2017-11-19 snapshot

Post anything about MX Simulator here. Please. I'm begging you.
barrington314
Posts: 6063
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:03 pm
Team: me
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby barrington314 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:06 am

I also feel as if we need some kind of "first pass" setting. For example, first pass over would act as if erode setting were on 10, while the remaining passes would be lower, like 5. Or in other words, loamy dirt that gets harder with each pass. I think this will be essential for outdoor tracks that start with zero ruts.

User avatar
Atom6246
Posts: 3030
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:28 am
Location: Florida

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby Atom6246 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 2:39 am

barrington314 wrote:I also feel as if we need some kind of "first pass" setting. For example, first pass over would act as if erode setting were on 10, while the remaining passes would be lower, like 5. Or in other words, loamy dirt that gets harder with each pass. I think this will be essential for outdoor tracks that start with zero ruts.

I think that would be a great idea.
Image
Check out my YouTube channel by clicking the pic below!
Image

barrington314
Posts: 6063
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:03 pm
Team: me
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby barrington314 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:02 am

We can use multiple settings throughout the track. When we tested on Unadilla, it had a setting that didn't allow as much erode in the first turn.

jlv
Site Admin
Posts: 12375
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:39 am
Team: No Frills Racing
Contact:

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby jlv » Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:40 am

Not sure if I like the idea of going all the way to 0 for depth. When you go with only inner depth you won't get much in the way of braking/acceleration bumps. Maybe good for SX but it's kind of bland in that it'll just make ruts but no bumps.

barrington314 wrote:JLV, could you give some examples of what would result in changing the 4 slip settings in either direction, as well the downhill scale? Please.

The slip scale settings affect the force/displacement, so they won't have much effect on inner radius erosion. The number that matters the most is erode_slip_scale. Raising it will scale the force up when it's slipping faster than the erode_slip_upper speed. The default 0 and 5 speeds for erode_slip_lower and erode_slip_upper are probably good. erode_slip_base_scale should stay at 1.

For downhill scale, the depth setting is multiplied by 1 + the slope * the downhill scale. So if the depth was 1 and you're going up (with the wheel exerting a downhill forcce) a .25 slope with a downhill scale of 1, it'll act like the depth is 1.25 (1 + .25 * 1). I originally added it to fix the kicker problem, but once I realized inner erode was broken I figured downhill scale wasn't really needed and set the default to 0. It will tend to make it erode more when accelerating uphill or braking downhill.

barrington314 wrote:I also feel as if we need some kind of "first pass" setting. For example, first pass over would act as if erode setting were on 10, while the remaining passes would be lower, like 5. Or in other words, loamy dirt that gets harder with each pass. I think this will be essential for outdoor tracks that start with zero ruts.

Would a max depth setting be enough? I figured I'd make it gradually reduce the depth settings to 0 as it gets a certain distance under the original terrain level.
Josh Vanderhoof
Sole Proprietor
jlv@mxsimulator.com
If you email, put "MX Simulator" in the subject to make sure it gets through my spam filter.

User avatar
checkerz
Posts: 7752
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:23 am
Team: RaGe Factory

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby checkerz » Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:48 am

Used JLV "blue" settings for a test tonight.

Because there is no build up, it kept the lips from getting dirt added to the top; however, the tops still won't erode out, the lips still get steeper and because the rut digs lower before the face and doesn't get deeper at the top the jump face still "grows" from the added negative space on the base.

It's harder to see without the building up.

This is happening on 3 foot faces exiting turns each time... which happens about 6 or so times on every IRL SX track.

Image

Image

Image

jlv
Site Admin
Posts: 12375
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:39 am
Team: No Frills Racing
Contact:

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby jlv » Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:13 am

That's TortillaFlatsDos2017 right? I'll have a look at it tomorrow. Must be something different that I didn't account for in my test cases.
Josh Vanderhoof
Sole Proprietor
jlv@mxsimulator.com
If you email, put "MX Simulator" in the subject to make sure it gets through my spam filter.

User avatar
Atom6246
Posts: 3030
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:28 am
Location: Florida

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby Atom6246 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:34 am

Not that my imput matters, but I really want to put out my observations and two cents.

Bad: First 5-8ish laps were difficult because the lines were still being formed and couldn't see any erosion at all. But once you started seeing the erode, it became much easier. (some sections were still blind with bumps at the end of the moto)

Good: I know most would classify this as bad but it created lines not possible without erode.
checkerz wrote:Image

It was impossible to triple in here but with the erode it made it possible and most importantly consistent. Obviously people wont have enough time to learn lines like this during qualifying so it will cater to the people who adapt faster during the race.

Now of course that isn't realistic but I think it would be a good thing for sim.
I feel like the highest priority is making it more visible during the beginning stages (or in general). Either way we need to try this in a legit race.
Check out my YouTube channel by clicking the pic below!
Image

User avatar
checkerz
Posts: 7752
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:23 am
Team: RaGe Factory

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby checkerz » Sat Dec 02, 2017 6:45 am

jlv wrote:That's TortillaFlatsDos2017 right? I'll have a look at it tomorrow. Must be something different that I didn't account for in my test cases.

