Buri's Rig

[Michal Burisin]

Hi,

last month I bought my first wheel Thrustmaster T-GT and got hooked up in no time , then I figured I would need a rig, so I started with Next Level Racing GTUltimate V2. Despite good reviews, I haven’t liked it, the seat had a lot of flex and weird shape for me, so I returned it. Ever since I’m reading through the forums figuring out how to improve my setup, which is desk and wooden chair right now .

I have just ordered rseat N1 and HPP 3P-PRX-SE pedals as T-GT pedals were lacking, now I have some time meanwhile the orders arrives, so I’m figuring what to do next and tactile seems to be next best upgrade, so driving doesn’t feel so “dead”, although even without tactile this is most fun I had on PC ever .

As for the plans, I will be keeping T-GT steering wheel for now. Currently I’m building DYI handbrake, I have some parts ordered, so when I have some progress, I will put some photos up, maybe with little step by step tutorial if it will be interesting for anyone (I’m total beginner so I will be figuring everything out as I go). It will be simple load cell handbrake.

So far I ordered Handbrake, Load Cell, Controller Board, I hope it all fits together. I will solve mechanical part when I get my hands on the handbrake. I was thinking about hydraulics, but it seems lot more complicated and expensive. Especially when for example HE are using also just load cells in their top of the line pedals, so I figured it must be good enough for DYI handbrake as well .

For now I’m running laptop with CORE I7 and Geforce 1060 6GB and 24’’ monitor. This will be my next goal after tactile, but I will probably wait until summer or later when new graphic cards arrive and TVs with HDMI 2.1 with VRR (variable refresh rate) and possibly VR, this will be long wait, but I will at least have some time to gather some finances .

Then I would like to get DD wheel and in more distant future I would like to get seat mover, probably Next Level Racing Motion Platform V3 as it integrates with rseat N1 quite nicely. My inspiration is Diablo2112 rig, it looks absolutely fantastic!

I will be eternally grateful for any help / advice anyone can give. Many thanks!

 

[Michal Burisin]

Bass Frequencies


Questions:

You dont say what source you are using or if its SSW, Simvibe or audio tactile.
That is causing this main problem? I assume the engine reference is with Simvibe

TST have issues with Simvibe "Textures" and I wonder if you are also using these with any effects?
It would help, if you explain better what you are doing/using.

Confused:
The image you posted for iNuke, appears that channel 1 and channel 2 are I presume the BKA (1) and TST (2). What you have done here is akin to a bandstop or notch type filter by eliminating a whole frequency segment. If you do that is it any wonder you dont feel certain frequencies?

So your RPM is going to have a whole chunk of Hz missing...
Why would you do that with the engine which by its very nature is progressive and creating its own harmonics as the frequencies rise with the RPM value?


Try having the TST operate from 35Hz
Its the unit that will have finer detail and improved speed but is likely to have its strongest Hz in the 40Hz region.

I have often found and shared that TST seem to have quite a peak in the 60-80Hz region.
However, you can better control these in reducing them via PEQ (Parametric EQ) rather than completely cutting them out. Likewise if you want to reduce 100-140Hz dB you can but still have some sensation. Every 3dB is 2x the energy, people relate 6db-10db being a doubling of volume (volume is subjective to different people).

Also in the screenshot, you posted you have upto about 160Hz operating at -5 dB.
Keep in mind Simvibe "Tones" are "center values" so if you set an effect to use say upto 130Hz then that is the "center value" it will have additional higher Hz being active. WIth that crossover chances are you are feeling upto approx the 150Hz-160Hz and again these frequencies are causing audio output from the TST.

Strongly recommend you set a 4ohm 100 wattage limit for the TST.
If you don't you can easily damage them.

For engine I was testing with SimVibe with variable RPM.

For bumps etc. I'm mainly using Front & Rear Suspension bumps. I have problem with Suspension bumps in PC2, that it doesn't pick up rear left wheel at all and front wheel only like at 50 % what it should be compared to right wheel.

Because of that I also use Vertical Surges to simulate bumps. And finally some Vertical Texture. I don't use road texture at the moment. This is my basic setup I achieved in like 2 hours, I didn't have much time to do it more properly.

