0.16 Discussion Thread

The RPMs that are used are not based on engine RPM, but torque converter output speed RPM (input is engine side, output is to the wheels), thus it's based on speed not throttle position, independant of torque converter activit
--- Post updated ---

Exactly this ^^

The transmission (electronic ones) should seek 100% load as much as possible, however 100% load isn't full torque, full torque is 100% load + fuel enrichment Having the throttle say 50% open at low RPM like 2000rpm, that will result in 100% load, push it all the way down, it will use fuel enrichment to get the last bit of torque, fuel consumption goes out the window... It's very similar to overclocking on a PC, poweruse thrown out the window for a little extra perf gain..

EFI cars control idle through an IAC valve (idle air control), these are pretty much a small inlet that the ECU adjusts throttle for, and measures airflow, this is only a tiny amount of air though, and will not provide full torque at idle.. (there is simply not enough air).. The IAC valve is only sized for say a worst case scenario for a loaded engine in drive, aircon on, and a bit extra, it is by no means designed for propelling the car along..

Newer EFI cars that use DBW (Drive By Wire) have not got this, since the ECU controls the main throttlebody for idle, hence there is the opportunity for more 'idle torque' as that throttle can fully open if necessary to give as much air as possible to the idling engine.. However it is also likely the ECU has preprogrammed limits for idle torque, since applying full throttle at 800rpm may result in strong undesired vibrations...


BeamNG does not simulate an IAC valve and thus its easier to stall a car IRL than on BeamNG...

 

BeamNG uses the throttle to hold idle. You can actually set how much throttle it is allowed to use, it defaults to something like 15%, which is more than enough to get 90% torque it idle.

 

That probably is part of the reason why idle can sound bit heavy with new sounds. IRL cars have very tiny amount of throttle at idle, well old carb cars had, which made stalling quite easy as you had literally less than 1mm gap where air were taken.

 

0.16.0.3 starts with the UI acceleration on so the game froze on startup. then i went in the game settings.ini but there was no "uiAcceleratedRender" or the old "uiRenderGPU" or anything... hence since that feature is "experimental" it should not have been ON by default... i only been able to turn if off by luck.

 

After current update game opens but I can't click "Play" or "Settings", what can I do?

 

No GUI crashing now

GTX 960 here..

But sometimes the UI can absolutely kill performance, i think it sends too much data to and from the GPU (across the bus), i was watching a video and the video stopped too (since CPU couldn't pass data to GPU decoder across bus since the bus was being saturated), and gpu usage pegs to 100% but power use is only like 50w or so, meaning not much is actually getting used...

Other times it's absolutely fine...

 

The main menu doesn't prevent me from using the "Options" menu, but when I use FPS limiter, the UI goes much faster.
I am fully noticed the frame-rate. When using FPS limiter to lower frame-rate, the UI frame-rate goes up.
--- Post updated ---

The fuel enrichment thing is already implemented in BeamNG, in BeamNG engine load is different than real-life. In "engine debug" uiapp load 0.60 is without fuel enrichment (best"burn efficiency") lower than that is pumping loss, higher than that is rich-burn loss.
However IRL it's a little bit complex. Carburated vehicles nearly always rich-burn the burn efficiency is low regardless of throttle, and no IAC. EFI vehicles use IAC but not as good as BeamNG. In BeamNG you can deliberate load the engine by using the clutch when stopped, then fully disengage it, the RPM remains the same. If you do this IRL the RPM will rise a bit then drop to idle.
Also older EFI vehicles use lean-burn(better efficiency) in less than half throttle and rich-burn with full throttle(more power), Modern ones always burn stoichiometry because lean-burn creates more NO and NO2 while rich-burn creates more CO which cannot be processed by a three-way catalytic converter, stoichiometry burn will create nearly equal amount of CO and NO allowing the three-way catalytic converter convert them to CO2 and N2. If you want BeamNG to simulate all of them you might be asking for too much.

 

put "uiAcceleratedRender = false" in the "game-settings.ini" located in "Documents\BeamNG.drive\settings"

so go in your Documents Folder by pressing the "Windows Key" and Holding it, and pressing "E". this will Open a Explorer Window.

