R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-13-2008, 01:56 AM   #61
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,039
Send a message via ICQ to rcnewb2004
Default

Hmm... wondering if i got this right...

basically the Error is equal (average lap time) - (time of fastest lap)?

Coming from a highschool stats background... basing this on a crap assumption that lap times are approximately normally distributed, (i guess if we have many lap times, and keeping all else consistent (not really possible) it "should" approach a normal distribution. If someone has a real stats background... do correct me...), then the Error is basically half the "width" of the standard distribution curve?

The goal then is to decrease the error (making the "width" of the peak smaller)?

Could I re-understand this as measuring the standard deviation in lap times as a better indication of "better driver"?

Sorry for the questions... I get lost very easily...
__________________
Ta04-TRF, EVO 5
Futaba
KO Propo
Spintec
rcnewb2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 04:45 AM   #62
Tech Master
 
miller tyme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,710
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcnewb2004 View Post
Hmm... wondering if i got this right..

Could I re-understand this as measuring the standard deviation in lap times as a better indication of "better driver"?

Sorry for the questions... I get lost very easily...
... wondering if i got this right.. I think the standard deviation bell curve and six sigma statistical analysis approach is based on the variation around the mean.

This would work but Bob's variation is based on deviation from the single fastest lap (since that is the ultimate goal)
__________________
Ken Miller
RCTarget - Capricorn - Pro Level RC - MAX Power - Maxima Fuel - EA Motorsorts - TQ Wire

LONG LIVE OPEN MODIFIED
miller tyme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 05:09 AM   #63
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,052
Trader Rating: 16 (94%+)
Default

Here are the results from my Stock 13.5 - 2nd place finish yesterday.

http://www.jlapracemanager.com/PC/Mi...ck%20Sedan.HTM

Qual 1:
4 5 Kelly 26 00:05:02.661 00:10.891 23 11.640
Qual 2:
4 5 Kelly 26 00:05:03.287 00:11.044 10 11.664
Qual 3:
5 5 Kelly 25 00:05:03.467 00:10.829 10 12.138
A-Main:
2 5 Kelly 26 00:05:02.723 00:10.992 12 11.643

I think I'm getting to be a pretty consistent driver, but still not consistent enough to not rub flapper or board from time to time. To finish the day with 3-races with almost identical fast laps, avg. laptimes, and total laptime was amazing to me. Most consistent to date for me. Now, how to I go faster and still get more consistent? Practice, Practice, Practice, which I almost never do.

For comparison sake, here is what the Expert Stock 13.5 guys put down on my track yesterday:

A-Main
1 1 Mike Dumas 30 00:05:09.350 00:09.738 2 10.311 Done!
2 6 Steve A Main Marker 28 00:05:01.963 00:10.255 2 10.784 Done!
3 3 Tye Love 28 00:05:02.434 00:10.211 4 10.801 Done!
Qual-3
1 7 Mike Dumas 31 00:05:08.922 00:09.761 2 09.965 Done! <---- This is sick - .204
2 3 Chris Metheny 28 00:05:04.338 00:10.619 12 10.869 Done! <---- This is sick - .250
3 10 Steve A Main Marker 28 00:05:05.432 00:10.350 9 10.908 Done!
Qual-2
1 7 Mike Dumas 30 00:05:01.697 00:09.741 10 10.056 Done!
2 1 Tye Love 29 00:05:05.371 00:10.071 4 10.530 Done!
3 6 Aaron Breuer 28 00:05:00.694 00:10.518 16 10.739 Done!
Qual-1
1 4 Rocco Margiotta 29 00:05:04.729 00:10.202 13 10.507 Done!
2 1 Tye Love 29 00:05:07.363 00:10.180 7 10.598 Done!
3 6 Aaron Breuer 28 00:05:06.707 00:10.310 2 10.953 Done!

