Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 486
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Damn it

Marquez probably wont get the Repsol ride because he's Spanish and so is that usless little pick Pedrosa

So now, not only is Pedrosa wasting his own seat, he's managed to potentially ruin the other one as well

nice

You're killing me Casey, Lorenzo has nobody to even remotely challenge him anymore. Makes it all a little too one sided and predictable for my liking.

I'm going to say it!

Rossi to HRC (he has already said he would if they consider it, and if HRC swallow their pride) He can ride his last two years on a bike that can win a championship and give the fans the racing they deserve.

Also would boost Honda's sales globaly as it did in Aus when Casey joined. Then after the Two years give his seat to Marquez as he will no longer be a Rookie and can get the factory ride he deserves.

Also move Pedrosa on and maybe pickup Crutchlow or Spies.

They could do the deal with Yamaha to swap riders.

I think it could work.

I dont see it

Honda will be keen to move on with somebody in their prime, not someone who's about to hit their used by date

Ironically, Simoncelli would have been perfect

Something out of left field would be nice for a change

Like, Honda boot Danni out when Casey goes and get Lorenzo in there with Bautista or something

Edited by ctjet

lol pedrosa you can be such a hack

you have somehow managed to fake your way into that seat

the Massa of MotoGP

barring weird weather, lorenzo may be out of here

You remind me of my mate, only he states his opinion as fact about AFL

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

    • My understanding is that UV tends to accelerate the aging process. If the car has been garaged, then you could probably get away with extending beyond 10 years. FWIW, in 2015, I had tyres on my 180B SSS that had a 3-digit code (2 for week, 1 for decade), ending in 0, so could have been more than 30 years old, but still worked fine. I did replaced them very quickly, though, once I discovered what the code meant!
    • But we haven't even gotten to the point of talking about stateless controllers or any of the good stuff yet!
    • You guys need to take this discussion to another thread if you want to continue it, most of the last 2 pages has nothing to do with OP's questions and situation
    • And this, is just ONE major issue for closed loop control, particularly using PID. One such issue that is created right here, is integrator wind up. But you know GTSBoy, "it's just a simple PID controller"...  
    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
×
×
  • Create New...