On the Left Panel, click on Documents Folder.

then go in the "BeamNG.drive" Folder by double clicking on it.

the go to the "settings" Folder by double clicking on it also.

in that page there will be a file called "game-settings.ini". Open it by double Clicking on it.

this should have opened it in Notepad or an other Text editor (Word) but unless Windows 10 works differently (i only have Windows 7) it will be opened in Notepad.

in the opened Text, go all the way to the bottom and add an extra line and put this in it: uiAcceleratedRender = false

it should look like hit after (and all the rest up top, just showing the last entries for example):

uiUpscaling = 1080
vsync = false
uiAcceleratedRender = false

just save the file and start BeamNG.drive

so all you need to do is only add uiAcceleratedRender = false to the file game-settings.ini and save.

i put a step by step example in case you do not know how to do it, i am not trying to look down on you, you may even be better at computer usage than me, but there are also those who are new to it.

 

Actually, 0.70 load is peak efficiency for most BeamNG engines, except a few diesels which peak at 0.4 or 0.5. Otherwise you are correct, BeamNG doesn't really simulate fuel properly, although I reckon it's current system is better than everything but other simulators. A lot can be improved by messing with the efficiency curves, most engines use the same curve but with different offsets basically, I assume tracking down a perfect load-efficiency curve for an engine isn't easy, and its near enough that almost no one cares.

 

Efficiency also changes by rpm and quite a lot, which I don't know being taken into account, so it does not matter so much to keep engine at correct rpm range, lowest rpm with 0.7 load for example would give best economy, while IRL engine does works usually most efficiently around max torque rpm.

Dynamic friction increases required torque and thus fuel consumption, but other than that I don't think rpm is taken into account with fuel consumption calculations.

So efficiency table in BeamNG:
[0.00, 0.19],
[0.05, 0.40],
[0.40, 0.52],
[0.70, 0.65],
[1.00, 0.44],

Numbers are totally wrong, but to give idea, IRL works something like this, each RPM bin would need own efficiency table, which might then make things bit much, considering it is not probably going to be huge difference and at least I would not look forward of need to fill every rpm bin with efficiency numbers, so I rather check brake specific fuel consumption tables and use single rpm bin from such to input efficiency table that game currently uses.
["rpm", "torque", "eff0.00", "eff0.05", "eff0.40", "eff0.70", "eff1.0"]
[0,0, 0.19, 0.19, 0.19, 0.19, 0.19],
[800, 282.31, 0.2, 0.22, 0.25, 0.3, 0.25],

 

The "burnefficiency" table is the fuel burn efficiency without friction. The final efficiency is this minus friction and dynamicfriction.
1. The lower the RPM, the higher the load at a given throttle value. So Throttle+RPM→load→burnefficiency
2. The higher the RPM, the lower the final efficiency at a given load, according to the dynamicfriction
3. If the RPM is too low(below 1000 RPM is a gasoline engine), the friction will be very significant to the output torque, lowering the mechanical efficiency.
4. If you set the "burnefficiency" to a constant, the higher the load the better the efficiency since more output torque/friction value

 

I'm not sure if its a bug or intentional, but to open the 'apps' menu in game in need to press CRTL+F9, whereas to open the 'tools' menu I only need to press F10.

If this is intentional, what is the reason for this? It just gives me OCD

 

My train mod f*ed with your new 0.16.3 update THANK you.

 

Early access, anything can change at any time without much warning, things may break or not work at all, with full release things will be much more stable so making mods that you don't need to fix is going to be thing after full release, it is nature of software development.

 

Maybe you know what i need to fix to make mu train working. I have no idea where i gave dig to.

 

Well i have well over 1000 fps in main menu, maybe lack of fps limit for ui causing worse performance comparing to 0.15 update

 

That is frame rate of 3D game, UI itself is one with limiter, afaik.

I think I have something like 4000fps in main menu, but that is the game itself.

 

Also I still have problems with buttons beginning from 0.13. I have a logitech g910 keyboard and assigned buttons sometimes work sometimes not, for example, turn signal buttons default binding for them, -left turn. right turn and / hazard. So sometimes then I load game I press any of these buttons and only turn left signal works. I reload the game and they working fine but on versions higher 0.15 sometimes it doesn't help. I have change log.

 

Can I just ask..

So with the new exhaust/intake sounds.. How does this work with automation, is the exhaust sound from automation duplicated at both ends of the vehicle in beamng.. Or do the sounds come across correctly