sick.

 

October is behind us, could be cool to just give a small heads up on the current status of the future update.

 

Soon

 

Is it really that urgent that an update...er...update is required? it's not really going to fundamentally change the game is it? I think it's pretty much mission complete by this stage. Even some of the red-bars are going back to the release candidate instead of the Beta, and they paid a hefty door price for that preview privilege.

 

IMO it does

 

In what sense is it mission complete?

 

The next update brings back the leaderboards, which is a big deal to quite a lot of AMS2 users.