planetf1.com

With limited pre and in season testing, the Simulators are playing a major role in the development of the car. Ferrari say their simulator is outdated so they hired PDR who worked on the McLaren Simulator which is considered state of the art and updated. My question is how does one know its outdated. I mean, its obvious that they would have made it possible to upload new software and stuff when they built it. But what goes into upgrading?

_________________
Loading Quote.......
--------------------
PF1 Pick 10
Aus13: 2nd
Chi13: 3rd

Just Ferrari trying to find excuses in case they don't have a fast car.
They're already downplaying themselves to make Alonso look better.
It's getting to be disgusting

Wish I was as all knowing as you.....

_________________
Going to Spa? Check out my site. http://visit-spa-francorchamps.page.tl/
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world
Oh and Bernie, National flags should be raised not flipped. Sort it!

Possibly the hardware is out of date, like how P.C.s and Macs from 5 years ago are outdated compared to more recent models. Also, there is only so far you can update a piece of software, eventually it needs to be replaced.

_________________
"I aim to misbehave"

So Kamui has a contract for Ferrari in WEC? Kinda makes this bit a tad pointless..

I wonder if they have cleared out their cookies and defraggled.

And failing that, turn it off and back on again. Works every time.

To be honest, if its out of date (and I presume they mean the hardware, not he software as I would have thought they would have the best software available for their current hardware) why not just replace it? It's not like Ferrari would go bust over buying new simulators.

_________________
Jenson Button Fan.

As Angus said, MOOOOOOOOAR POWER. Probably updates to what moves it and how.

Gee Thank you for your valuable insight.

_________________
Loading Quote.......
--------------------
PF1 Pick 10
Aus13: 2nd
Chi13: 3rd

LOL

_________________
Loading Quote.......
--------------------
PF1 Pick 10
Aus13: 2nd
Chi13: 3rd

I'd imagine the teams have to construct the whole simulator themselves - the software, the hardware; all of it. They need a chassis that responds perfectly to what the computer is stating and inputs to setup change that very accurately represent what happens on their race car. Ferrari getting a 'new' simulator isn't just about them going down to the local computer store and getting a new processor, they actually have to develop what they have and that takes time.

Admitting you don't have the best simulator in the world isn't making excuses for failing on the racetrack, it's identifying and acknowledging that you have a weakness in that area and voicing your intent to improve it. That's, apparently, why they hired PDLR. They didn't give him a contract to verify their technology as being out of date.

_________________

I also have one of these.

Yeah I would assume they mean the hardware is not as like to like with the real thing, hence giving PDR the drive last friday so he can build on this. It might also possibly be the way their software is configured as to how the simulator works.

Its basically GT5 on a giant screen.

The OP's statement is true, in such times using Simulators is critical as it is the source for most base setups as well as development route selection. Basically everything (including drivers) are tested in the simulator, so with the limited testing available simulators are the where to location and to be honest even with unlimited testing Simulators would play a key role instead of teams investing so much in testing only to get few results so it would be worthwhile testing parts in the simulator before even bothering with the expenses, effort and time of making such a part or testing a new setup.

As i have gathered the Redbull and Mclaren Sims are the best in the business. Redbull use a base software of rfactor pro (same company who makes rfactor "game" makes a pro version highly customizable for teams) and then custom make and program every single detail of their car into it using a variety of options compatible with rfactor pro, i don't know much about the hardware but i would guess they buy a multi DOF unit and build from there. Mclaren however custom make the whole thing (not entirely sure about the hardware as well) and i couldn't get what base program they use or did they make the base program but most imply they made it.

As for knowing if you are outdated or not it is quite simple:
1. If your correlation with the real car is about 5% and another team achieves 0.5% correlation it means you are outdated.
2. If your tracks are 98% accurate and other teams are 99.5% accurate then you are outdated
3. If things tested in the sim react marginally different in reality than the sim then you are outdated.

Outdated is not necessarily hardware, but could also mean bad software or bad programming all De laRosa said is that the Mclaren simulator is better, what causes that only the Ferrari engineers know after getting a more detailed feedback from Pedro.


I really do hope i try out the Mclaren sim one day, and if i am lucky enough hopefully i will be working on developing it.

The simulators are quite advanced....video game on steroids. Please look at these links below for more info. So very easy to be outdated, yes by hardware technologies, all to acquire as much real-world data hence lack of true testing.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/01/17/driving-the-f1-simulator-which-gives-teams-the-best-way-to-cheat/

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2010/10/video-exclusive-inside-an-f1-teams-driving-simulator/

Redbull Sim with DC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWVogW9cnDc&feature=related

Although, I do believe a couple teams have a custom system, designed and upgraded in-house. I thought Ferrari were using the Toyota sim in Cologne as it is difficult, understandably, to upgrade a sim during a season and pre-season testing? I recall Ferrari having problems with their wind tunnel as well.

I have been hearing nice things coming from the Curden simulators

Cruden are a top flight outfit, and their rigs are awesome.

http://youtu.be/DrdrymIwscw
http://youtu.be/EsAzk1R9Fzo

But as you mentioned, correlation is critical. The teams are not there to play games, but to use them as development tools. Such companies as Cruden could be contracted to contribute their expertise, build some components, and integrate software.

Engineers and developers study concepts on workstation computers, then if they are deemed to have potential, the concept is refined and then tested on the simulator. If it is still considered valid, then parts may then be constructed, to be tested (wind tunnel) and then integrated in the car.

And then that's where correlation becomes important, the simulators have to match up with the real world results. If, for example a front wing component offers a 5% increase in downforce and a 2% reduction in drag, it would turn out to be a huge waste of time and resources if by the time it was on the car it did not perform as expected.

With the dire shortage in testing, simulation becomes more and more important.