Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

What a maggot!

Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone says the easiest way to bring down grand prix ticket prices is for teams to accept less commercial rights income.

Bahahahaha!

That is all.

Too soon. I mean he looks to have some talent but shouldn't they put him in something a bit quicker for a year or two? Like a Sauber?

Pressure must be on Team Cheater Abu Dhabi if Kimi is to lead them next year based on this years results.

You would think Grosjean would still be half a chance at either McLaren or TCAD.

I hope something happens somewhere that gives Romain a shot at McLaren or Fezz. Still stick by my statements that Alonso will see out Fezz and Vettel a chance to sign for McLaren for 2016 season with Romain keeping his seat warm for 2015....which will effectively bne a drive off between Romain and Magnussen to see who will partner Vettel in 2016.

As delusional as Maldanado this bloke.

http://www.planetf1.com/driver/18227/9487921/JEV-I-showed-my-potential

Scrappiest of races with penalities, running off the road left right and centre...yet is claiming it as his arrival drive. Where did he qualify again? :) Hack. Off you go to Nissan LMP1 program and leave Romain to fly the F1 flag

Brabham crowd funding appears to be working.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/project-brabham

Wonder if it would actually be interesting?

Brabham-Engineer

Brabham-Engineer will involve the community in the development of the team’s racing technology while providing online training on what it takes to reach the pinnacle of motorsport engineering. Project challenges will cover all aspects of aerodynamics, CFD, suspension geometry and gearboxes, where members can get involved in the development of specific parts or even a future Brabham prototype, with certification of their achievements.

We are also in advanced talks with a market-leading CAD software developer to integrate their technology into our web application. You will be able to see your designs come to life as you contribute towards the development of Brabham Racing.

Brabham-Engineer is more than just an e-learning platform. The race team brings everything alive, putting context to our content and a providing a practical experience that’s unlike anything else in the market.

Edited by djr81

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...