After riding spa for a bit i though i would use MaxHud and observe the suspension movements.
It seems that with the 990 under any acceleration (even light acceleration) the front suspension is at full extension and the rear does not move much at all. Playing with the settings for front and read suspension really does not seem to make much impact. I was under the impression that the rear suspension geometry is supposed to give some opposing reaction to keep the suspension more level (and keep some load on the front tyre) under acceleration. What am i missing?
I thought it worked like this
http://www.sportrider.com/more-fun-geometry (http://www.sportrider.com/more-fun-geometry)
The thing that would affect the anti-squat behavior is the swing arm pivot setting in the garage (figure 6, yellow line). But on the 990 (and on most of the other bikes) this setting is irrelevant ans there's no difference in the 0,1 and 2 setting (min/mas point are identical in the .geom).
In many situations me too I find the front to be way too light (and to lift too easily). Let's just hope what PiBoSo is doing on the rear suspension will help.
try it on the rsw500, the pivot setting is working on it.
+1 Front needs more load during acceleration. This will help with tankslappers, inability to change direction, front washouts IMO.
For BoB (saves his fingers): BoB would also like a steering damper please. :)
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 23, 2015, 12:27:29 AM
The thing that would affect the anti-squat behavior is the swing arm pivot setting in the garage (figure 6, yellow line). But on the 990 (and on most of the other bikes) this setting is irrelevant ans there's no difference in the 0,1 and 2 setting (min/mas point are identical in the .geom).
In many situations me too I find the front to be way too light (and to lift too easily). Let's just hope what PiBoSo is doing on the rear suspension will help.
Tried swing arm with 990 - does not seem to alter squat under acceleration :(
here is my test Bike to known Geometry
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8z1c8mntGtLdG1NR2pwMjJ3ckE/view?usp=sharing
bese is RC990. I edited Swingarm angle 5degrees to low, pivot position, and little CoM.
at first, you get ride Pivot Position "0" thats not working for anti squat,
next changing Pivot Position to "5" that has big anti squat moment geometry.
thats testing to get feel anti squat,
and this bike static balance is "front down" "rear up". this cause many front weight, but that cause less dynamic front fork caster angle, plz reset caster to big (23→25)
it cause better balance at Acceleration, but not good at braking (too many front weight!)
offcouse, i know that Test bike balance is not good to Racing Ride :P
I think, GPB has to more Improvement to Pitch (or dynamic wight distribution)
(so, now Piboso working new rear sus sim, I hope it cause better to ride )
Brilliant, it works!
Much better on the flat turns :)
The elbows against the tank, still rubbing the ground, are against real progress due to the tires. Coefficients of adhesion achieved today is approximately 2. This means that a tire that supports a weight of 100 kg will skid soil for horizontal thrust force of 200 kg !!! (1 adhesion means that the vertical force and the horizontal force would be identical). This allows pilots to look at 60 °, which corresponds to 2 G of centrifugal force! It's huge but also very complicated to manage and you'll understand why the flexibility of frames ... is another puzzle Japanese head (and Italian).
Technical MOTO GP: Travel to the limits of physics
Variable flexibility
The fact that the motorcycle and the driver take 2 G in turn, means that in this situation, the load on the suspensions is huge and they are then strongly compressed. Therefore, to drive the more it will take a major effort, which does not facilitate the natural absorption of bumps in turns. That is not good for handling. Worse, if a lump of 2 cm is in the wheel, the suspension being not at all in the working axis, but inclined of 60 °, it will have to compress 4 cm, so that the wheel actually up 2 cm gold ... we have said it already had more than a good part of his race ... a result, engineers are playing on the lateral flexibility of the frame and the swingarm to absorb some dents in this context for the less delicate. Again, like charging for transfers, it is a virtuoso work to handle the art of compromise so that flexibility provides handling that is not bouncy curve and rigidity is sufficient braking, as straight and fast corners. It is for this reason that many executives and swingarm are tested constantly to suit the circuit and the sensations of the driver.
source/http://www.lerepairedesmotards.com
Quote from: Yohji on November 23, 2015, 06:04:25 PM
here is my test Bike to known Geometry
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8z1c8mntGtLdG1NR2pwMjJ3ckE/view?usp=sharing
bese is RC990. I edited Swingarm angle 5degrees to low, pivot position, and little CoM.
at first, you get ride Pivot Position "0" thats not working for anti squat,
next changing Pivot Position to "5" that has big anti squat moment geometry.
thats testing to get feel anti squat,
and this bike static balance is "front down" "rear up". this cause many front weight, but that cause less dynamic front fork caster angle, plz reset caster to big (23→25)
it cause better balance at Acceleration, but not good at braking (too many front weight!)
offcouse, i know that Test bike balance is not good to Racing Ride :P
I think, GPB has to more Improvement to Pitch (or dynamic wight distribution)
(so, now Piboso working new rear sus sim, I hope it cause better to ride )
Hello Yohji,
I tried a bit more with this bike and the changes in the handling are very interesting. Using the pivot adjustment allows for more realistic suspension movements and i also noticed that the bike is noticeably different when using softer suspension settings and/or the longer swing arm - with the original bike i have found it difficult to notice much change in the bike when adjusting suspension.
