Test Marshall DLC

[Dhalj]

On the bale trailer is a collision box, I think for the Giants locking system, which Dural removed from the original bale trailer. Can we disable or remove this collision box? I think it has to be removed in the i3d and I am affraid that is not possible?

hooked-up baletrailer is MR, the other bale trailer is standard giants

trying to pull the bale (MR-JD864) from the trailer

Ursus Bales

[JakobTischler]

Just out of curiosity: in vehicleTypes.xml remove the spec dynamicMountAttacher from mr_dynamicMountAttacherTrailer_m. I basically wanna see if the attacher spec is the problem, or the trigger/collision itself.

[Dhalj]

That works, it does not stick the bales in the box anymore, can just normally lift the bales now will you remove it (or text the specialization out as I did) and commit is again?

will do some more testing on this trailer tomorrow.

[JakobTischler]

Basically, without the dynamicMountAttacher spec, the trailer can now simply use the moreRealistic.baleTrailer vehicleType. I'll change and push that in a bit.

[Satissis]

Yeah sorry about that, I didn't actually put any bales on that trailer, so I haven't tested that one properly.

[Dhalj]

Marshal bale trailer is good now, spring settings are good, with a full load the tires do not hit the chassis. roll-over tests were good.

herwith 2 pictures to show the difference between the "sleep effect" when not moving and when all masses are appleid during movement. these bales are drygrass windrow bales from the Krone Comprima

[Dhalj]

Tested the QM16 trailer.

I changed the weight settings. I heared somewhere that a trailer should not have more then 3000kg on the Hitch of the tractor.

with these settings the empty trailer has approx 1000kg on the tractor hitch and fully loaded with maize it has approx 2500kg on the hitch

I also raised the center of mass of the empty trailer, because I could not tip th e empty trailer over with the Deutz 7250TTV, the trailer was even keeping the tractor upright

I think these settings are better:

<component1 centerOfMass="0 0.65 -0.5" realMassWanted="5.59" realTransWithMass="0 0.03 -0.020" realTransWithMassMax="0 0.45 -0.35" />

[Dhalj]

The hp requirement for muck spreaders listed on http://www.marshall-trailers.co.uk/ are not the tractor power you need to use the spreaders, but the power the PTO needs when you try to used them?

because I see that you put the shop description power higher then the power ratings on the marshall site.

[quadural]

so, I gave a try to the marschal, and there is a "big" problem with "physics" :

• the VES2500 and ST1800 are ok reagrding the "wanted mass" compared to the "measured mass"
• all the others are weird... Example with the QM16 : I got 815Kgs more than expected (empty or fully filled, whatever the wheels settings) I wish I could look at what have been done in the i3d file to achieve that, because this is really not normal (especially since we are using the physx's "getWheelShapeContactForce" function)

[Satissis]

@Dhalj I'll update the QM16 trailer with the new settings you have provided But before I do that, have you tested it drive ability, when empty and when it full ? When empty you should not be able to tip it when driving at, at least 30 km/h and making a sudden a sharp turn. When it's full, it should start tipping over when driving at high speed and making a sharp turn. (Soft turn should be okay)

About the muck spreader, then I'm always counting the HP required on a website as the minimum hp a tractor's PTO needs to run the implement. Then it needs the extra hp for the tractor to being able to pull and spread at the same time. If I'm wrong at this point, please say so.

@quadural I'm guessing that there is nothing we actually can do about that or do you have any suggestions ?

[quadural]

@Satissis : the power requirement is indeed the "whole" recommanded tractor power. And so, when they say "power requirement = 95Hp", that means it is recommended to use a 95Hp tractor to use this implement. (sometimes, this is for security reason, sometimes for 3pt-hitch performance or balance, and in other cases, this is the amount of hp an avg tractor of this size needs to pull the implement) Example : the amazon EDX requires a "powerful tractor" whereas there is no need for such power to pull it in field at reduce speed (8km/h for example). But, it is very heavy and only 150Hp class tractors can handle it safely. This is the same with most fully-mounted fertilizer spreaders => very light power required at the PTO to run the implement, no need for a very powerful tractor to drive it in field, but good balancing and 3-pt hitch required.

