Vehicle Software Company Marble Labs Announces Potential FFB Replacement Tech

Marble-Labs-Haptic-Architecture.jpg
Image: Marble Labs
Force Feedback is essential to enjoying sim racing. US-based vehicle software company Marble Labs attempts to turn this aspect of our favorite hobby on its head with a newly-announced haptic architecture.

After first appearing in arcade racing games as early as the 1980s, Force Feedback has conquered sim racing at least since 1997 when Microsoft introduced its Sidewinder Force Feedback Wheel - generally considered to be the first FFB wheel available to consumers.

While the hardware for has evolved considerably since then, the software-side evolution of FFB has not seen jumps that have been quite as drastic - although the current crop of racing sims certainly is leaps and bounds ahead of the titles of yesteryear thanks to a combination of both.

However, Las Vegas-based vehicle software company Marble Labs wants to get things moving at quite a drastic pace. It has patented "a revolutionary vehicle dynamics engine and haptic architecture", according to their press release (the full version of which is attached to the end of this article).

Having developed software for Advanced Driver Assist Systems and Automated Driving solutions, the company is now trying to tackle sim racing via a rethink regarding haptic feedback relayed to the player. Marble has patented a system called 'Position Control Haptics', which "delivers a pure, physics-based, accurate output that is not dependent on a pre-determined effects-based haptic architecture - the first patented alternative to force feedback, an archaic 30-year-old standard."

An All-New Way To Feel Racing Sims?​

To support the system, Marble is developing three further technologies. The press release explains them as follows:

  • Digital Contact Patch™ (DCP) provides breakthrough surface awareness to quantify the driving surface as never before. After decades of development, today’s driving games still consider a single grip value per surface per tire (with up to 8 points of resolution) state-of-the-art. Marble’s DCP utilizes over 16,000 points of resolution and grip in each contact patch, which is processed in real-time — it’s where the rubber meets the road.
  • Dynamic Multi-Surface™ (DMS) provides an unparalleled road feel. DMS is Marble’s proprietary virtualized geometry system that increases surface detail far more than what’s been possible before in a real-time driving simulation — no more predefined static surfaces. The dynamic surface types and real-time surface wear and deformation provide infinite variability in the driving experience — bringing the road to life.
  • Unlimited Drive™ provides an unconstrained virtual playground for all drivers by combining Marble’s simulation platform with Google Earth — delivering the driving world to the desktop. The proprietary platform offers an unlimited user-definable vehicle simulation experience based on expansion modules and content creation tools (UGC).

On paper, this sounds like a remarkable step up in how sim racers will be able to feel a car and how it interacts with different surfaces, which are ever-changing depending on how they are driven on. And if the promises of the Unlimited Drive system hold true, it might be the answer for those sim racers who long for a proper open-world driving simulation.

Marble Labs Co-Founder Chad Laurendau explains: "Anyone with behind-the-wheel experience should be able to enjoy a high-speed digital driving experience. And those with track experience should be able to turn fast, consistent laps and aggressively drive the car… dancing on the pedals to modulate weight distribution, tossing it into corners, and using the curbs to rotate the vehicle."

With the goal of a more natural feel for driving and racing simulations, Marble Labs certainly has lofty ambitions for the systems they are devloping. Demo videos of the systems in action are already available on the company's YouTube channel. We have embedded one with a yet-to-be named NASCAR driver at the wheel below.


More Big Physics Strides?​

With physics as in-depth as this, the question of hardware performance inevitably comes up. Should it require a high-end PC to run, they might not be able to take off in the short term. Then again, developers have found their way around hardware limitations for decades, so it will be interesting to see if the developers can implement a solution.

It is certainly an exciting time for sim racing developments, as Marcel Offermans' The Last Garage demonstration turned heads at the beginning of the year. The engine of the former Studio 397 dev also promises big strides in sim racing physics and was met very positively at Sim Formula Europe 2024, where visitors could try an early build of the project.

What do you make of Marble Labs' announcement and intentions? Let us know on Twitter @OverTake_gg or in the comments below!

Marble Labs introduces a revolutionary vehicle dynamics engine and haptic architecture, redefining the world of high-performance simulation for digital driving enthusiasts​


Marble’s technology delivers a pure, physics-based, accurate output that is not dependent on archaic 30-year-old “Force Feedback” (FFB) effects-based haptic architecture.

