Ok guys (and girls) , let's proove AC right (or wrong) using Laguna Seca.

good input guys. I am adding the "ground level" correction for wind and it'll be out in a hotfix very soon.
Thank you for the help


EDIT: I should really learn to update the thread before posting.. ninj'ed by @Aristotelis

 

You guys are f****** legends

All hail Kunos.

 

Unintentional tornado feature in AC. How to activate?

 

Setting a value of 30 felt like one when I was playing around shortly after it was added. I ended up setting most of them in the server cfg to max 10 with a few max 20's in there as well.

 

Awesome news!

Some further ideas/suggestions:

On its simplest form, the wind shear profile (or gradient) is relative to the distance from the shear surface (track) and not the actual track elevation (slopes and hills). This means all the track would have the same wind-speed, irrespective of actual slopes on the track. The gradient equation could be made assuming the wind-speeds the cars will see are about 0.5 (?) meters above ground (or better yet, use a specific value for each car!) computed from a reported wind-speed set on the menu (which is say measured at 5m above ground, not sure what's the standard here). A second simplification would be to assume the wind always travels parallel to the track and it always hits the car orthogonal to its vertical planes (if all 4 tyres are in the ground ). Given wind is implemented already, I suspect the sim already has all it needs to get this done.

If you want to go complex, and do account for track elevation changes, then the above would have to be corrected for wind pressure changes as wind goes uphill or downhill and accounting for wind direction (again a simple approx. equation could do the job). This would change the local effective wind speed depending on the slope angle and location. The second part would be that now the wind would not necessarily be parallel to the ground, orthogonal to the car vertical planes, or both. It could lift the car (say when entering/exiting a hill's crest) or push it down (when on a entering/exiting valley). It might be cool to tinker with more complex wind but would be far more complicated to implement.

 

wind is already parallel to the surface.
The correction has been made considering 0.5m height exactly as you suggested that results in a value of 44% of the original wind speed following "Wind Gradient" equation with an Hellmann exponent of 0.27.

 

I am getting smarter reading this thread

 

Does this essentially just mean that if we continue to use wind speed as given in weather reports, that the effect on the cars will be a lot less than it was before? I'm asking as someone who regularly uses real track weather when setting up races.

 

I believe you have already quoted the exact answer from Lord K

"...that results in a value of 44% of the original wind speed..."

 

Yeah, I guess that's all it is.
I can even write the entire code change:

windSpeed *= 0.44;

But hey, who am I to demistify the secrets of a coder

 

yeah that's pretty much it, the only complication was where to put the multiplication because the UI should still show the original value, but at the end that's really all there is

 

Here's my attempt in the M4:



I'll tell you, I think there are some days when the track was grippier, because his laptimes cannot be replicated using the really low track grip settings in AC. I know from also having talked to people in California that Seca does not have the best of surfaces...but there is no way you can reach Randy's laptime using "dusty" or "slow" track grip.

 

The grip at optimum is still realistic, it's already less than other Kunos tracks. Optimum grip can be used for a day that wasn't very windy and had a good number of clean laps done on it (which would help clean up the racing line).

 

Ooo, how can you tell? (I don't know how the track grip is modelled.)

 

Interesting, I always set the grip at dusty or slow because of what Aris said in a thread somewhere on this site. But you're saying that the baseline track grip as it was modeled is lower by design? Interesting, will make a note.

 

*sigh*

 

Yes it's lower; all tracks have their own surface friction values. Also, to be clear (for Laguna specifically), Aris said that it's worth testing a range of grips, not that you should only use low grip.

Track grip in AC (and all sims) is just a multiplier for the friction coefficient of the tires - thus, it's somewhat arbitrary (in that you can design very grippy tires but then offset that by a more slippery track and there would be no real difference in behavior. The only important part is the final friction coefficient). The Dusty, Slow, etc. presets are just there to add some variation to the mix (they're multipliers of a muliplier).

In AC currently, it's usually the case that the most realistic lap times are done on fast/optimum grip. With certain combos and situations (e.g. a windy, sandy day at Laguna), it may need to be lowered, but fast/optimum is a good starting point.

 

Don't forget that the track grip settings also have a variation/randomisation for the initial grip, except the 100% one. Plus I thought there's the rubbering in over an amount laps. Or perhaps it's only between sessions (practice-quali-race), not sure.

 

My quick search for track grip posts by Aris turned up these, but there might be posts that I missed.

February 22nd, 2017
https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/i...grip-settings-1-12-and-v10.43297/#post-844485

October 26th, 2016
https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/index.php?threads/porsche-pack-1-comments.38046/page-5#post-774483

And ofc the post #18 from this very thread we're in:
https://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/i...or-wrong-using-laguna-seca.48651/#post-950016

 

Cool!
And do you know if the DY value that you can get from a telemetry app (Physics built-in, Python SDK, shared mem, UDP, whatever) is that final value or just the plain value from the tyres?