Last edited by kn7671; 01-13-2008 at 05:21 AM.
kn7671 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 02:35 PM   #64
Tech Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: north-west Indiana
Posts: 747
Trader Rating: 18 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcnewb2004 View Post
Hmm... wondering if i got this right...

basically the Error is equal (average lap time) - (time of fastest lap)?

Coming from a highschool stats background... basing this on a crap assumption that lap times are approximately normally distributed, (i guess if we have many lap times, and keeping all else consistent (not really possible) it "should" approach a normal distribution. If someone has a real stats background... do correct me...), then the Error is basically half the "width" of the standard distribution curve?

The goal then is to decrease the error (making the "width" of the peak smaller)?

Could I re-understand this as measuring the standard deviation in lap times as a better indication of "better driver"?

Sorry for the questions... I get lost very easily...
Without even plotting, I can hazard a guess that lap times will not be normally distributed, even if you drop off the outliers to try and make it normally distributed you would not be able to use the Stormer error as a standard deviation. Alright, the Stormer error is derived from the fastest lap, in a normally distributed bell curve that fastest lap will be 3 standard deviations from the mean. If you are using 1 standard deviation as your indicator you will be 1/3rd the value of the Stormer error. Ultimately however, you are trying to narrow the width of the curve, but that doesn't change the fact that from 1 standard deviation from the mean in both directions, 68% of your laps will fall, from 2, 95% and 3, 99.7%.

Hey Bob, had a bad night Friday, I couldn't stop thinking about trying to turn my best laps for the thread, needless to say disaster struck. So here is my best qualifier:

Laps Time Fast
36 5:3.759 8.028

Stormer error: .291. Error from all the laps: .410

I still managed to qualify second and place second in the A.

TQ run:

Laps Time Fast
37 5:06.182 7.933

Stormer error: .172 Error from all the laps: .342
trilerian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 03:47 PM   #65
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kn7671 View Post
To finish the day with 3-races with almost identical fast laps, avg. laptimes, and total laptime was amazing to me. Most consistent to date for me. Now, how to I go faster and still get more consistent? Practice, Practice, Practice, which I almost never do.
You say your 3 races and a nearly identical result. What changes did you make to the car, if any, on those 3 runs? How familiar was the track layout? new, old, etc.

I looked at that link, the driver in front of you got you by a lap. Lap times were pretty close for a club scenario. But even though you were second, you can see where he got you. Just more consistent and able to turn more accurate laps. Not all of that is the driver, that's why I like to call it the "package" or putting together your puzzle. An easy to drive car, is easy to drive and you can turn faster more consistent laps with it.
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 03:50 PM   #66
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trilerian View Post
Hey Bob, had a bad night Friday, I couldn't stop thinking about trying to turn my best laps for the thread, needless to say disaster struck. So here is my best qualifier:

Laps Time Fast
36 5:3.759 8.028

Stormer error: .291. Error from all the laps: .410

I still managed to qualify second and place second in the A.

TQ run:

Laps Time Fast
37 5:06.182 7.933

Stormer error: .172 Error from all the laps: .342
Sounds like you had fun though.

The real advantage to looking at the error is in comparing your result to those around you. To help maximize the package.
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 04:14 PM   #67
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcnewb2004 View Post
Hmm... wondering if i got this right...

basically the Error is equal (average lap time) - (time of fastest lap)?

Coming from a highschool stats background... basing this on a crap assumption that lap times are approximately normally distributed, (i guess if we have many lap times, and keeping all else consistent (not really possible) it "should" approach a normal distribution. If someone has a real stats background... do correct me...), then the Error is basically half the "width" of the standard distribution curve?

The goal then is to decrease the error (making the "width" of the peak smaller)?

Could I re-understand this as measuring the standard deviation in lap times as a better indication of "better driver"?

Sorry for the questions... I get lost very easily...
The goal is to decrease your error. But the goal is to do it with the fastest possible package. The best use is to compare yourself with drivers around you in any main or qualifier. I find the fastest qualifier is a good spot to look. Mains can get rough.

A lot of this stemmed from people griping about motors... "If I had this guys motor, I'd whip all you guys"...