Patented Position Control Haptics™ (PCH) is a revolutionary haptic innovation that is a watershed in freeing vehicle simulation. It is complemented by a suite of innovative driver-focused technologies, including Digital Contact Patch™, Dynamic Multi-Surface™, and Unlimited Drive™.

Marble’s platform is the first PC-based driving simulation to deliver a real-world immersive environment with an honest vehicle feel, natural vehicle dynamics, and authentic haptic feedback.

VIDEO – Marble Labs Simulation Alpha Testing with Professional NASCAR Driver

LAS VEGAS, Nevada, May 14, 2024 — Marble Labs, a Tier 1 vehicle software company that engineers and deploys innovative tools for autonomous systems and software-defined vehicles based on its patented technology, is releasing a consumer-grade PC-based version of its high-performance driving simulation platform for digital driving enthusiasts to experience.

Every consumer driving simulation today uses decades-old technology masked with high-resolution graphics, audio, and hardware. While flashy 4K screens, surround sound, and full-motion rigs improve immersion, they don’t alter the synthetic driving experience — leaving driving enthusiasts yearning for an authentic vehicle feel.

Marble’s patented Position Control Haptics™ (PCH) is a revolutionary haptic innovation that is a watershed in freeing vehicle simulation. The technology delivers a pure, physics-based, accurate output that is not dependent on a pre-determined effects-based haptic architecture — this is the first patented alternative to “force feedback,” an archaic 30-year-old standard.

Pursuing real-world driving dynamics in a digital simulation, Marble Labs complements PCH with a suite of innovative technologies.

Digital Contact Patch™ (DCP) provides breakthrough surface awareness to quantify the driving surface as never before. After decades of development, today’s driving games still consider a single grip value per surface per tire (with up to 8 points of resolution) state-of-the-art. Marble’s DCP utilizes over 16,000 points of resolution and grip in each contact patch, which is processed in real-time — it’s where the rubber meets the road.

Dynamic Multi-Surface™ (DMS) provides an unparalleled road feel. DMS is Marble’s proprietary virtualized geometry system that increases surface detail far more than what’s been possible before in a real-time driving simulation — no more predefined static surfaces. The dynamic surface types and real-time surface wear and deformation provide infinite variability in the driving experience — bringing the road to life.

Unlimited Drive™ provides an unconstrained virtual playground for all drivers by combining Marble’s simulation platform with Google Earth — delivering the driving world to the desktop. The proprietary platform offers an unlimited user-definable vehicle simulation experience based on expansion modules and content creation tools (UGC).

Drivers experience a real-world immersive environment with an honest vehicle feel, natural vehicle dynamics, and authentic haptic feedback. It is the world’s first vehicle simulation platform that rewards driving skills, handling aptitude, and driving talent. “Anyone with behind-the-wheel experience should be able to enjoy a high-speed digital driving experience. And those with track experience should be able to turn fast, consistent laps and aggressively drive the car… dancing on the pedals to modulate weight distribution, tossing it into corners, and using the curbs to rotate the vehicle,” explains Co-Founder of Marble Labs, Chad Laurendeau.

Marble Labs’ philosophy is to upgrade how you drive in one click — drive better, faster, and more consistently against anyone, anywhere, on any device.

About Marble Labs
Marble Labs is a Tier 1 vehicle software supplier that provides authentic, accurate, and scalable tools to train and validate pioneering Advanced Driver Assist Systems (ADAS) and Automated Driving (AD) solutions for automotive OEMs, commercial operators, and the defense industry. Marble Labs’ patented technology provides a proprietary foundation for the company’s low-cost scalable consumer- and industry-focused tools that permit closed-loop simulations and crowdsourced data gathering with unlimited dynamic test environments. Founded in 2023, Marble Labs is headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: antonn, haunetal1990, fatal and 10 others
About author
Yannik Haustein
Yannik Haustein
Lifelong motorsport enthusiast and sim racing aficionado, walking racing history encyclopedia.

Sim racing editor, streamer and one half of the SimRacing Buddies podcast (warning, German!).

Heel & Toe Gang 4 life :D

More in Misc

Comments

H
So they're writing a new physics engine which supports FFB...
I fail to see where's the novelty of this, it may be a great engine, but if their marketing is about a new FFB tech and they only talk about software that's unrelated to it, I immediatly get skeptical.
They also seem to know very little about current games FFB.
 
