70 replies to this topic

[SirSaltire]

While reading one of the latest ask Nigel Roebuck questions, I was intrigued by his answer to how realistic the F1 simulators are that some of the teams use. I can understand that the controls etc would be very realistic but he clearly says that these simulators are of use in getting drivers used to the g-forces! I think he must be wrong as surely a static simulator cannot exert g-forces on the driver

[bira]

Why not? These kind of simulators are very common in air forces and aerospace programmes. It's sometimes easy to forget that back in the factory, F1 teams - especially those with the resources - deploy technology that is really in line with some stuff you would normally find only in programmes like as NASA

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by bira
Why not? These kind of simulators are very common in air forces and aerospace programmes. It's sometimes easy to forget that back in the factory, F1 teams - especially those with the resources - deploy technology that is really in line with some stuff you would normally find only in programmes like as NASA

But how can they simulate g-force on drivers when in a static simulator. Flight simulators can't do this either- they can bump up and down and tilt but cannot simulate g-force. The only way they can do this is in a centrifuge where they spin the pilot around on they end of a long shaft - centrifuge clip

[tifosi]

There are flight simulators which can introduce g-forces. If this is possible than surely an F1 team can use similar technology. Obviously these simulators are not static in the strict sense of the word.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by tifosi
There are flight simulators which can introduce g-forces. If this is possible than surely an F1 team can use similar technology. Obviously these simulators are not static in the strict sense of the word.

I don' believe there is. To introduce a g-force you HAVE to be moving hence why the air force use a centrifuge. I am open to persuasion though if anyone can give me some facts!

[bira]

You don't introduce g-force, you simulate the effects of g-force - quite a difference there, Sir. How it's done is beyond me. I've no idea how to make roast turkey, let alone an F1 sim

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by bira
You don't introduce g-force, you simulate the effects of g-force - quite a difference there, Sir. How it's done is beyond me. I've no idea how to make roast turkey, let alone an F1 sim

The only way I can see they could "simulate" g-force is to attach ropes, pulleys and weights onto the drivers head, body etc (similar to the neck training devices they use) but I dont believe they would do that!
aybe I should move to "The Technical Forum" for help.

[tifosi]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
I don' believe there is. To introduce a g-force you HAVE to be moving hence why the air force use a centrifuge. I am open to persuasion though if anyone can give me some facts!

http://www.wylelabs....simulators.html


Just an example. You can choose not to believe it but the fact is the Air Force, NASA, and many flight training schools use simulators which can also simulate g-forces.

And why are you assuming that Nigel Roebuck is referring to some box that wont move?

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by tifosi


http://www.wylelabs....simulators.html


Just an example. You can choose not to believe it but the fact is the Air Force, NASA, and many flight training schools use simulators which can also simulate g-forces.

And why are you assuming that Nigel Roebuck is referring to some box that wont move?

Thank you for that Tifosi but the link you quoted is for a CENTIFUGE simulator. I know all about these. The pilot and controls spin on the end of a centrifuge arm and do indeed induce g-force (enough to make them pass out!) but are you trying to say that an F1 simulator would be on the end of a centrifuge? I don't think so somehow! I am not trying to be smart here, I just want to know if/how they can do it or if Nigel Roebuck has got it wrong. Maybe he could post an answer!

Originally posted by tifosi
And why are you assuming that Nigel Roebuck is referring to some box that wont move?

The picture he shows of a GP2 simulator is static, in fact it looks like those you see at a fairground!

[tifosi]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
The picture he shows of a GP2 simulator is static, in fact it looks like those you see at a fairground!

My guess is your looking at some stock picture that was provided. I doubt if Ferrari or McLaren are actually going to let anyone into their main factory to snap pictures.

[Spyker MF1]

I know some drivers just use the plain sims that have the static bucket seats(anyone watch the inside f1 programme(what Villuevue(sp?) was driving on there)) but haven't seen a moving a driver use a moving one

[ReynardDave]

The best you can do with fixed base simulator is 1g. To get more than that you need to be able to move the entire base.

