Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[thx_nb]

@cameni:
In a recent update tire friction was made dependent on the surface. This is of course a good thing. However, it seems to be a simple factor or something.
Is there a way to influence how tires interact with the surface: when I use a 4x4 (like theshanergy's 4runner) with rough offroad tires, it should AFAIK have better grip on grass than on asphalt, because of the limited road-connecting surface. Right now the 4runner slides around like any other road car.

In other topics from several years ago, you have mentioned ground deformation and the friction involved and such.
Or this one about an interface for tire modeling.

One of the things I like(d) to do is just take the 4runner and do some rock crawling or such, and although the earlier setup wasn't really realistic, it was possible to configure a grip level that made it fun to play around. I can't seem to get that working right now.

Just curious what your plans for the near future are, if there are any, on this front, or how I can work around this limitation.

[cameni]

Wheel setup structure now has an additional optional field "grip", which is a relative friction coefficient that alters the friction that was fetched from friction table. The grip value is supposed to reflect tire construction, but at the moment it's just a simple value applied to all surface types.

The table is currently defined as follows:

Code: [Select]

///Friction coefficients for average tire: sliding dry, sliding wet
static const float2 TIRE_FRICTION[] = {
    float2(0.65, 0.50),         // 0  Dirt
    float2(0.35, 0.25),         // 1  Grass
    float2(0.45, 0.35),         // 2  Moss
    float2(0.75, 0.70),         // 3  Rock
    float2(0.65, 0.40),         // 4  Soil
    float2(0.55, 0.50),         // 5  Gravel
    float2(0.75, 0.55),         // 6  Asphalt
    float2(0.75, 0.45),         // 7  AsphaltPaintWhite
    float2(0.60, 0.50),         // 8  Sand
    float2(0.45, 0.35),         // 9  ForestFloor
    float2(0.75, 0.70),         // 10 Concrete
    float2(0.75, 0.45),         // 11 AsphaltPaintYellow
    float2(0.00, 0.00),
    float2(0.00, 0.00),
    float2(0.00, 0.00),
    float2(0.15, 0.07),         // 15 Snow
};

Maybe instead of a single grip value we could add several, for different material groups?

[cameni]

Oh .. seems I forgot to expose the grip value into script

[SteelRat]

Maybe instead of a single grip value we could add several, for different material groups?

+

[thx_nb]

Maybe instead of a single grip value we could add several, for different material groups?

This would probably the easiest way to allow vehicles to excel in certain areas, without having to complete define and calculate how the tire profile affects the grip (with rough tires gripping better in softer terrain while having relatively bad grip on superflat asphalt roads).

Also, based on the above table, am I reading correctly that wet rock has more friction than wet asphalt? This doesn't seem right from my experience (based on dutch asphalt, which may be quite a bit above average and my experience of walking on wet rock) .

[cameni]

Depends on the rock type, but the idea is that rock is usually coarser to the point that some wetness doesn't affect it that much, i.e there's not a continuous water film to slide on. It's not meant for smoothed pebbles.