My main issue was just with the engine.

Yes the (1) is BK and (2) is TST. There's a little notch at 75 Hz, but there's still overlap, so it's not completely missing. BK is fading, but before it fades completely, the TST is starting to pick up volume. I fine tuned it so the tactile feeling is continuous with this configuration. As the frequencies around 75 Hz are felt more strongly or perhaps either BK or TST is stronger at this frequency, this little notch is compensating for this.

I will try to experiment with TST from lower frequencies. Should I keep BK only up to 35 Hz? Having 2 units play same frequencies at the same time feels too strong to me.

As I said, when I changed the max. frequency for seat TST to 110 Hz the problem is solved for the engine. I still need invest more time to setting it up properly, also for other effects.

Thanks, I will definitely set the power limit, I didn't know it could get easily damaged. Once I messed up cabling and plugged TST instead of BK, it ran too strong on low frequencies . I hope I didn't damage them, but I think they sound still the same as before. I think I have hit thermal limit couple of times, is this also problem? I think it was quite weird as the power / volume wasn't all that powerful in my opinion.

What power limit should I set for BK Advance? 400 watts as they write on website?

 

[Michal Burisin]

I got some little progress.

My pedal platform is done, they did really nice job, I'm very happy. It was around 220 EUR so not cheap. Maybe 8020 would be cheaper, but I don't want to mix it for rig core structures, this will also fit more closely with the looks of the rig and will be probably more solid.

From plans to realisation:

It's rock solid and rock heavy, I think it's around 20 kg I hope it won't be too stiff and transmit the vibrations nicely. This main construction will sit on the bottom platform (leaning on mirror in the image) and will be separated from it by isolators.

TST will be positioned on top of the construction so it will have very close contact with pedal stems, which will hang down in inverted position. I hope the TST vibrations will reach down to heels contact point.

I have yet to figure out the position for BK Advance for engine effects.

I will also probably experiment with heel plate separation as suggested by @Mr Latte

I have prepared 2 BK Concerts for wheel effects and also managed to get rest of the iNukes to total number of 4, I hope I'm done with them Well maybe additional TST for wheel would be nice

I will have to spray paint it first and then I will move to installation. Unfortunately moving forward will take me quite a lot time.

Another downside beside weight is that it's vertical position mount is not modular at all, but I hope the HPP pedals will last me lifetime

@Mr Latte What do you think it's better?

1) put BK on "arms" as did @Magiashkii here

2) Or use plates as @Ceolmor did here?

 

[Mr Latte]

Well currently in both those cases above they form a L-R bridge which I personally try to avoid having.
We then go into this whole debate I am being challenged about regards channel blending and how much a factor it has on the immersion or if we seek to maintain the purity of the telemetry output more.

With seat connected, if for example Rob does channel tests with different audio files what I would say is, give us an idea how much you feel the left tactile on the right-hand side and vice versa. Lets just make some presumptions, So with seat attached and isolated in how Rob has shown can we say that now with much more tactile that potentially he may have 60% energy going up into the seat and 40% energy going down through the isolators.

People decide to sidestep or ignore some things I often highlight that's up to each person what they want to do with their own tests or installations. I make recommendations is all. Different seats bring different possibilities but guys come on, we should be seeking to maximise the contact and distribution of each channel within the seat.


I will cover this and explain more in future post my thoughts on Stereo etc

I would cut this (red) to form two plates and then the LFE becomes the only potential bridge.
We cant stop the seat from being a bridge it is the last material destination. This does not mean we have to increase or encourage channel crosstalk happening even before reaching the seat. Yet most peoples builds this is what happens due to cross-sections. We can though, greatly increase the stereo interaction into the seat and greatly reduce/avoid this issue.

Here the LFE is mono we want it in both sides
The question is what energy differences do we feel with stereo based tests on the seat with Circles Vs Squares?

