GT5Calc 1.51b

[Litzner]

Moved to Tuning forum with the release of 2.0b.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=198067

 

[Lusitano]

Thanks, I giv it a try, but why the speed are only in Mph?

 

[Litzner]

Thanks, I giv it a try, but why the speed are only in Mph?

I have not wrote the code to have the choice between mph/kph yet. I am from the US so I put it in mph, but I do plan on adding that functionality and more in the the future.

 

[MasterFocus]

now if somebody could make something to calculate how much camber is needed

 

[calan_svc]

now if somebody could make something to calculate how much camber is needed

You mean something revolutionary and never-before heard of? Like...tire temperatures showing up in the game or something?

 

[Litzner]

You mean something revolutionary and never-before heard of? Like...tire temperatures showing up in the game or something?

Yeah, camber would be fairly easy to figure out if the game would give us the telemetry needed.

 

[MasterFocus]

Yeah, camber would be fairly easy to figure out if the game would give us the telemetry needed.

Maybe someday

 

[dark_ruffo]

It's a virus.

lol no, joking, trying it right now.

 

[Griffith500]

This looks fun. Will give it a try when I get around to playing again...

I've lost touch with suspension tuning in GT games, so I just tend to drive conservative, balanced settings. This might help me get a faster base setup that I can "fit and forget".

One thing: aren't tyre grades important here?

 

[MasterFocus]

I've try it with the '05 Mini Cooper S and the setting that your little program is giving me is too soft, softer than what the fully adjustable suspension came with and too soft for my own personal taste.
Also I tend to drop the ride height all the way down.

 

[Unidos]

Complicated lol

 

[Litzner]

One thing: aren't tyre grades important here?

Not really, tire grades can be important in some other tuning options, camber for example, specifically the width of the tire would have strong effects on how much camber a car would produce at certain levels on down-force. Spring rate is much more about weight and weight transfer.

 

[Litzner]

Complicated lol

You should see the math going on behind it .

 

[HJLamont]

erm, it suggests springs of 2 for a FGT, is that correct??

 

[Litzner]

erm, it suggests springs of 2 for a FGT, is that correct??

It does not take into account the extreme amount of down force on a formula car, so no, that would not be correct. I am currently working with down force number and trying to figure out how to configure them into account. It is just difficult to do with out knowing how much each tick of down force pushes the car down at a specific speed. Right now it is just going by the weight of the car, not the artificial weight that down force creates.

 

[the_1way_ticket]

uhh... exe file. i'm not opening that.

 

[JJ72]

Not really, tire grades can be important in some other tuning options, camber for example, specifically the width of the tire would have strong effects on how much camber a car would produce at certain levels on down-force. Spring rate is much more about weight and weight transfer.

weight transfer is depended on the amount of longtitutional/laterial G you pull though, which is directly affected by what tire grade.

so in fact tire grade is very influential in spring rate setting.

 

[Litzner]

weight transfer is depended on the amount of longtitutional/laterial G you pull though, which is directly affected by what tire grade.

so in fact tire grade is very influential in spring rate setting.

This is true, but the difference is fairly small. The difference is not as great as one may think though.

 

[Griffith500]

This is true, but the difference is fairly small. The difference is not as great as one may think though.

I see that the spring rate balance is determined by cornering speed, which would be affected by tyre grade for a given circuit; so, in a sense, it already is (indirectly) accounted for.

I'd be interested to learn a bit more about the theory behind this, i.e. why my Integra needs stiffer springs at the rear than the front for cornering at speeds lower than 55 mph, and vice versa. I also notice the front springs don't really change much on this particular car (62%F weight distribution).

Give a man a fish...

 

[Pro driver]

I'm not interested in the source code to the program but can you at least keep the algorithms open. If you have got info on how to adjust any setting related to another than please share.

 

[CAG_Theory]

I have no idea...

 

[Litzner]

The front springs are calculated by the weight, weight distribution, and optimal spring frequency. The spring frequency (the times the spring can bounce up and down each second) of a race car is about 2Hz, so I calculate the front spring weight to have frequency of 2 (again, these calculations do not yet take into account aero down-force as artificial weight). The rear springs should have a frequency slightly higher then the front so the oscillation of the front and rear suspension finish at the same time. The delay between the front and rear springs varies depending on the wheel base, and the speed of the car.

So when you enter the speed in the calculator, you should be perfectly balanced at that speed, tighter below that speed, and looser above that speed.

 

[Griffith500]

Thanks for the clarification! 👍

I guess this program would be most useful for ovals, then, where the speed in the corners varies very little.
I imagine it gives a good starting point for any tune, though. I've still yet to play around with the settings it gives me, then I'll get my vote up.

 

[column5]

I need to do some more driving, but I used your app to calculate spring rates for a couple of my '69 Corvettes and the results after a few runs around the HSR seem very good. 👍

 

[Litzner]

Thanks for the clarification! 👍

I guess this program would be most useful for ovals, then, where the speed in the corners varies very little.
I imagine it gives a good starting point for any tune, though. I've still yet to play around with the settings it gives me, then I'll get my vote up.

I would not say it would be the best for ovals, just easiest to configure for, as any spring settings you put on a car will be tight and loose at certain points.

 

[Jump_Ace]

Can't wait to give this a try, sounds great for tuning nubs such as myself.

Jerome

 

[asdfg11]

You should see the math going on behind it .

Fancy sharing the maths or working with me to make a small php website? In the long run this could rule out some of the reaptivie research that needs to be done, assuming one does it correctly the first time and it gets saved to a database people could merely lookup "generic/ideal" setups for car X on track X 👍 I like the idea. nice work

 

[calan_svc]

Subscribed. This is interesting, especially in light of the GT5 tire research I've been working on.

👍

 

[Litzner]

Update 1.1 Released!

Added the ability to enter kg or lbs, mm or in, and most importantly kph or mph. All you crazy kph users are welcome .

 

[oppositelock]

I couldn't get it to open, gives me some sort of error message, but I see a potential problem in that your formulas can't and don't take into account suspension motion ratios. We can see some cars like the MKIV Supra have extreme front/rear differences in spring rate which correspond roughly to real life rates but have no correlation at all with weight distribution. That these cars handle fine with these springs leads me to conclude that GT does indeed take motion ratios into account somehow. The rest of the math may be rock solid but without this little bit of information we're still left throwing darts.