Patch 2.0 oversteer bug still present! (?)

[BrandonW77]

 

[Racelow]

That's tyre surface temp, not the internal gas temperature (which is shown as a pressure rating)



Nope.

You yet again made an adsurd claim about pressure rating. This has no increase effect when brakes are cooling.

 

[Scaff]

You yet again made an adsurd claim about pressure rating. This has no increase effect when brakes are cooling.

As the brake drum cools the tyre pressure increases.

Its rather clear the brakes start cooling from 908f while the tyre pressure is 2.38; the brakes lose 150f of temp in 1.5 seconds and the resulting tyre pressure at the end of that is 2.39!

As the brakes cool from the highest temp they get to the tyre pressure increases.

As time elapses and the brake temp drops, the tyre pressure increases, its really very, very simple.

To claim otherwise is to fly in the face of what the video shows.

What do you think happens to the 150f? Does Santa nick it ready for Christmas?

 

[Jack Dulmage]

He even liked the fallacy post... Thought progress was made... but alas...

 

[Scaff]

He even liked the fallacy post... Thought progress was made... but alas...

He thinks it refers to me.

 

[Racelow]

Tyre pressure is not reset at every corner, its not an indicator of the load of the car at that point in time. Should you wish to claim it is (which flies in the face of established tyre physics) then you will be expected to support that claim.

Right here you are jumping ship with your claim to not reset which is absurd.

As the brake drum cools the tyre pressure increases.

Not true, and the chart you shown proves absolutely nothing in this case you have shown no data up to the corner

 

[Scaff]

Not true, and the chart you shown proves absolutely nothing in this case you have shown no data up to the corner

What the highest brake temp up to the corner?

 

[SilkCutXJR]

Running raw.

The only great setting!

 

[Bealdor]

Not true, and the chart you shown proves absolutely nothing in this case you have shown no data up to the corner

Of course it's true, that's BASIC thermodynamics.

The car brakes -> brakes heat up (storing energy as heat) -> brakes dissipate heat to the rim -> brakes are cooling down because the energy (heat) is transferred to the rim -> rim gets warmer -> rim heats inflation air -> tire pressure rises

If the brakes wouldn't dissipate energy (read: cool down) they wouldn't heat up the tires.

This doesn't mean that the tire surface temp should rise because the heat has to move through the carcass first but I already posted this:

I'm happy enough with this part of the heat model. From all the research we've done and data watching live telemetry of various cars, the air inside the tire is a strong choke point (super low thermal mass and low conductivity). Brake heat has a strong effect to heat the rim and raise tire pressure, but moving from there outward to the tread rubber is a verrrrryyy slooooowwww process.

 

[killerjimbag]

****




Not true, and the chart you shown proves absolutely nothing in this case you have shown no data up to the corner

Ok! Perhaps you should use Google and search some things before posting. This is becoming comical and makes my day.

 

[BSD200]

What do you think happens to the 150f? Does Santa nick it ready for Christmas?

Oh man. I have been chuckling from this post for so long.

 

[BrandonW77]

The big question is whether the heat from the reindeers' hooves transfers to the rails of Santa's sleigh under braking...

 

[diesel97]

The big question is whether the heat from the reindeers' hooves transfers to the rails of Santa's sleigh under braking...

I don't think my roof shingles have a temp rating.., easy on the brakes Santa LOL

 

[Racelow]

What the highest brake temp up to the corner?

This has absolutely nothing to do with your claim. This shows only flawed physics in project cars.

 

[redi]

This has absolutely nothing to do with your claim. This shows only flawed physics in project cars.

I'm sorry to say, but this and your previous comments only show that this discussion is going way over your head. You apparently have no idea what the people are trying to explain to you, and basically you don't seem to understand the topic that you brought up for discussion.

I'm not going to say that the physics modelling in pCARS2 is perfect, but this particular part of modeling how brake heating influences tyre pressure is pretty accurate and with that pCARS2 is a unique sim racing title in that it's the first modelling this real effect. The people above have explained it perfectly fine, the only thing flawed is your grasp on the subject.