Take a look at this thing.

http://www.simlabs.a...ms/motionb.html

[jb_128]

Maybe something like this is more likely (indeed with a limit of 1G) :

I'd love to know what kind of software they're usung though. Do they have in-house sim development teams or do they work with commerical titles as a base?

[bira]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
The picture he shows of a GP2 simulator is static, in fact it looks like those you see at a fairground!

You can't seriously think Nigel Roebuck sits there searching for pictures. The photo editor reads the text and tries to find the best photo that would garnish or illustrate the text. That's all.

[themark]

The FCS full-motion race simulator. You can bet most F1 teams can afford one.

[tifosi]

Originally posted by themark


The FCS full-motion race simulator. You can bet most F1 teams can afford one.

Awesome, now I know what I want for Christmas.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by themark


The FCS full-motion race simulator. You can bet most F1 teams can afford one.

Now that looks like one cool machine! But I'm afraid it would NOT produce any more than the normal 1g.

Originally posted by ReynardDave
The best you can do with fixed base simulator is 1g. To get more than that you need to be able to move the entire base.

Take a look at this thing.

http://www.simlabs.a...ms/motionb.html

WOW! Now we are getting closer to it! By the looks of this it would indeed produce some g-load but I doubt very much any of the F1 teams has one. So it looks like we are back to the old 1g that even I am experiencing sitting here typing!

[RDM]

Originally posted by tifosi


Awesome, now I know what I want for Christmas.

Don't forget to download the Hitchin Town Race Circuit for your simulator! Available for a wide range of race sims...

http://www.hitchin-circuit.co.uk

[xflow7]

Unless they can translate in all 3 dimensions far enough to impose the required acceleration for the required time, the simulators will be limited to <1g total acceleration produced by rotating the simulator to re-orient gravity. However, from what I remember on the subject, in terms of providing the sensations to an occupant the absolute magnitude of the g-force is not too critical. So, sure maybe they can't simulate directly the fatigue that results from 4g vs. 0.75g, but even then one could maybe envision a device that bears up against the helmet and loads the occupant's head directly to simulate the effects on the neck.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by xflow7
Unless they can translate in all 3 dimensions far enough to impose the required acceleration for the required time, the simulators will be limited to <1g total acceleration produced by rotating the simulator to re-orient gravity. However, from what I remember on the subject, in terms of providing the sensations to an occupant the absolute magnitude of the g-force is not too critical. So, sure maybe they can't simulate directly the fatigue that results from 4g vs. 0.75g, but even then one could maybe envision a device that bears up against the helmet and loads the occupant's head directly to simulate the effects on the neck.

That all makes sense to me. So we are back to saying that the likelyhood is that the teams do not have sumulators that can induce any g force on the drivers over and above normal g.

[tifosi]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
That all makes sense to me. So we are back to saying that the likelyhood is that the teams do not have sumulators that can induce any g force on the drivers over and above normal g.

Why are you assuming that they don't have the "centrifuge" type simulators we alluded to earlier? I don't know if they do or not, just wondering why you are assuming they don't.

My guess is these teams can very easily afford and operate the type of flight simulators I linked to earlier. There is no evidence that the teams are limited to static simulators only in thier training programs.

[The Kanisteri]

Late xmas present hint for people who has money to spend as toilet paper and such...

http://www.force-dynamics.com/

-; 69 990 €uros

Nothing to do with serious simulations by plane pilots and f1 teams, but scratch on iceberg top for (rich) Johnny Average

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by tifosi


Why are you assuming that they don't have the "centrifuge" type simulators we alluded to earlier? I don't know if they do or not, just wondering why you are assuming they don't.

My guess is these teams can very easily afford and operate the type of flight simulators I linked to earlier. There is no evidence that the teams are limited to static simulators only in thier training programs.

They don't. If they did we would know about it. These things the military use are massive and cost 100's of thousands. No doubt some of the teams could afford it but why? It would be cheaper and more realistic to just go testing with the real thing!! The reason the military do it is because the pilots need to cope with g forces that can easily make them pass out - they don't want them doing that in the real thing at 20,000 feet!!