Key:
Squares = Channel Position Of Source
Circle = Force Of Source In OPPOSITE Channel/Side
Triangle = BK LFE Into Both Sides

What we can use contact areas/strips under the seat with the mounted plate, we can even if we want extend from these, using metal profile or other solutions (bendable aluminum with isolation materials to prevent reverb) that basically could form two strips/sections that run up the back of the seat. They dont need to make contact the whole way but connect to the seat at some point via a secure mounting solution. So if something like this was implemented you then have two stereo sections that combine with the side seat mounts with the L/R tactile. So if we implement this can we then estimate we are greatly increasing the amount of tactile going into the seat but not only this but we are allowing the flow to come in from different locations.

We were at 60%, so with something like this implemented can we estimate an increase of contact, can we estimate a much greater perception of the felt stereo as now it may flowing direct into buttocks, sides, and shoulder regions.

However what are we doing to reduce or slow down the progression of tactile energy going down into the main frame?. If Rob has potentially increased the energy by a factor of @5x adding more units (2x BKA 1x LFE) then in my view users doing likewise upgrading their units or number of units should consider the prospect that such may need improved isolation also.

I have shared and discussed with you in this thread many links to materials. What you showed was that layers work as I have stated in the past. So combining a decent quality isolator, with a rubber/EVA pad layer/section and vibration control materials. These should help a lot over a standard or singular isolator will on its own placed on 4 corners of a seat. If a few people were going down the same path then findings or peoples reports on how or what some solutions do should greatly help towards confirming what combos can improve things.


I want to do more of my own tests come the time when I start this new seat section I have been working towards (more parts arrived this week). Look I too am keen to find improvements and continue to seek in understanding this even more. I've did a good number of installs over time but this does not mean every idea or possible solution may prove to be brilliant. Yet if we dont try, if we dont think with creativity then what will we improve?

For my dual LFE I bought the official BK couch plates. I will mount these (steel) to my tubing.
What I am curious about is if we place some rubber between the plate and the attached surface if this helps give a bit of additional mechanical rebound/leverage?

We can try a unit with some and a unit with none. I noticed with the BK couch mounts the rubber isolator feet it has are quite soft (from images I thought it came with BK typical isolators) but its feet are not the same.

Buttkicker also have a drilled holes on their LFE and Concert (throne seat) mounts which we assume is to help prevent the central casing of the units bottoming. Yet I see with many peoples plates they get made they perhaps do not facilitate this feature. The BK Advance may be different as IIRC its own mount is molded more to its underside but who has tried a BK Advance with high energy and low frequencies to see if a plate with a hole helps this model or not?

Having a gap, is why Anton however has the two feet supported and not the full underside of the unit using his profile. I dont know if he spent much time comparing with or without gap. For a VR3 however I think more can be done as really nobody is properly looking to improve how we apply isolation to its own supports and connect whatever seat is being used.

Will cover more later regards image above.

 

[Mr Latte]

With my own seat this is in part similar to how I will seek to increase the individual channels for the stereo but also use a central unit for engine and other effect enhancement. My seat is not like this but is an illustration to match the idea with Robs excellent new plate section. A lot of peoples rigs will use a bucket based or style seat.





Bonkers Or Brillant?
The Circles Vs Square example from the previous image in the last post is not highlighting specific positions or parts of the mounts or seats. But rather the colours represent the channel/side (L/R) of the stereo. LIsten, the factor here is where the source originates from to how much it is felt on the oppostie side. How much does leak, how clear or well defined is the side that the source of the effect originated from being projected into the user accurately to the correct side of the body?

If people install and make connections with the seat mounts then this limits the delivery of the tactile into the seat mainly to the bolts or contact the seat riser has with the seat itself.

Rod Goes Rad
What has worked for me in the past and I personally feel is the best way to help maximise the L/R individual vibrations is find some method to have contact points to follow these lines. Of course, the tactile when it goes into the seat will spread as it can and not in such lines. However, we can have contact points using materials following these lines. In doing this we bring new areas for the energy to also begin to flow into the seat in unison with the other contact placements.

With seeking to incorporate stereo to:

• Shoulders/spine from the back
• Buttocks/thighs from below

So, these combined with the sides people traditionally use wiill make quite an addition to the control and displacement of the stereo tactile.