 

[Scaff]

This has absolutely nothing to do with your claim. This shows only flawed physics in project cars.

Actually it does, and if you knew a damn thing about what the conversation is about you would have figured out why I asked it.

I'm going to be blunt here, you have now moved the goalposts four times on this subject, in some increasingly desperate attempt to show something, anything wrong with PC2. All it seems because you are having an odd tantrum about a video in which I said some bad things about some of the sort of people who white knight GTS. In doing so all you are doing is re-enforcing the exact point I was making.

Lets take a look at this chain of events shall we.

After a number of claims (using other peoples videos) that cars in PC2 are undrivable (cinder-blocks for tyres and stone-age physics were your claims I recall) which were easily refuted by being able to drive them, we got the 66 Mustang as the next target. It not being able to take slow corners without turning to tightly and wiping out.

First goalpost move: Videos showing Mustang being quite drivable around the Glen, along with a member who has a known record of owning and driving cars from the era saying these videos look fine and he has no issue with the 66 in PC2. So you switch to a late brake oversteer being the PC2 oversteer bug.

Second goalpost move: Second by second breakdown of the whole oversteer situation, with telemetry and an explanation of ech part with reference to how vehicle dynamics operate in reality is provided. Immediate switch to, PC2 is broken because tyre pressure doesn't change with corner load.

Third goalpost move: Its explained (again with reference to real world physics) that corner load is not a major factor in tyre pressure at all, in fact its impact is minor. This resulted in the so wrong its amazing balloon analogy, which reinforced the appearance of you not understanding the subject at all. When you are unable to support this claim you then resort to misunderstanding the laws of thermodynamics and now claim that brake heat should affect tyres immediately, when this is explained to not be the case you then...

Forth goalpost move:....move to claiming that brake heat should affect the tyre surface, somehow bypassing the rest of the tyre by what I can only assume is a form of magic.

Throughout the entire process you have dismissed other people and sources out of hand, expected to be taken at face value while offering no evidence, sources or even logical explanations for any of the claims you have made.

You have now quite clearly dug a pit so deep for yourself that I actually feel rather sorry for you. You have no idea what you are discussing, shifting from one unsupported position to another while getting more and more confused and incoherent.

Basically I can see this going three ways:

1. You keep going. I can do this all day long, its not difficult when what you are discussing is supported by the fundamentals of vehicle and tyre dynamics.
2. Listen and actually learn something
3. White knight yourself into a position in which the staff take action, note that will not be me. I have no intention of moderating a discussion I am in.

So feel free to keep digging, to keep reporting me (five is a personal best for me) and to keep trying to bait me and other members for simply posting what is happening.

No one at all is under any illusion that PC2 is perfect (in fact you are the only one who has said that, in an attempt to state that others have claimed it), however one hell of a lot of the physics issue from the original have been fixed. Take the camber issue from the original, a quite clear issue that no one has a problem acknowledging, they sort of fixed it late in PC's life, and in PC2 it has moved even further forward.

However be assured that I will not be bowed into not commenting on GTS, PC2, AC, etc. In both positive and negative ways, simply because you get triggered by it.

Oh and I still am not convinced that you have played either PC2 or AC, but proving me wrong on that one would be easy. Some of the other claims you have made less so.

 

[killerjimbag]

Actually it does, and if you knew a damn thing about what the conversation is about you would have figured out why I asked it.

I'm going to be blunt here, you have now moved the goalposts four times on this subject, in some increasingly desperate attempt to show something, anything wrong with PC2. All it seems because you are having an odd tantrum about a video in which I said some bad things about some of the sort of people who white knight GTS. In doing so all you are doing is re-enforcing the exact point I was making.

Lets take a look at this chain of events shall we.

After a number of claims (using other peoples videos) that cars in PC2 are undrinkable (cinder-blocks for tyres and stone-age physics were your claims I recall) which were easily refuted by being able to drive them, we got the 66 Mustang as the next target. It not being able to take slow corners without turning to tightly and wiping out.