Regarding the "weird" mass of some of the Marshall, I can't say if we could do something or not by the moment since I don't understand/know how they "achieved" to do that. This is something that should not happen and that is not "possible"... (tractor beam in use by some worms in the ground ? another "donwforce" applied to this implement ?)

@JakobTischler : do you know if this is possible to "read" all the parameters of the xml config file of a DLC implement ?

PS: I forgot to say : do not bother making "slight" change to the marshall, I am breaking all of them. Spreaders are almost finished, QM trailer is fully broken ;)

[quadural]

ok, "my" changes uploaded now. I hope FS2015 bale physics would be far better than the current one... Otherwise, we will need a "straps" mod By the moment, the "newer" the game engine, the worst the bale physics... (FS13 patch 2.1 being the worst compared to patch 1.4 and then patch 1.3 or even Fs11) Since we will get (I guess) the nvidia physx 3.0 engine in FS15, let's hope this will improve a lot objects interaction for this "sim" game.

[JakobTischler]

do you know if this is possible to "read" all the parameters of the xml config file of a DLC implement ?

Without knowing their names: no. As far as I know, there's nothing like a wildcard query (getXMLString(xmlFile, 'vehicle.*')). What exactly is it that you're looking for?

[Satissis]

@quadural I notised that you removed the realMaxMassAllowed from the wheels and set the suspTravel="0.1" instead of 0. I did this, since those trailers do not have any spring at all and that in one of the tutorials from fs-uk, you said we could set it to 0 but the realMaxMassAllowed was required then. Do this have something to do with the weird physics you were talking about ?

[quadural]

@Satissis : nope. nothing to do with our problem. Your setting was ok too. In my case, I prefer simulating the fact that a "rubber" wheel has some deformation, and this is like a suspension IRL. And so, even a wheel without any suspension should not be set to 0, except if this is a "steel" wheel or something like that. (except in a very few particular cases, we never have to use a 0 suspTravel)

@JakobTischler : I am "exactely" searching for the reason why we got "additional" weight on some of the marshall vehicles. Look at my comment 2 days ago on this "topic". Of course, I don't have any clue on how such a thing is possible. This is as if there was a "hidden" downforce added to these vehicles.

[JakobTischler]

@quadural: Uhm, looking at the script, this could actually be my mistake. downForce and brakeForce are only set to 0 for steerables, instead of all vehicles. Try moving those two above the if mrData.category == 'steerable' then line and see if that's the cause.

[quadural]

damn it !!! this is it. The worst part is that I double check that you set these 2 values to 0, but I didn't notice it was only for steerable... And know : that means every other piece of equipment we have converted so far have no downforce set by Giants ? I am very doubful of that when comparing to the basic game equipment. Anyway, I will modify that and we now have to check again every "vehicle" again on this matter (checking the "wanting" (=moving mass) and the "measured" mass (=total moving mass on the wheels)

Note : please use the mr engine V1.3.47 before your tests, because I activated again the "stabilizer" bar effect in it. => https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B_iAIcwiFq-bNzVScHpkb1dkSTg&usp=sharing

[Dhalj]

Anyway, I will modify that and we now have to check again every "vehicle" again on this matter (checking the "wanting" (=moving mass) and the "measured" mass (=total moving mass on the wheels)

I think we do not have to retest the Lindner DLC because the only vehicle in it is a steerable? or do I have to retest it because of the "stabilizer bar" function in the MR engine?

[quadural]

all the "module" are not steerable. Anyway, this is good to test it again to check the "turn over capability" with the stablizer bar activated. But, I will surely give it a try after the marshall and before looking at the ursus pack. So, maybe wait for my correction before giving it a full test.

[JakobTischler]

So, basically we will have to test all non-steerables again. Just to make sure, what exactly will we have to look for? cosAngle, moving mass, mass on wheels, ... what else?

Also, I'm sorry for this fuck-up, should have seen it earlier.

[quadural]

"moving mass" and "total moving mass on the wheels" (but it should be ok for everything now - And it should have been checked during conversion/previous test => it seems there are not so much implements with "downforce" in the DLCs) Then, just give a try at "high" speed to check the "tip over / turn over" "capability" of the vehicle/implement. "Cosangle" is only important when converting a tractor with a 3pt-hitch (easier to set up the 3p hitch if the cosangle is very close to 1)