As mentioned elsewhere recently, I have taken this even further to have some extension to each leg under the knee joint which also helps magnify the sensory definition of the individual L/R channels. This is part of my own individual goals to create the most detailed and immersion I can from the tactile.

Body Regions & Sim Vs Reality
My view on this is from the testing I have done that the more nerves/tissue/muscle we can incorporate the tactile into the greater it will encompass the sensation the user is seeking to feel from the tactile channel or effects.

I tried to find a way to describe this as I think we have two different perspectives. Some people look more into reality and what they feel in a real car or situation. They then want to replicate that, as in what "they feel" from a real car and have this in their sim.

For me, I am not trying to replicate that, I think that's flawed and not the actual focus of what we can bring with simulation. Instead, I want to try and replicate more the forces/energy what the cars axis, its, chassis, suspension, steering, tyres, engine etc would be feeling. So my body in the sim
via the tactile becomes a decoder for this to alter my own responses and controller inputs but combine with all the other sensosry things like audio, vision etc my brain is dealing with.

For me this is the goal, rather than me seek to target or create true sensations or emotions the real experience can only bring. Some factors perhps like adrenaline, fear, physical stresses or muscle impacts or other factors we cant really replicate. No not even even with very expensive commercial sims.


Channel Crosstalk
When installing L/R tactile with no separation and with each unit either installed onto perhaps a solid cross-section. Or that the surface they are installed onto is in contact with a cross-section will enable the channels to freely mix with no level of control in how they mix.


This also is commonly seen on a solid single material plate/surface used for pedals but two units for the front tactile only maybe inches apart or they are installed on the main corners of the rig and the cross sections being in contact freely let their energy combine into a single mix.

Some stereo sensations may still be felt but in allowing this mixing of the channels we cannot maintain situations where the telemetry is highlighting more energy in one side for an effect than the other and this balance or % of energy to L/R channels vary based on what is happening with the simulation/telemetry and the users inputs.

In other cases, we may have the tactile energy for an effect only originate from one side and this could be various things or effects if they support and work in stereo.

So what happens with a rig that has crosstalk is that this telemetry that the sim is outputting as being accurate to what the physics dictate, we are taking the output of that an allowing it to be distorted.

Users with high levels or crosstalk with connecting bridges or single plates/materials and L/R units both attached to . Then the output for each channel is being mixed and both are going to each side. This in my view does not extend the immersion or experience whatsoever. As we are losing vital positional replication of energy to what should be the individual L/R channels and where it originates from.

So in many peoples tactile rigs I can see how their stereo is being mixed before it even reaches the seat or pedals. This is a very different situation to having the seat become the point where THEN the channels mix.

In in the seat, we are ensuring proper stereo we can determine and feel the position the energy is starting or emitting from much more clearly with improved detail or indeed accuracy. This is a big difference.

When you have crosstalk and bridges or plates with each channels activity being combined then we have the energy emitting into both sides. Be it the seat or pedals.

Some may see my views on this as overkill or not that important yet for me extending and maintaining the proper energy to each of the L/R channels is one of vital elements I want to keep as pure as possible based on what the telemetry is determining should be on each channel.


SWW TEST
One thing I can do at some point is to create custom channel tests of frequency sweeps or sensations for individual channels. I can make usage of SSW "test feature" to then start a specially made demo for channel testing and this type of thing.

The question is if people started considering this more seriously for their own rigs do they even realise or are even concerned how much or how good/bad their stereo channels are working?~
To some it may not even matter, they cant be bothered and are happy enough with what their tactile may already be offering or doing.

Personally, I don't want 60-70% or whatever of my left channel to be felt on my right channel side and it hard for me to determine what side it shoulfd be on or be clearly much stronger on.

 

[Michal Burisin]

Hey,

thanks for reply. For pedals, I think I will try something like on image below and I will split the heel plate in two. I'm not sure what will be the best way to split it. I can split it however I want, as the pedals will be hanging from the top.