First goalpost move: Videos showing Mustang being quite drivable around the Glen, along with a member who has a known record of owning and driving cars from the era saying these videos look fine and he has no issue with the 66 in PC2. So you switch to a late brake oversteer being the PC2 oversteer bug.

Second goalpost move: Second by second breakdown of the whole oversteer situation, with telemetry and an explanation of ech part with reference to how vehicle dynamics operate in reality is provided. Immediate switch to, PC2 is broken because tyre pressure doesn't change with corner load.

Third goalpost move: Its explained (again with reference to real world physics) that corner load is not a major factor in tyre pressure at all, in fact its impact is minor. This resulted in the so wrong its amazing balloon analogy, which reinforced the appearance of you not understanding the subject at all. When you are unable to support this claim you then resort to misunderstanding the laws of thermodynamics and now claim that brake heat should affect tyres immediately, when this is explained to not be the case you then...

Forth goalpost move:....move to claiming that brake heat should affect the tyre surface, somehow bypassing the reason of the tyre by what I can only assume is a form of magic.

Throughout the entire process you have dismissed other people and sources out of hand, expected to be taken at face value while offering no evidence, sources or even logical explanations for any of the claims you have made.

You have now quite clearly dug a pit so deep for yourself that I actually feel rather sorry for you. You have no idea what you are discussing, shifting from one unsupported position to another while getting more and more confused and incoherent.

Basically I can see this going three ways:

1. You keep going. I can do this all day long, its not difficult when what you are discussing is supported by the fundamentals of vehicle and tyre dynamics.
2. Listen and actually learn something
3. White knight yourself into a position in which the staff take action, note that will not be me. I have no intention of moderating a discussion I am in.

So feel free to keep digging, to keep reporting me (five is a personal best for me) and to keep trying to bait me and other members for simply posting what is happening.

No one at all is under any illusion that PC2 is perfect (in fact you are the only one who has said that, in an attempt to state that others have claimed it), however one hell of a lot of the physics issue from the original have been fixed. Take the camber issue from the original, a quite clear issue that no one has a problem acknowledging, they sort of fixed it late in PC's life, and in PC2 it has moved even further forward.

However be assured that I will not be bowed into not commenting on GTS, PC2, AC, etc. In both positive and negative ways, simply because you get triggered by it.

Oh and I still am not convinced that you have played either PC2 or AC, but proving me wrong on that one would be easy. Some of the other claims you have made less so.

I'm reporting you. Double post. Ha,Ha. I couldn't resist.
Just to add something. How dare you ever say a bad thing about GT. My god this is what you started? Perhaps we can take the 66 Mustang in GT Sport,to Watkins Glenn. Oops never mind.

 

[BrandonW77]

 

[Racelow]

Actually it does, and if you knew a damn thing about what the conversation is about you would have figured out why I asked it.

I'm going to be blunt here, you have now moved the goalposts four times on this subject, in some increasingly desperate attempt to show something, anything wrong with PC2. All it seems because you are having an odd tantrum about a video in which I said some bad things about some of the sort of people who white knight GTS. In doing so all you are doing is re-enforcing the exact point I was making.

Lets take a look at this chain of events shall we.

After a number of claims (using other peoples videos) that cars in PC2 are undrivable (cinder-blocks for tyres and stone-age physics were your claims I recall) which were easily refuted by being able to drive them, we got the 66 Mustang as the next target. It not being able to take slow corners without turning to tightly and wiping out.

First goalpost move: Videos showing Mustang being quite drivable around the Glen, along with a member who has a known record of owning and driving cars from the era saying these videos look fine and he has no issue with the 66 in PC2. So you switch to a late brake oversteer being the PC2 oversteer bug.

Second goalpost move: Second by second breakdown of the whole oversteer situation, with telemetry and an explanation of ech part with reference to how vehicle dynamics operate in reality is provided. Immediate switch to, PC2 is broken because tyre pressure doesn't change with corner load.

Third goalpost move: Its explained (again with reference to real world physics) that corner load is not a major factor in tyre pressure at all, in fact its impact is minor. This resulted in the so wrong its amazing balloon analogy, which reinforced the appearance of you not understanding the subject at all. When you are unable to support this claim you then resort to misunderstanding the laws of thermodynamics and now claim that brake heat should affect tyres immediately, when this is explained to not be the case you then...

