PiBoSo Official Forum

GP Bikes => Bikes => Mods => Physics => Topic started by: Yohji on November 07, 2014, 08:52:41 AM

Title: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: Yohji on November 07, 2014, 08:52:41 AM
this topic for discuss GPBikes beta6c discussion.

my first question, Chassis flex only lateral side? if can use vertical flex, it maybe good feeling when junp randing, washboard kerbs...
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 10:19:03 AM
As far as I can see, only lateral flexibility of fork and swing arm has been introduced. To me it's all we need.

What do you mean with "vertical chassis flex" ?

MaX.
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: Yohji on November 07, 2014, 01:02:35 PM
so, now fork and swing arm flex to left or side(lateral) its not flex to up or down(its mean Vertical)?

in cfg file, only lateral frex.
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 01:19:28 PM
Swing arm vertical flexibility is likely to be irrelevant, as anyway you have a suspension attached to it.

Lateral for both fork and swing arm is all we need (and have).

If you wanted to be and absolute sim maniac (which I don't recommend for GPB), you should separate lateral flexibility from torsional flexibility and you should also include fork bending under longitudinal forces (e.g. when braking hard).

I think the current implementation (lat flex only) covers 99.999% of our needs.

MaX.
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: Yohji on November 08, 2014, 08:36:55 AM
hm,

I tryed edit flexing, maybe stiffness 0=flex off.


so, I want debug for flexing,,,
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: PiBoSo on November 08, 2014, 05:46:22 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on November 07, 2014, 01:19:28 PM
Swing arm vertical flexibility is likely to be irrelevant, as anyway you have a suspension attached to it.

Lateral for both fork and swing arm is all we need (and have).

If you wanted to be and absolute sim maniac (which I don't recommend for GPB), you should separate lateral flexibility from torsional flexibility and you should also include fork bending under longitudinal forces (e.g. when braking hard).

I think the current implementation (lat flex only) covers 99.999% of our needs.

MaX.

http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=1622.msg23296#msg23296

FYI, professional simulators only simulate the front flex ( the very few that simulate chassis flex at all ).
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: PiBoSo on November 08, 2014, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: Yohji on November 08, 2014, 08:36:55 AM
maybe stiffness 0=flex off.

Correct.
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: Yohji on November 14, 2014, 02:00:26 PM
beta6 Correspondence slipper clutch? I feel difference from beta5

and beta6 still strange motion in up hill & down hill its cant fix now...? and what its cause?
Title: Re: GP Bikes beta 6c physics total Discussion
Post by: PiBoSo on November 14, 2014, 08:17:34 PM
Quote from: Yohji on November 14, 2014, 02:00:26 PM
beta6 Correspondence slipper clutch? I feel difference from beta5

and beta6 still strange motion in up hill & down hill its cant fix now...? and what its cause?

No changes in the slipper clutch simulation.