[Pep]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
While reading one of the latest ask Nigel Roebuck questions, I was intrigued by his answer to how realistic the F1 simulators are that some of the teams use. I can understand that the controls etc would be very realistic but he clearly says that these simulators are of use in getting drivers used to the g-forces! I think he must be wrong as surely a static simulator cannot exert g-forces on the driver

Yes, he's wrong. The only team that works with a simulator is McLaren. It's very developed but it's static. Pedro de la Rosa has sometimes talked about the McLaren simulator on spanish TV and his work on it.

He says that it's close to reality but the biggest difference of course is that you don't feel the mega forces pushing you to one side of the car or to the front. You can only achieve that with real movement, of course

Regarding graphics, he said that it is not very different from the playstation games, but of course the simulator is prepared to take into account the same hundred of different set ups you can do to a real race car.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by Pep


Yes, he's wrong. The only team that works with a simulator is McLaren. It's very developed but it's static. Pedro de la Rosa has sometimes talked about the McLaren simulator on spanish TV and his work on it.

He says that it's close to reality but the biggest difference of course is that you don't feel the mega forces pushing you to one side of the car or to the front. You can only achieve that with real movement, of course

Regarding graphics, he said that it is not very different from the playstation games, but of course the simulator is prepared to take into account the same hundred of different set ups you can do to a real race car.

Thank you for that Pep. Some peoples imaginations were going a bit wild on this subject But I have to say that some of the simulators links on some of the posts look like great fun and I fo one would love a go on them

[Rexx Havoc]

yeah but...

how do you simulate the 3-4 g load

flick ---flick

going through lets say well I can't tink of the name of a high speed chicane

the only way to do that is with a table that could have the sim at the center and then it accererates on at least 6 planes for 5-6 seconds at a time

understand?...

[F1Champion]

Could it be that the simulator works by simulating what the G-forces will do to the handling and steering, breaking and acceleration of the car. Maybe the simulator works by simulating the car handling conditions rather than the driver conditions....if that makes any sense.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by F1Champion
Could it be that the simulator works by simulating what the G-forces will do to the handling and steering, breaking and acceleration of the car. Maybe the simulator works by simulating the car handling conditions rather than the driver conditions....if that makes any sense.

Yes that does make sense and I'm sure it does but it must be far from the "real thing" and not quite what Nigel Roebuck says.

[mach4]

Originally posted by bira
You don't introduce g-force, you simulate the effects of g-force - quite a difference there, Sir. How it's done is beyond me. I've no idea how to make roast turkey, let alone an F1 sim

Maybe it's worth writing a journal piece about it? It would be interesting to find out more about the hardware and software they use.

[Rexx Havoc]

Originally posted by F1Champion
Could it be that the simulator works by simulating what the G-forces will do to the handling and steering, breaking and acceleration of the car. Maybe the simulator works by simulating the car handling conditions rather than the driver conditions....if that makes any sense.

(with hands up and palms showing...)

that would be a test rig by my definition

you could be the greatest sim driver ever

but once you got in a car with real physics involved... the acceleration involved alone would empty most bowels ... never mind the forces encountered driving that "sim" lap in the real world

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by Rexx Havoc


(with hands up and palms showing...)

that would be a test rig by my definition

you could be the greatest sim driver ever

but once you got in a car with real physics involved... the acceleration involved alone would empty most bowels ... never mind the forces encountered driving that "sim" lap in the real world

Very true Rexx H, the world is full of "armchair racers" that trully believe they are the next Senna [/COLOR]

[xflow7]

Originally posted by tifosi


Why are you assuming that they don't have the "centrifuge" type simulators we alluded to earlier? I don't know if they do or not, just wondering why you are assuming they don't.

My guess is these teams can very easily afford and operate the type of flight simulators I linked to earlier. There is no evidence that the teams are limited to static simulators only in thier training programs.