Last edited:
Skinny McLean
Last edited:
Badwheels
the first patented alternative to force feedback, an archaic 30-year-old standard."

Ok, I don't trust them. If they think something 30 years old is "archaic", I assume ethernet should be replaced also.
 
SharkVA
A lot of buzzwords/buzzphrases, but I'm all for anyone trying to move the hobby forward by leaps and bounds. Eternally skeptical, especially where patenting commonly used technologies is concerned, but if they can bring something legitimately new and high fidelity to the sim crowd, Godspeed.

Stanislas said:
Nice project, wish them good luck, eager to try it out... and it instantly remembered me of this old but very interesting article by Leo BODNAR:
Click to expand...
Interesting read, thanks for posting. I would be curious to see how his viewpoint has evolved in the 13+ years since he wrote this, if it has budged at all.

Skinny McLean said:
I call BS on this (I'm not a big fan of software patents.) The only patent I could find is the co-founder's 2020 patent, "System and method for force feedback interface devices", which almost looks like he's trying to patent sim-racing itself.
Click to expand...
I don't quite have the time to digest the entirety of this patent, but while some of it reads very generic and all-encompassing, further down the patent he seems to clarify:

"Additionally, vehicle dynamics should not vary for the same vehicle from device to device, as this also impacts vehicle performance. In simulations, the interface device dictates movement of a simulated vehicle's steering system. This is why there is a desire for “position feedback” in place of the traditional force feedback. The forces felt by a driver through the steering wheel or column are a by-product of the position. Also, with a ConstantForce signal, the application sends a force command and the rotation is based on wheel dynamics. Therefore, the same force command does not provide the same result with different devices."

To me, it seems directly related to the subject(s) of this article and the system they are building out. I get where you are coming from, but he seems to get deep into the weeds with what will differentiate their system from classic "FFB." I would have to spend some serious time digesting the topic to thoroughly understand where their system departs from existing approaches and what that could potentially mean for both the software and hardware side of the equation. I imagine they would look to have people license the requisite tech on both ends and create a sim-market money printing machine if there turns out to be more substance than hype.
 
jonelsorel
Lots of catchwords and glitter. Let's see how it materializes. Make a demo available for an existing sim. If this means new devices, no thanks. If it's code you write, write it for existing ones.
 
Pete Conway
Premium
Interesting, I understand very little of what's what when it comes to why folks feel they need gazillions of newton meters of torque in their power assisted jimmy rig, but I do know that the contact patch and the road surface and the speed in, say, a Ford Anglia has a different feel to any desk top steering wheel I've ever encountered.
So if these guys can replicate that feel and have the software adjust to the feel of a Veyron/F1 at their high and low speeds then I look forward to what they have to offer.
It's costing me nothing apart from my time to read and reply so I spit no venom.
 
H
SharkVA said:
I don't quite have the time to digest the entirety of this patent, but while some of it reads very generic and all-encompassing, further down the patent he seems to clarify:

"Additionally, vehicle dynamics should not vary for the same vehicle from device to device, as this also impacts vehicle performance. In simulations, the interface device dictates movement of a simulated vehicle's steering system. This is why there is a desire for “position feedback” in place of the traditional force feedback. The forces felt by a driver through the steering wheel or column are a by-product of the position. Also, with a ConstantForce signal, the application sends a force command and the rotation is based on wheel dynamics. Therefore, the same force command does not provide the same result with different devices."

To me, it seems directly related to the subject(s) of this article and the system they are building out. I get where you are coming from, but he seems to get deep into the weeds with what will differentiate their system from classic "FFB." I would have to spend some serious time digesting the topic to thoroughly understand where their system departs from existing approaches and what that could potentially mean for both the software and hardware side of the equation.
Click to expand...

If you output a position instead of a force, you're just offloadinf the force calculations to the wheelbase, since the motor can only generate a force, not a position.
It would make sense if the update rate of the FFB output was much slower than the wheel, since with the current systems the motor would keep pushing in the direction of the latest input it got and not stop if it passes the point where there'd be no force.
Unfortunately for them, I doubt any wheel has a dynamic range above FFB update rate, and you'd still need to also send a force otherwise the wheel doesn't know how much it wants to get in the desired position.
To me it looks like they're trying to solve a non-issue in a way that may help reducing oscillations, but may introduce more perceptible "steps" between FFB updates, and would require more wheelbase side calculations that would need different parameters for each car to be physically correct.
The same could be accomplished by just having a much faster FFB loop running ingame usinge the bandwidth of USB3.
 