I'm thinking about these options

1) Split it exactly in half with brake in the middle - then when braking, the heel will be on both plates at the same time

2) Right plate for gas pedal only and left plate for brake and clutch (more suitable for left foot braking)

I will not be dealing with proper seat separation right now, because I will be reworking whole section, I will be replacing default rSeat bucket seat with Kirkey Aluminium seat.

I will try to mount all tactile units directly to the seat and the mounting plates will be isolated from some base structure, so most of the tactile mixing will happen inside the seat.

Another challenge for me will be to transfer the tactile energy to second layer of aluminium plates used as paddles, as I will be building DYI G-Seat.

Thanks @Mr Latte for great ideas. I will see how I progress and then try some more advanced ways how to distribute tactile - for example reinforcing some parts of aluminium seat with some more solid structures to facilitate better tactile transfer as you shown here.

Once I'll do some testing, I'll let you know. The seat will take me couple of months to put together, so I will focus on the pedals area now.

 

[Mr Latte]

Got nightshift tonight so will catch up later.

 

[Ceolmor]

With seat connected, if for example Rob does channel tests with different audio files what I would say is, give us an idea how much you feel the left tactile on the right-hand side and vice versa. Lets just make some presumptions, So with seat attached and isolated in how Rob has shown can we say that now with much more tactile that potentially he may have 60% energy going up into the seat and 40% energy going down through the isolators.

I can place my hands on top of the Buttkicker Advances when testing left and right channels separately. Yes, when the left BKA is activated and shakes I can also feel the right BKA shaking, but to a lesser extent. However, sitting in my seat, my body knows the vibration is coming from the left.

So, in game, if I run over the left rumble strips and only the left transducer is activated (which as I understand doesn't currently happen in SSW anyway, and Simvibes activation of rumble strips seems poor to me) then my body will feel that vibration coming from the left.

The brain will also help with this, as it knows the left rumble strip is on the left by sight and sound. e.g. when you feel the rumble strip through the wheel, your brain tells you it is coming from the left, when in fact the vibration is traveling from the central shaft to the wheel rim.

If I am loosing say 40% of energy into the isolators, how do I prevent this? By removing the isolator? By replacing it with a bigger lump of rubber?

I would cut this (red) to form two plates and then the LFE becomes the only potential bridge.
We cant stop the seat from being a bridge it is the last material destination. This does not mean we have to increase or encourage channel crosstalk happening even before reaching the seat. Yet most peoples builds this is what happens due to cross-sections. We can though, greatly increase the stereo interaction into the seat and greatly reduce/avoid this issue.

If I cut the steel plate in half, will not the same amount, or almost the same amount, of vibration travel from left to right through the metal body of the LFE?

Will not the LFE just become a stressed member of the setup, in the same way the Cosworth engine was used as a stressed member of the Lotus 49 chassis? (Bit of racing history for you there folks )

In addition, or possibly alternatively, will I not loose energy from the LFE because there will be twist and flex at the ends of the two cantilever metal plates?

Not saying what has been suggested is wrong, just trying to think through how this all works.

 

[Michal Burisin]

That hole in the middle of the plate directly under the BK is interesting, I didn't noticed this before, I will incorporate it to my final build. I don't see how it might prevent bottoming out - the bottom of central casing of BK doesn't touch the plate surface directly even if the hole wasn't there. I suppose it might help more with reverb or something.

Channel Crosstalk

For me, reducing channel crosstalk is also important, so I will try to do my best to minimize it. I haven't thought of this much before.

Some tests in SSW might be nice, but I think it's quite easy to do something in Audacity, but if you incorporate it into SSW with Andre, it might get more people interested in the topic.

@Ceolmor Yes, I noticed this even with mono setup, that the brain sees you are running on rumble strip with left wheels and it feels like the vibration comes from left side even though it's not possible with mono setup.

You have good L/R setup so the position of the effect is better felt, but I think if there's option to improve upon that, I would try it.

Cutting base plate into L/R sections depends, if that plate bears weight and if it is important for the rigidity / structure of the rig, if not, you can try it, but I think no one can tell you for sure if it will be better, same or worse, so there's risk involved and it's up to you to decide to try it.