Generally, centrifuges serve a considerably different purpose. They are used to simulate sustained high g's for the purposes of studying the effects on the body and measures to counter them. The thing is, in order to generate the g-forces they must be spinning very fast. Thus they can only gradually approach a given g-level. Contrast with a simulator intended to represent the vehicle dynamics of a car entering a corner where the car may go from no lateral g's to 4 lateral g's in under a second. It would be unfeasible to attempt to spin up a centrifuge so quickly (it would be analogous to having a car standing still at the entry to a 4-g corner and then attempting to accelerate it to its normal speed through the corner by the time it reached the apex). Even assuming you could accelerate the centrifuge fast enough, that would then impose an ENORMOUS tangential acceleration to the occupant that would be totally spurious as it would not be present in the actual dynamics you were trying to simulate.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by xflow7


Generally, centrifuges serve a considerably different purpose. They are used to simulate sustained high g's for the purposes of studying the effects on the body and measures to counter them. The thing is, in order to generate the g-forces they must be spinning very fast. Thus they can only gradually approach a given g-level. Contrast with a simulator intended to represent the vehicle dynamics of a car entering a corner where the car may go from no lateral g's to 4 lateral g's in under a second. It would be unfeasible to attempt to spin up a centrifuge so quickly (it would be analogous to having a car standing still at the entry to a 4-g corner and then attempting to accelerate it to its normal speed through the corner by the time it reached the apex). Even assuming you could accelerate the centrifuge fast enough, that would then impose an ENORMOUS tangential acceleration to the occupant that would be totally spurious as it would not be present in the actual dynamics you were trying to simulate.

Exactly

[mach4]

How about using galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) ?

Taro Maeda and colleagues at NTT believe the system could primarily be used to make computer games feel more realistic. In a driving game, for example, a player could feel gravity shift as their car hurtles through a tight bend.

http://www.newscient...le.ns?id=dn7829

[Rexx Havoc]

Originally posted by xflow7


Generally, centrifuges serve a considerably different purpose. They are used to simulate sustained high g's for the purposes of studying the effects on the body and measures to counter them. The thing is, in order to generate the g-forces they must be spinning very fast. Thus they can only gradually approach a given g-level. Contrast with a simulator intended to represent the vehicle dynamics of a car entering a corner where the car may go from no lateral g's to 4 lateral g's in under a second. It would be unfeasible to attempt to spin up a centrifuge so quickly (it would be analogous to having a car standing still at the entry to a 4-g corner and then attempting to accelerate it to its normal speed through the corner by the time it reached the apex). Even assuming you could accelerate the centrifuge fast enough, that would then impose an ENORMOUS tangential acceleration to the occupant that would be totally spurious as it would not be present in the actual dynamics you were trying to simulate.

once again my guttural point has been perfectly translated and presented to the Illuminati ... for their perusal and consumption

thx XFlow

[HoldenRT]

Originally posted by bira
no idea how to make roast turkey, let alone an F1 sim

Since Xmas is only a few days away.

1. Preheat oven to 200deg C.

2. Take the turkey out and rinse it in the sink. Remove all the crap from the inside of it, neck etc.

3. Get some stuffing mix, or see google "turkey stuffing" and add some water to mix or combine ingredients if making from scratch in a bowl and put it in the opening where the neck and other stuff was removed from.

4. Combine some butter and salt together and then rub them on the turkey wings, legs, underside etc. The more you rub and the more evenly it's done, the shiny and tastier the skin will be. "Baste" every hour or so, once it's cooking until it's done.

5. Place turkey on middle oven tray breast side down, and place a pan underneath so all the juices don't drip onto floor of oven and create a nasty mess in there! Add some water to the pan to prevent the oil from smoking in the pan and creating a smokey kitchen.

6. No need to turn it. Stick a fork in the meat and once it's tender (after a few hours) remove turkey from oven and resist temptation to grab a leg and start eating until vegetables are cooked.

See, now there is no excuse not to get into the kitchen on Xmas day, while the men are busy doing men things.


* This was meant to be funny.

[Rexx Havoc]

Originally posted by HoldenRT
[B]
See, now there is no excuse not to get into the kitchen on Xmas day, while the men are busy doing men things.

dasss right!

[SirSaltire]

What exactly is an oven? and where do I find it?

[connerz]

I don't exactly know what an oven is, but all the top F1 teams probably have them.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Originally posted by HoldenRT
Since Xmas is only a few days away.