Last edited:
SharkVA
hotak said:
If you output a position instead of a force, you're just offloadinf the force calculations to the wheelbase, since the motor can only generate a force, not a position.
It would make sense if the update rate of the FFB output was much slower than the wheel, since with the current systems the motor would keep pushing in the direction of the latest input it got and not stop if it passes the point where there'd be no force.
Unfortunately for them, I doubt any wheel has a dynamic range above FFB update rate, and you'd still need to also send a force otherwise the wheel doesn't know how much it wants to get in the desired position.
To me it looks like they're trying to solve a non-issue in a way that may help reducing oscillations, but may introduce more perceptible "steps" between FFB updates, and would require more wheelbase side calculations that would need different parameters for each car to be physically correct.
The same could be accomplished by just having a much faster FFB loop running ingame usinge the bandwidth of USB3.
Click to expand...
My initial take is damn near identical to yours. I fail to see how their approach will fundamentally change the end-user experience utilizing identical hardware. I applaud their endeavors though, I'll back anyone trying to think outside the box for our hobby and experiment with new approaches. I'm wondering if they will be targeting commercial simulation/training with combined hardware and software packages above anything else, as I just don't see this being all that viable, at least early on, given the wide array of hardware and software being utilized on the "gaming" side of things. Adoption in our segment is bound to be slow regardless of what you bring to the table.
 
Stereo
The actual features they list (contact patch and multi-surface) sound exactly like the kind of FFB effects they claim earlier are made obsolete.

I am 100% onboard that Microsoft DirectInput Force Feedback, which in most sims is solely sending data to the constant force channel and reading back position (already not using the effects they decry), is lacking when you look at the entire control loop. I'm just not convinced they're doing anything novel in that loop.

To me the main thing I don't like about FFB wheels is the same problem that mechanical shifters cannot be simulated by commercially available shifters - you put a TH8A in first gear and the sim just has to deal with it, it's always going to feel the same, go into gear with the same effort, etc. it's never going to pop into neutral just because the simulation says that should happen.
 
Last edited:
Mekonrider
Beyond a point, how much feedback do you need? In the real world some modern cars feel numb at the wheel. My wife had a clio and I hated it, It felt like driving a sim when your FFB won't turn on. The current Nissan she's got isn't much better. Even my Merc is pretty numb compared to the Mini i got rid of.
 
guidofoc
Ok, they are developing a driving sim with its physics engine. It also looks like they like to write pompous press releases with not much to show for. We'll see.

In all honesty, the press release sounds like written from a 16-18 years old boy who thinks that it is the way to succeed in life.
 
Last edited:
P
hotak said:
Unfortunately for them, I doubt any wheel has a dynamic range above FFB update rate, and you'd still need to also send a force otherwise the wheel doesn't know how much it wants to get in the desired position.
To me it looks like they're trying to solve a non-issue in a way that may help reducing oscillations, but may introduce more perceptible "steps" between FFB updates, and would require more wheelbase side calculations that would need different parameters for each car to be physically correct.
The same could be accomplished by just having a much faster FFB loop running ingame usinge the bandwidth of USB3.
Click to expand...
I don't know if I'm interpreting correctly what you are trying to say, but the bit in bold sounds wrong in my books from what I know: the best DD bases (at least OSWs and Simucubes with IONIs or Simucube 2 units) have processing power in spades and work at much faster rates than what commercial sims can throw at them. Also, any CNC driver works primarily looking for position as targets, and that is the main branch of technology from where the DD systems come from. The limitations from the FFB loops we use in simracing titles nowadays lie strictly on the software side; the hardware handles it without breaking a sweat and with capabilities to do more if asked to.

Moving from FFB to PFB, in DD systems at least, is doable: it would require new firmwares developed from scratch to use the hardware power available via a different loop. But again, the ball would be on the software's field: they would have to write PFB code to output a different signal towards the hardware devices, and we don't know if developers will actively tackle this project. At this point in time I would guess that the answer is no: a closer look into sims shows a chronic issue with devs not being able or not willing to take advantage of the full hardware capabilities at disposal to deliver better products, so there are not a lot of signs to think this would be different.