Forth goalpost move:....move to claiming that brake heat should affect the tyre surface, somehow bypassing the rest of the tyre by what I can only assume is a form of magic.

Throughout the entire process you have dismissed other people and sources out of hand, expected to be taken at face value while offering no evidence, sources or even logical explanations for any of the claims you have made.

You have now quite clearly dug a pit so deep for yourself that I actually feel rather sorry for you. You have no idea what you are discussing, shifting from one unsupported position to another while getting more and more confused and incoherent.

Basically I can see this going three ways:

1. You keep going. I can do this all day long, its not difficult when what you are discussing is supported by the fundamentals of vehicle and tyre dynamics.
2. Listen and actually learn something
3. White knight yourself into a position in which the staff take action, note that will not be me. I have no intention of moderating a discussion I am in.

So feel free to keep digging, to keep reporting me (five is a personal best for me) and to keep trying to bait me and other members for simply posting what is happening.

No one at all is under any illusion that PC2 is perfect (in fact you are the only one who has said that, in an attempt to state that others have claimed it), however one hell of a lot of the physics issue from the original have been fixed. Take the camber issue from the original, a quite clear issue that no one has a problem acknowledging, they sort of fixed it late in PC's life, and in PC2 it has moved even further forward.

However be assured that I will not be bowed into not commenting on GTS, PC2, AC, etc. In both positive and negative ways, simply because you get triggered by it.

Oh and I still am not convinced that you have played either PC2 or AC, but proving me wrong on that one would be easy. Some of the other claims you have made less so.

If you knew a damn thing about this problem with project cars you would have been talking about brake heat inside the tire in you original claim that you yourself debunked. It wasn't until bealder stepped in and spoke on brake heat inside tires could be a cause of this phenomenon. That clam still does not prove this because it does not happen everytime this is replicated. While turning left the right brake should get the most heat and cool into tie tire at straits according to that claim,this game is deeply flawed with bugs. But you want to say that I moved the goal post, end even more, you go to do personal attacks about my experience. and bragging about how many complaints you received from your personal attacks. Great job of setting an example of how everyone should act in this forum.

 

[Scaff]

If you knew a damn thing about this problem with project cars you would have been talking about brake heat inside the tire in you original claim that you yourself debunked.

Its not a problem, so why would I be talking about it?

Its what happens in the real world!

It wasn't until bealder stepped in and spoke on brake heat inside tires could be a cause of this phenomenon.

You do know what internal gas cycles in a tyre means? Take a look at when I mentioned that.

That clam still does not prove this because it does not happen everytime this is replicated.

Which is why I asked you what the highest tempt on the straight was when braking, you know he question you dismissed.

Now if you answer than and then take a look at how heat transfer occurs for various materials you will answer the question for yourself.

While turning left the right brake should get the most heat and cool into tie tire at straits according to that claim,this game is deeply flawed with bugs.

Which would assume that the brakes were at an equal temperature before staring to turn, it also assumes equal air flow to remove the heat from the drums and wheels as well.

Both of which you might have considered if you had answered my question about the highest brake temp on the straight.

Do you know what the three factors in heat transfer are?

Can you then relate that to the heat dissipating from a drum, across the air to the inner wheel hub, via the wheel hub to the internal gas of the tyre, from that to the interior of the tyre carcass through to the exterior of the tyre?

Drum > Air > Outside of Wheel Hub > Inside of Wheel Hub > Air Inside Tyre > Inside tyre carcass > Tyre Surface

Which of these materials will experience the most energy loss during transfer?

What starting temp at the drum would be needed before enough energy is generated to manage to affect the interior of the tyre?

Think about the max brake temp on the staright and then at the corner in conjunction with the above.

what conclusions can you draw from that.

Put some thought into these and answer them and you will be making a start.

But you want to say that I moved the goal post,

You have, repeatedly.

end even more, you go to do personal attacks about my experience.