You could conceivably, and for sake of debate, put your error on his fast lap and see how the car would have been with you at the wheel.

Lot of assumptions, but it works out most of the time. Also, a driver that is a serious wheel would very likely pull a lower error number, driving your car. I hate when that happens to me, but I've seen it happen. What that means is that there is a piece of the puzzle that can still be improved, the driver.

It's a package. It's about maximizing your package and it's potential, and you won't know if it's good enough until you can compare it either to a different setup of your own, or a different driver.

What's faster, a package you can drive to a 10.4 with an error of .560 or a package you can drive to a 10.5 with a .430?

The 10.5 with the .430 is the car you want to take into the main. Easier to drive, and faster (overall).

Setup a car that is loose, and one that is pushy. Run some good laps, watch the error.
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 04:41 PM   #68
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,039
Send a message via ICQ to rcnewb2004
Default

Thanks to those who are taking my reply seriously. Its good to know when I at least try to understand something here, that some of you do not make fun of me.

trilerian: (just curious) why do you "know" it won't be normally distributed? (sorry, i am not the brightest... not even close). Thank you for correcting me, yes it should be 3 deviations away. Also the Stormer Error correction is much easier to apply at the track than to do some funky standard deviation.

Bob-stormer: Thank you for your reply. It is an excellent way to measure consistency and shows that consistency actually is the difference between a "better" driver and a "worse" driver. I will work on improving my consistency.
__________________
Ta04-TRF, EVO 5
Futaba
KO Propo
Spintec
rcnewb2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 06:07 PM   #69
Tech Master
 
~McSmooth~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,082
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob-Stormer View Post
The one Vicky liked...
NOW I remember! I'll have to ask and see if that one still exists!
__________________
DeSoto Racing * Franchise * Pro-One * Team Scream * Power Push * Team Ass

Badly influencing a new generation of racers!
~McSmooth~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 07:33 PM   #70
Tech Master
 
miller tyme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,710
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

A few of us were discussing this at the track today so we looked at resulting lap times pretty carefully.

Bob you met Phil Zimmerman at Cleveland this year,
he ran 43 laps with a fast lap of 10.7 and a consistency of .195,
he finished second to a fast lap of 10.7 and a consistency of.190
and I rolled in 3rd also with 43 and a fast lap of 10.7 but only a .245 consistency

and taking my consistency out to 35 laps yielded .295. Studying the #'s if my 12 laps at 11.1 had been 11.0 (excluding a bad marshaling incident) all 3 of us would have finished ~ .8 seconds apart.

Conclusion is it may be easier for me to concentrate more on those dozen laps and not sweat trying to pull a 10.6 second lap.
__________________
Ken Miller
RCTarget - Capricorn - Pro Level RC - MAX Power - Maxima Fuel - EA Motorsorts - TQ Wire

LONG LIVE OPEN MODIFIED
miller tyme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2008, 08:01 PM   #71
Tech Champion
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 7,211
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob-Stormer View Post
A lot of this stemmed from people griping about motors... "If I had this guys motor, I'd whip all you guys"...
You know, now that I think of it, I don't remember anyone ever saying that.

What I have heard is how can I compete with these peope if I can't even match their power?
jiml is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008, 12:09 AM   #72
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miller tyme View Post
A few of us were discussing this at the track today so we looked at resulting lap times pretty carefully.

Bob you met Phil Zimmerman at Cleveland this year,
he ran 43 laps with a fast lap of 10.7 and a consistency of .195,
he finished second to a fast lap of 10.7 and a consistency of.190
and I rolled in 3rd also with 43 and a fast lap of 10.7 but only a .245 consistency

and taking my consistency out to 35 laps yielded .295. Studying the #'s if my 12 laps at 11.1 had been 11.0 (excluding a bad marshaling incident) all 3 of us would have finished ~ .8 seconds apart.

Conclusion is it may be easier for me to concentrate more on those dozen laps and not sweat trying to pull a 10.6 second lap.
Phil kept me outta the main! Actually, I kept me outta the main, Phil drove better.