I personally think it might help little bit, as the point of contact between two plates will be much narrower (only through BK), but as you write, there might be some flexing / twisting, especially if the plate bears the weight of the seat + driver which might make some unwanted vibrations, resonance etc.

What you could try more safely is to cut only part of the plate, so there's still some material maintaining the rigidity, but possibly improving the separation, but this might be so small difference that it might not be worth the hassle.

 

[Ceolmor]

That hole in the middle of the plate directly under the BK is interesting, I didn't noticed this before, I will incorporate it to my final build. I don't see how it might prevent bottoming out - the bottom of central casing of BK doesn't touch the plate surface directly even if the hole wasn't there. I suppose it might help more with reverb or something.

Holes were cut out, originally for the single BK Advances I had under the seat and pedals, because Mr Latte had noticed a hole on most commercial BK brackets. There is no way the bottom of the BK could touch the plate when vibrating, so it must have another purpose, if it has any purpose at all. Maybe the company melts down all the metal from the holes to use to make an extra bracket .

Yes, I noticed this even with mono setup, that the brain sees you are running on rumble strip with left wheels and it feels like the vibration comes from left side even though it's not possible with mono setup.

I think how racing sims trick the brain is amazing. I have VR and only one 32" rim, but it always feels like I am holding a wheel the same diameter as that which I can see in game, whether a rim the size of a dustbin lid (as in the old Maserati) or a small modern single seater "wheel."

Cutting base plate into L/R sections depends, if that plate bears weight and if it is important for the rigidity / structure of the rig, if not, you can try it, but I think no one can tell you for sure if it will be better, same or worse, so there's risk involved and it's up to you to decide to try it.

There is a lot of weight in that there LFE to be held up by two 5mm plates sitting on at either end two rubber isolators. The H plate which I cut in two under the pedals, one side for each BK Advance, couldn't cope, so I don't think I'll try cutting this one in two at the moment.

I really like the idea of a aluminium seat. The vibrations from that could be crazy. Don't forget to cut it in half though

 

[Hiro Abe]

I really like the idea of a aluminium seat. The vibrations from that could be crazy. Don't forget to cut it in half though

 

[Michal Burisin]

Holes were cut out, originally for the single BK Advances I had under the seat and pedals, because Mr Latte had noticed a hole on most commercial BK brackets. There is no way the bottom of the BK could touch the plate when vibrating, so it must have another purpose, if it has any purpose at all. Maybe the company melts down all the metal from the holes to use to make an extra bracket .



I think how racing sims trick the brain is amazing. I have VR and only one 32" rim, but it always feels like I am holding a wheel the same diameter as that which I can see in game, whether a rim the size of a dustbin lid (as in the old Maserati) or a small modern single seater "wheel."



There is a lot of weight in that there LFE to be held up by two 5mm plates sitting on at either end two rubber isolators. The H plate which I cut in two under the pedals, one side for each BK Advance, couldn't cope, so I don't think I'll try cutting this one in two at the moment.

I really like the idea of a aluminium seat. The vibrations from that could be crazy. Don't forget to cut it in half though

I will do it without holes for now, but when I design final plates, I will put them there, maybe there's some reason behind having them.

Regarding VR, that's very interesting, how brain can be tricked. Though I hope one day, they will do full hands tracking as shown here

Yeah, when it bears weight, it's better to leave it as it is.

Regarding cutting the seat in half, I'm considering it - to lesser extent Maybe just some holes in the middle, but I will see how thick and rigid the material is.

 

[Mr Latte]

I can place my hands on top of the Buttkicker Advances when testing left and right channels separately. Yes, when the left BKA is activated and shakes I can also feel the right BKA shaking, but to a lesser extent. However, sitting in my seat, my body knows the vibration is coming from the left.

So, in game, if I run over the left rumble strips and only the left transducer is activated (which as I understand doesn't currently happen in SSW anyway, and Simvibes activation of rumble strips seems poor to me) then my body will feel that vibration coming from the left.

Looking more into this it seems that quite often a left impact can have energy on the opposite channel and vice versa. We see this with the telemetry in SSW with the data values. I am not a coder, I don't know the internal workings of SSW but I highlighted this issue as we don't know if its a filtering thing with how SSW works and can be improved regards the left/right channels or be something that a user can be given more control of?