Nope, I've asked you to support the claims you have made about your experience.Quite different.

and bragging about how many complaints you received from your personal attacks. Great job of setting an example of how everyone should act in this forum.

I've not made any personal attacks.

What I have done is ask you to provide evidence to support your claims, claims that do not match how real world physics work. Those are not personal attacks, but rather perfectly valid questions to ask.

Personal attacks would be the language and abuse you used to describe me when you made the reports!

 

[PzR Slim]

If you knew a damn thing about this problem with project cars you would have been talking about brake heat inside the tire in you original claim that you yourself debunked. It wasn't until bealder stepped in and spoke on brake heat inside tires could be a cause of this phenomenon. That clam still does not prove this because it does not happen everytime this is replicated. While turning left the right brake should get the most heat and cool into tie tire at straits according to that claim,this game is deeply flawed with bugs. But you want to say that I moved the goal post, end even more, you go to do personal attacks about my experience. and bragging about how many complaints you received from your personal attacks. Great job of setting an example of how everyone should act in this forum.

So yet again, nothing to back up your own claims, nothing to refute the claims of others and a little bit of mud slinging. Standard.

 

[Bealdor]

...It wasn't until bealder stepped in and spoke on brake heat inside tires could be a cause of this phenomenon. That clam still does not prove this because it does not happen everytime this is replicated...

It does. Just check out Scaff's original video:



The same effect happens at/after every single corner he had to brake for.

While turning left the right brake should get the most heat and cool into tie tire at straits according to that claim,this game is deeply flawed with bugs.

The left brakes get hotter because the braking sequence didn't start with equal brake temperatures.
This is because this track is driven clockwise, which leads to increased load on the left side tires (and brakes).

 

[Scaff]

The same effect happens at/after every single corner he had to brake for.

This is why I include the telemetry in the videos I produce for this, however its a double edged sword.

 

[OdeFinn]

The big question is whether the heat from the reindeers' hooves transfers to the rails of Santa's sleigh under braking...

It kinda transfer, but not as direct transfer, but because stored kinetic energy of sleigh, plus few other things related to friction, masss, and snow hardness factor..

Do you know what the three factors in heat transfer are?

Can you then relate that to the heat dissipating from a drum, across the air to the inner wheel hub, via the wheel hub to the internal gas of the tyre, from that to the interior of the tyre carcass through to the exterior of the tyre?

Drum > Air > Outside of Wheel Hub > Inside of Wheel Hub > Air Inside Tyre > Inside tyre carcass > Tyre Surface

Which of these materials will experience the most energy loss during transfer?

Air? This sleight was too fast for me to stay on board, my wheels on my car transfer most of heat thru center of rim (where bolts are) to outer part of rim, which is metal etc.. Maybe my language understanding capability hits on limits here? Air is only secondary heat transfer method afaik.
How far this sleight gone, what I'm not understanding?

 

[Scaff]

It kinda transfer, but not as direct transfer, but because stored kinetic energy of sleigh, plus few other things related to friction, masss, and snow hardness factor..



Air? This sleight was too fast for me to stay on board, my wheels on my car transfer most of heat thru center of rim (where bolts are) to outer part of rim, which is metal etc.. Maybe my language understanding capability hits on limits here? Air is only secondary heat transfer method afaik.
How far this sleight gone, what I'm not understanding?

Does your car run drums?

Brake setups are also designed to try and get as much heat away from the hub carrier as possible.

Not that it would make much difference as it's the air in the tyre that's the main blink to heat getting to the outside of the tyre.

 

[eran0004]

Nor would that be a 1 bar increase, it's a 0.01 bar increase, 2.28 to 2.29 is a 0.01 increase.

It may not even be that much. It's the last digit of a floating point value, so it could have gone from 2.284 to 2.285, and it would display as a change from 2.28 to 2.29, since it only displays two decimals.

And it could even be less than that (2.284999 to 2.285, for instance). The last digit of a rounded floating point value doesn't really mean anything other than "the actual value is closer to this digit than to the previous/next digit", so it's not a good idea to read too much into it.