It's not like we are far from reaching the limits of what USB3 can do on simracing either: just running a Direct Drive wheelbase and a VR headset through the same controller, making both devices fight for the native bandwidth available, is enough to bring the controller to its knees and make for one of the devices to falter or stop working (or make others suffer if there is more than those two running through the same center), which is why several users owning both had to install dedicate PCIe boards with separate USB controllers to offload the data via different paths.

Also, pumping up FFB rates is not easy, otherwise all devs would be doing it: instead you have all current titles working on a 300-400 Hz range, and many talk about not being able to increase it, as it demands a rise of the tick rate on the whole physics engine, which can either make it extremely demanding to run (as they are mostly unoptimized and don't multithread properly), or make the whole thing become unstable and create bonkers results.

I guess the conclusion is that there is no easy way out in trying to take a proper leap in terms of haptic feedbacks in driving simulations: implementing a new software technology that can replace FFB is a major task and we don't know how legit this project is...and improving upon the FFB we have nowadays relies on the devs taking a major leap on physics engines, which won't happen anytime soon. The Last Garage may be the chance for it, but it's a technology development that still has a long road ahead.
 
Marcel Offermans
Premium
I think your post @pai is a very fair assessment of where we are today. A few observations:
  • I think software developers are reluctant to start supporting different, brand specific software interfaces because you then end up with a lot of work to maintain all of those. This is why generic APIs were created and so far the most used one on Windows is DirectInput (and even that one over the years ended up having a few variations).
  • You're right about using a shared bus (like USB) for these things. From a real-time point of view that's bad if you need to share it with others. So having a dedicated USB controller makes sense, or maybe even some other dedicated technology, such as CAN (used in real cars a lot) or ethernet (possibly a variation optimized for real-time use too).
  • Not all titles are currently running their physics in the 300-400 Hz range. Remember AMS? That started out with 360 Hz like rFactor, but during its development it doubled that frequency to 720 Hz. Interestingly though, this actually caused issues with some FFB wheels that could not handle that speed. And these were not even the most low-end wheels either. I happened to own one, the first SimSteering wheel by Leo Bodnar. Through experimentation I learned that staying around 400 Hz for sending FFB updates for that one was about the maximum. So in real life situations, the FFB update rate might depend on your hardware.
 
P
Marcel Offermans said:
I think your post @pai is a very fair assessment of where we are today. A few observations:
  • I think software developers are reluctant to start supporting different, brand specific software interfaces because you then end up with a lot of work to maintain all of those. This is why generic APIs were created and so far the most used one on Windows is DirectInput (and even that one over the years ended up having a few variations).
  • You're right about using a shared bus (like USB) for these things. From a real-time point of view that's bad if you need to share it with others. So having a dedicated USB controller makes sense, or maybe even some other dedicated technology, such as CAN (used in real cars a lot) or ethernet (possibly a variation optimized for real-time use too).
  • Not all titles are currently running their physics in the 300-400 Hz range. Remember AMS? That started out with 360 Hz like rFactor, but during its development it doubled that frequency to 720 Hz. Interestingly though, this actually caused issues with some FFB wheels that could not handle that speed. And these were not even the most low-end wheels either. I happened to own one, the first SimSteering wheel by Leo Bodnar. Through experimentation I learned that staying around 400 Hz for sending FFB updates for that one was about the maximum. So in real life situations, the FFB update rate might depend on your hardware.
Click to expand...
Thank you for assessing (and correcting!) me. In the end, I'm just another user :)
 
I
So, the new fashion word is haptic.
I got a haptic desire in my scrotum while reading this.
Such a try hard PR mambo-jumbo.
You know, we humans have a limited refresh rate & resolution in our senses. 16000 points... sounds impressive until you realize you don't need it.
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Yannik Haustein
Article read time
3 min read
Views
4,904
Comments
33
Last update

Share this article

What is the reason for your passion for sim racing?

  • Watching real motorsport

    Votes: 413 69.2%

  • Physics and mechanics

    Votes: 261 43.7%

  • Competition and adrenaline

    Votes: 282 47.2%

  • Practice for real racing

    Votes: 124 20.8%

  • Community and simracers

    Votes: 165 27.6%
See comments…
Back
Top