The bike also seems a little less prone to the front randomly folding and the rear slides longer (more chance to save) before letting go, i did not notice any big problems with braking as the more predictable bike is more controlled if it does weave a bit. The nice thing is it does not make the bike 'easier to ride' like some fixes, just a bit more predictable.
Have you considered submitting it to the bike MOD so that it can be used online, i think it might generate some useful discussion and feedback.
Thanks
This is totally awesome, Yohji!!
Can you include your seamless gearbox in this modified RCV?
It would be very interesting to try.
Wheelie is a lot better of course but also braking and rear wheel feel (powersliding works much much better).
..Now I have high expectations for the PiBoSo's improved rear suspension geometry simulation.
Not tried it yet but it sounds like bike setup porn! Nice one 8)
Yohji, it's probably better if you create a dedicated thread to discuss the changes you've done.
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on November 24, 2015, 11:36:55 AM
Not tried it yet but it sounds like bike setup porn! Nice one 8)
Its encouraging that a geometry modification has a positive or predictable effect on the bikes handling without messing (fiddling) the physics.
Still does not like inclined turns though (we know why) - Roll on B8
here is V2 bike
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8z1c8mntGtLN1N0cjdVN1pfT0U/view?usp=sharing
some moddified at front, and transmission(near-seamless Shift)
but, I will not more modding this bike now. because, beta8 will comming soon. and that has big change at rear section.
Thanks Yohji,
Not sure about the seamless shift myself, seems very strange after being used to the default and has quite an impact on the way the bike feels. Going to experiment more with the V1 bike.
I respect the work but driving is not natural.
Based on the 990 is rotten, expect beta 8 can finally be a good working basis ::)
@Yohji: in the .geom you're missing pressure_center2 with respect to the stock murasama (I don't know what it does though).
Decided that the V2 bike behaves very strangely, but i do like the V1 version. Not sure what you changed at the front or whether its due to the smoothed gearbox but it does seem difficult to hold a line on the V2 model.
The new gearbox works brilliantly!
You can brake later and accelerate harder.
Plus, now you can properly revmatch manually if you'd want to.
I really want to try it out in a race, a server with version two installed would be ncie.
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 24, 2015, 08:28:39 PM
@Yohji: in the .geom you're missing pressure_center2 with respect to the stock murasama (I don't know what it does though).
I used BikeED, when save with it, it parameta has gone. I will insert manually.
V3
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8z1c8mntGtLQ1I1WjBGVk51SDg/view?usp=sharing
now I edit RC990, but if I could, I challenging to make a RCV1000R(or RC213V-RS) bike, if I get these model.
the bike is smoother curve rapidly, and many more live in tight curve,the front gives the impression of a problem under braking(big braking)
pleasant to drive.(compared with the original version)
Oh, seems that you have to be careful on the downshifting at some corners.
Just destroyed my engine two times at the Fuchsröhre (Nordschleife) when downshifting from 6th to 4th :D
Once again, we probably need more advanced slipper clutch controls to avoid this and get the smooth downshifts MotoGP are able to bikes do.
Quote from: vin97 on November 27, 2015, 02:37:59 AM
Oh, seems that you have to be careful on the downshifting at some corners.
Just destroyed my engine two times at the Fuchsröhre (Nordschleife) when downshifting from 6th to 4th :D
Once again, we probably need more advanced slipper clutch controls to avoid this and get the smooth downshifts MotoGP are able to bikes do.
I think all the elements we need are there, it's all in the tuning of the slipper clutch.
So, you say, it's already possible to get the smooth seamless downshifting where you almost cannot distinguish the individual gear changes?
I thought engine brake and clutch controls for downshifting was still seperated to some degree.
Well, even better then :D
Quote from: vin97 on November 27, 2015, 09:40:09 AM
So, you say, it's already possible to get the smooth seamless downshifting where you almost cannot distinguish the individual gear changes?
That's shouldn't be too difficult: push the EB control far enough and reduce shifting timing (as Yohji did). But you'll have little engine brake.
I guess the difficulty is in finding the right compromise: you still want some engine braking when downshifting, but not too much.
Right now in-game we can only act on the EB setting, but modder can act on it and on the slipper clutch parameters.
Quote from: vin97 on November 27, 2015, 09:40:09 AM
I thought engine brake and clutch controls for downshifting was still seperated to some degree.
EB and slipper clutch are separate, but that shouldn't be a big problem.
One has just to ensure that the setting of the two make sense together.
Interesting.
Where do you configure the clutch and engine brake?
Quote from: vin97 on November 27, 2015, 06:55:56 PM
Where do you configure the clutch and engine brake?
In the bike .cfg file:
- ecu section, EngineBraking subsection
- plus engine section, Clutch subsection (Slipper, MaxAngle, MaxSlip)
An idiots guide to rear suspension anti-squat design. :)
http://www.angelicbulldog.org.uk/how-it-works/swingarm-geometry/ (http://www.angelicbulldog.org.uk/how-it-works/swingarm-geometry/)
http://www.angelicbulldog.org.uk/how-it-works/swing-arms-1/2/ (http://www.angelicbulldog.org.uk/how-it-works/swing-arms-1/2/)
It would be nice is bikeED could display these geometry lines to assist with adjustment.