Good close racing there. Once you're to that point, it gets even better. Unless one of you changes something, you will not go much faster. Sure, you'll eventually run some better laps as track familiarity increases, but your error tends to follow you. Some guys dial in quick. I'm not that guy. I'll sometimes struggle the whole weekend and never find something. It happens.

Assuming better driving, for you to knock these dudes off, you need to not only step up your game, you gotta find something else in your chassis. If you assume that your error follows you, you need to up the anti everywhere else you can, so that even with your error, you can win. That's tough. And usually good drivers go faster anyway, so it's hard.

BUT, the more you watch the numbers, the more you'll see guys with super fast cars just barely win, to much error. Or guys with very slow cars knock off a bunch of good drivers, not much error.

Just gotta maximize the package.
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008, 12:12 AM   #73
Tech Elite
 
Bob-Stormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Glasgow, Montana USA
Posts: 3,518
Trader Rating: 8 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jiml View Post
You know, now that I think of it, I don't remember anyone ever saying that.

What I have heard is how can I compete with these peope if I can't even match their power?
Well when you see it next time, whip some math on 'em and let 'em know the real reason they're getting beat... "Dude, we've been looking at the numbers, you suck..."
__________________
www.stormerhobbies.com "Where the world shops for radio control."
www.facebook.com/stormerhobbies
www.twitter.com/stormerhobbies

looking for....vintage 1/10-1/12 pan, need Schumacher 1/12th cars and parts.
Bob-Stormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008, 12:21 AM   #74
Tech Elite
 
SWTour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Central Coast...CALIF.
Posts: 2,873
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

Bob,

this is a great thread...

It's kinda funny, but when I got my son racing about 5 years ago (He's 15 now) I told him to work on being consistant and learn to drive with patience.

After every run - LOOK at the score sheet for 5 things.

1) Your FASTEST LAP
2) Your SLOWEST LAP
3) The TQ's FASTEST LAP
4) The TQ's SLOWEST LAP
5) Your Overall Consistency

Study those times - learn where you've made mistakes...fix those mistakes BEFORE you ask ME to make your car faster.

Work on DRIVING, HANDLING and CONSISTENCY...and slowly we'll keep adding power as needed.

I'm always suprised by people who only compare their FINISH time to the Winners FINISH time w/o comparing laps and consistency and taking into account all the errors in driving...and complain they had a SLOW car (When their lap times sucked)
__________________
Joe Myers
R/C Racing since 1985 ~ Santa Maria, CA (Central Coast)
2001-2012 - South-West Tour R/C Oval Series...will the SWT be revived?
Things are headed towards a return of the SWT Series, but for
2017 the focus will be on the Encino Velodrome (and dirt oval racing)
SWTour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2008, 12:21 AM   #75
Tech Elite
 
SWTour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Central Coast...CALIF.
Posts: 2,873
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

...dang system LAG - DOUBLE POST!!!
__________________
Joe Myers
R/C Racing since 1985 ~ Santa Maria, CA (Central Coast)
2001-2012 - South-West Tour R/C Oval Series...will the SWT be revived?
Things are headed towards a return of the SWT Series, but for
2017 the focus will be on the Encino Velodrome (and dirt oval racing)
SWTour is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KO Propo EX-1 Mars..."Back Up Error"????? Impreza Electric On-Road 5 12-01-2012 07:56 PM
How to fix "Fatal error" in M8 sanwa truongluu Radio and Electronics 7 10-24-2007 08:30 PM
""" XRAY FK05 """ excellent cond/super clean/stock evostyle R/C Items: For Sale/Trade 9 06-29-2006 10:04 PM
Calling all Electric Driving "PUSSIES" soc123_au Australian Racing 9 12-04-2004 06:16 PM
Help! sanwa M8 "FATAL ERROR" neptunes Nitro On-Road 11 03-12-2004 07:11 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 06:07 PM.


Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net