Jump to content Jump to content

Different behavior of the REAR CAMBER in race and in practice


Recommended Posts

I share a situation that is confusing me and I can't find a logical explanation.

 

Using the PXG Telemetry to compare two different stints...

In the race, with a certain setup (REAR CAMBER -2) and after 10 laps, I score an estimated life (40%) in 9.2 laps. And also in carerra, with that same setup (varying only the REAR CAMBER to -1) and also after 10 laps, I mark an estimated life (40%) in 9.7 laps.

 

With this data I could draw the conclusion that with the rear camber in -1 the tires wear less than with the rear cambre in -2. But...

 

In practice, with the same setup of stint 1 in the race (REAR CAMBER -2) and after 8 laps, I score an estimated life (40%) in 9.5 laps. And also in practice, with the same setup of the stint 2 in the race (REAR CAMBER at -1) and also after 8 laps, I mark an estimated life (40%) in 8.9 laps.

 

That is, the setup of the first stint both in race and in practice is the same... then change only the rear camber equally in race and practice for the second stint...

 

and the data says that in the race the wear is greater in the first stint and in practice the wear is greater in the second stint... I do not understand why this happens, I clarify that the conditions in which I took the data were exactly the same in both stints (both for running and for practice)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2021 at 3:41 AM, Noboton said:

I share a situation that is confusing me and I can't find a logical explanation.

 

Using the PXG Telemetry to compare two different stints...

In the race, with a certain setup (REAR CAMBER -2) and after 10 laps, I score an estimated life (40%) in 9.2 laps. And also in carerra, with that same setup (varying only the REAR CAMBER to -1) and also after 10 laps, I mark an estimated life (40%) in 9.7 laps.

 

With this data I could draw the conclusion that with the rear camber in -1 the tires wear less than with the rear cambre in -2. But...

 

In practice, with the same setup of stint 1 in the race (REAR CAMBER -2) and after 8 laps, I score an estimated life (40%) in 9.5 laps. And also in practice, with the same setup of the stint 2 in the race (REAR CAMBER at -1) and also after 8 laps, I mark an estimated life (40%) in 8.9 laps.

 

That is, the setup of the first stint both in race and in practice is the same... then change only the rear camber equally in race and practice for the second stint...

 

and the data says that in the race the wear is greater in the first stint and in practice the wear is greater in the second stint... I do not understand why this happens, I clarify that the conditions in which I took the data were exactly the same in both stints (both for running and for practice)

Oh no... This totally screws up my understanding of Codemaster's logic. So, what you are saying, there is a tire wear difference associated with 1st and 2nd stints? 1st stint = greater wear vs 2nd stint? I am wondering if this is the result of "rubbering in?" "Scrubbing" more without a "rubbered" in track?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, pal! Unfortunately there's not enough in your post to draw any decisive conclusions. I'll get to it later, but first just let me clear this up:

On 9/11/2021 at 7:41 AM, Noboton said:

With this data I could draw the conclusion that with the rear camber in -1 the tires wear less than with the rear cambre in -2. 

Not necessarily. Actually, that's a misconception in need of clearing up.

Think of things this way.

  • If we were on a drag race, 100% of the time the car would be at 0° of body roll, so the average roll angle of a "lap" would be zero. The best, optimum camber for this circuit for maximum performance and lowest tyre wear would be 0, neutral camber.
    • If you were to run -0.5 camber you'd get higher tyre wear. Easy, right?
  • If we were on a bendy, sweepy circuit like Zandvoort or Portimao, let's say that the "average" roll angle of the chassis on the rear axle is 1.5°. Obviously there are sections where you're be on a straight (where neutral camber would be better) and there are sections where you're on a really fast and long corner with a even higher roll angle (where an even higher camber would be better), but the "average" is 1°. Here, the best camber for maximum performance and lowest tyre wear would be -1.5°.
    • If you were to run with -2° of camber you'd be running with excessive camber and have less performance and higher tyre wear;
    • If you were to run with -1.0° of camber you'd be running with less than enough camber and have less performance and higher tyre wear.

This is a really poor example not at all representative of what really goes on, but hopefully will get the point across. There's an optimum camber setting for your actual driving and the track characteristics, and any excess or lack of camber will result in poorer performance and higher tyre wear, as you do not have the best contact patch for the lap as a whole – all the straights and all the turns.

Now how this tyre wear comes to be is not that straight forward. There's wear from heat degradation and there's wear from abrasion, from the actual scrubbing and rolling of the tyre against the tarmac. But that's beyond the point. Bottomline is, both too much and too little camber are bad for the tyres.

Back to the first point, unfortunately there's not enough here to arrive at any conclusions, mate.

  • Same exact car on both sessions? Different cars have different weights, different chassis and suspension values, different aero capabilities. Different cars have different tyre wear rates for a given setup.
  • Did you have any R&D upgrades installed on the career session? Same point as above. Different upgrades carry different wear rates for a given setup. The car will be objectively different.
  • What was the session length? Looks like you're running a shorter session, maybe 25%? The tyre wear scales oddly in these games. Maybe what you're seeing is a statistically negligible difference in wear if you were running 100% or even 50% race length, but that gets overblown on a short session. 
  • Was your driving exactly the same? You mentioned practice session and race session. If you're battling for position, as you normally are on a race, you'll have a considerably higher tyre wear than the one you measured at a practice session as (1) you get to push the car more and (2) get to drive on lines other than the ideal racing line.
    • If you push more into a corner, have to tighten or widen a line during the race, you're positively changing the tyre behavior relatively to what you had on a practice session with possibly clean air, no traffic, and laps taken at a constant level of effort.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...