1. Preheat oven to 200deg C.

2. Take the turkey out and rinse it in the sink. Remove all the crap from the inside of it, neck etc.

3. Get some stuffing mix, or see google "turkey stuffing" and add some water to mix or combine ingredients if making from scratch in a bowl and put it in the opening where the neck and other stuff was removed from.

4. Combine some butter and salt together and then rub them on the turkey wings, legs, underside etc. The more you rub and the more evenly it's done, the shiny and tastier the skin will be. "Baste" every hour or so, once it's cooking until it's done.

5. Place turkey on middle oven tray breast side down, and place a pan underneath so all the juices don't drip onto floor of oven and create a nasty mess in there! Add some water to the pan to prevent the oil from smoking in the pan and creating a smokey kitchen.

6. No need to turn it. Stick a fork in the meat and once it's tender (after a few hours) remove turkey from oven and resist temptation to grab a leg and start eating until vegetables are cooked.

See, now there is no excuse not to get into the kitchen on Xmas day, while the men are busy doing men things.


* This was meant to be funny.

Much lower heat, much longer cooking time.

Turkeys come from America, trust the American.

[Ultra150]

Originally posted by connerz
I don't exactly know what an oven is, but all the top F1 teams probably have them.

Only Ferrari.

They keep their tires in it.

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by Ultra150


Only Ferrari.

They keep their tires in it.

Went a bit off topic but hey its the festive season

[3Sword]

Just a thought. How about using a negative version of an anti G suit to simulate G forces..

And the next question..
Is it possible to simulate a roast turkey ??
With stuffings...

[Spyker MF1]

Originally posted by Ultra150


Only Ferrari.

They keep their tires in it.

Last time I looked it was that Super Aguri bunch ;)

[Jerome]

On topic: I severely doubt that the showed simulator can only pull one G. I don't know how steep the incline of decline can be arranged, but I can assure you: if the simulator would tilt over thirty degrees in one second the pull would considerably more than 1 G. This is, for example, the reason why so many professional athletes get injured. They acclerate from a standing position (for example for a sprint), and the load put on a specific muscle can be much more than their own weight. For example: Andy Roddick landing on the ground after one of his serves puts a load of about three times his own weight on his feet.

Is there a fysicist around on this forum to be able to calculate what G you would pull if you tilt the simulator from one angle to another in a split second?

[SirSaltire]

Originally posted by 3Sword
Just a thought. How about using a negative version of an anti G suit to simulate G forces..

And the next question..
Is it possible to simulate a roast turkey ??
With stuffings...

On your first point - sorry it wouldn't work. The anti-g suit just compresses certain parts of the body to stop all the blood draining away to other parts so a "negative version" would not simulate g-forces. On your second point - Yes it is possible to simulate a roast turkey - all the supermarkets do it and sell it as "fresh"

[SkorbiF1]

Maybe it's just something magnetic.
A magnet pulls driver's helmet (+other parts of his body) from different angles and different powers.

[Jerome]

What I forgot to mention in my post: it is not neccessary in a simulator for the images shown and the movements made by the simulator to be equal. For example: if the image itself is stationary, but the machine or simulator would be tilted heavily, you would not notice it if your eyes have no possibility to 'see' the difference. With other words: if you would be in a fully closed canopy. In that way you could use 'unrealistic' movements with the simulator to stimulate the realistic G forces with the realistic images. Your brain just would not know it was suckered into feeling something that did not really happen.

[Juan Kerr]

Originally posted by SirSaltire
But how can they simulate g-force on drivers when in a static simulator. Flight simulators can't do this either- they can bump up and down and tilt but cannot simulate g-force. The only way they can do this is in a centrifuge where they spin the pilot around on they end of a long shaft - centrifuge clip

There's a million ways to apply forces, airbags squeezing the driver inside the cockpit or things pushing against his head to resist against.

[Pep]

Originally posted by Juan Kerr
There's a million ways to apply forces, airbags squeezing the driver inside the cockpit or things pushing against his head to resist against.

It takes 5 seconds to complete the long Seat turn in the spanish GP. The G forces (>3) push every part of your body, not only your head, but your arms, legs, feet, tongue and even your intestines.

Pushing the head of a driver wih an airbag in a simulator at the same time that he is turning would probably be more unrealistic than doing nothing.