Yessir it is.

User avatar
ColtonD719
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 4:15 am
Team: Privateer
Location: California
Contact:

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby ColtonD719 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:48 am

jlv wrote:
barrington314 wrote:I also feel as if we need some kind of "first pass" setting. For example, first pass over would act as if erode setting were on 10, while the remaining passes would be lower, like 5. Or in other words, loamy dirt that gets harder with each pass. I think this will be essential for outdoor tracks that start with zero ruts.

Would a max depth setting be enough? I figured I'd make it gradually reduce the depth settings to 0 as it gets a certain distance under the original terrain level.
jlv wrote:Would a max depth setting be enough? I figured I'd make it gradually reduce the depth settings to 0 as it gets a certain distance under the original terrain level.

Something like this would be great to have. Especially if there was a way to adjust the rate at which the reduction occurs. IRL, a tilled mx track usually starts fairly soft and it doesn't take much to get ruts started. However, as lines form, the dirt starts to pack down and harden. Of course, the type of dirt and grooming have a big impact on this effect. Hard pack dirt is obviously going to progress at a much different pace from deeply tilled loam; and sand, or mud will progress differently still.
Colton, Track Creator

Released MXS Tracks

barrington314
Posts: 6063
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:03 pm
Team: me
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby barrington314 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:46 pm

jlv wrote:
barrington314 wrote:I also feel as if we need some kind of "first pass" setting. For example, first pass over would act as if erode setting were on 10, while the remaining passes would be lower, like 5. Or in other words, loamy dirt that gets harder with each pass. I think this will be essential for outdoor tracks that start with zero ruts.

Would a max depth setting be enough? I figured I'd make it gradually reduce the depth settings to 0 as it gets a certain distance under the original terrain level.

Maybe. So like if depth were set at 1 foot, a first pass might be 5 inches of depth and the next pass would take it down to say 8, then 10, then 11, then 12, at which point itll no longer erode? Just in most basic terms.

barrington314
Posts: 6063
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:03 pm
Team: me
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby barrington314 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 6:01 pm

I tried out some "plywood" under the dirt today. Kinda cool.
Image
Image

barrington314
Posts: 6063
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:03 pm
Team: me
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby barrington314 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:44 pm

For anyone wondering, it's a model plane with collision to act as the stadium floor. Right there its only set 6 inches below the surface for testing.

User avatar
TeamHavocRacing
Posts: 6031
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:52 am
Team: Havoc Racing

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby TeamHavocRacing » Sat Dec 02, 2017 8:26 pm

Dude, that's sick! This is the most exciting time around here in a while with these looming developments that breathe new life into sim. Kinda like the arrival of the four fifty's jlv you rat. Member berries?
jlv wrote:Havoc is right.

jlv wrote:Phat is wrong.

jlv
Site Admin
Posts: 12375
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:39 am
Team: No Frills Racing
Contact:

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby jlv » Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:57 am

checkerz wrote:
jlv wrote:That's TortillaFlatsDos2017 right? I'll have a look at it tomorrow. Must be something different that I didn't account for in my test cases.

Yessir it is.

I think the main difference is the initial jump shape. I was testing with my typical .3 slope with a razor sharp peak which cuts through pretty fast since there's so little material at the top. With a more rounded peak and face it has to dig really far to reach the downslope on the far side of the jump so it ends up just cupping out the face instead. It doesn't do a great job wearing away the very top even with a sharp peak so the rounded top really gives it trouble. It helps a little bit to go to 16 on the outer radius. I tried 32 but it seemed like diminishing returns at that point.

I think the best thing I can do is add the depth limit. It won't fix the fundamental problem but it'll make it possible to keep it from getting too bad.

barrington314 wrote:
jlv wrote:
barrington314 wrote:I also feel as if we need some kind of "first pass" setting. For example, first pass over would act as if erode setting were on 10, while the remaining passes would be lower, like 5. Or in other words, loamy dirt that gets harder with each pass. I think this will be essential for outdoor tracks that start with zero ruts.

Would a max depth setting be enough? I figured I'd make it gradually reduce the depth settings to 0 as it gets a certain distance under the original terrain level.

Maybe. So like if depth were set at 1 foot, a first pass might be 5 inches of depth and the next pass would take it down to say 8, then 10, then 11, then 12, at which point itll no longer erode? Just in most basic terms.

OK. I can make it be a user defined table. It won't work on first pass/second pass since it doesn't track that. It'll be more like once the first inch is worn away it uses depth a, for second inch, depth b, etc. So you'll say use full depth for the 1st inch, maybe 50% for the 2nd inch, and at 12 inches you hit bedrock and it goes to 0.
Josh Vanderhoof
Sole Proprietor
jlv@mxsimulator.com
If you email, put "MX Simulator" in the subject to make sure it gets through my spam filter.

taylorsmx
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:01 am
Team: Privateer

Re: 2017-11-19 snapshot

Postby taylorsmx » Sun Dec 03, 2017 4:47 am

barrington314 wrote:I tried out some "plywood" under the dirt today. Kinda cool.
Image
Image

track?


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rickstar250 and 7 guests