It may be perhaps whats happening is already accurate based on the telemetry code and from the sims physics. So let me highlight and query something here for your own opinions or others...

If we are meant to have with a lot of bumps activity the energy being split with more on the side of the impact but then a lesser percentage on the opposite channel. Not so much having it as more like ON/OFF

Then we can perceive this is very much likely the energy transfer that some people state happens in a real car already coming from the sim.

If that is so, we then do not need to have channels blending by perhaps uncontrolled ways or giving such little thought with our rigs. As such is it then not counteractive, if we do not seek in maintaining this channel output regardless of what the varying L/R energy percentage may be?

The brain will also help with this, as it knows the left rumble strip is on the left by sight and sound. e.g. when you feel the rumble strip through the wheel, your brain tells you it is coming from the left, when in fact the vibration is traveling from the central shaft to the wheel rim.

I agree, even when testing some of the early SSW files, this is apparent as how many of you brought up the issue that stereo bumps in SSW at that time didn't appear to be more convincing on the side of the impact? Its not a dig at anyone and you only had mono but I tried settings Signman said improved his stereo but viewing these via my hardware/software options did not correlate. Perhaps I noticed this more with my current test rig has no connecting cross-sections between the tactile where the tactile are installed.

In some cases "Audio tactile" did seem more focused on the impact side which you can hear in headphones. Having the visual ability to see the tactile with the monitoring options I have does let me see what audio-tactile is doing compared to say SSW/Simvibe. However, on my own temp test rig, I felt I wanted more definition/emphasis on the impact side and is why I queried this with Andre.

If I am loosing say 40% of energy into the isolators, how do I prevent this? By removing the isolator? By replacing it with a bigger lump of rubber?

Well, I had suggested using vibration apps to obtain for yourself a visual representation of the vibe energy. That these can perhaps help bring more general understanding or determine a loose range towards a % value for a single unit/channels tactile distribution. This could be considered for not just L/R dispersion but also what is going down compared, at the point of the seat section and on the mainframe after the isolators.

You could be losing 30% it could be 60% who knows? The tactile are mounted well but my point is how do we better maintain it in the seat. I have shown you pads to try in the past, highlighted other vibration materials that can be combined. I cant tell you what improvement they will bring but it makes sense to reason they will improve over the current method applied.

LIke I said its upto to each person to do their own tests or trials, bring their own creativity. Points I share here are what I have done in past or things I will do with my own build. Testing the theory is the only way but often ideas applied that bring some or even small improvements can carry over and be combined.

The tactile geek in me would like to have these types of things looked at more closely for instance two 8020 test sections built, one with no isolation and compare that to one with variours isolation methods applied. Showcase such with measuring equipment, actual data tests, have a Youtube channel for such experiments and all things tactile experimentation for sims but I only toy with such ideas yet none of the sim channels do stuff like this.

If I cut the steel plate in half, will not the same amount, or almost the same amount, of vibration travel from left to right through the metal body of the LFE?

Will not the LFE just become a stressed member of the setup, in the same way the Cosworth engine was used as a stressed member of the Lotus 49 chassis? (Bit of racing history for you there folks )

In addition, or possibly alternatively, will I not loose energy from the LFE because there will be twist and flex at the ends of the two cantilever metal plates?

Not saying what has been suggested is wrong, just trying to think through how this all works.

Looking at other images of that plate you have its actually much narrower in the middle than I thought from the image above. You kept the bridge section to a minimal size to approx that of the BK. I dont know with your weight on the seat and the tactile isolation used if you have a small amount of flex in the seat section?

Yes you highlight a good point that a cut my cause an issue placing strain on the LFE and if flex is a factor?
My perspective highlighting this was to try and reduce the potential crosstalk that can happen but this configuration tends to also bring other potential factors to consider.

What way are you going to use the LFE regards effects?

Much of what it brings or adds will determine how it's used. For instance, if used with L/R bumps, to boost them. I see this as having a potential to detract from the L/R positioning (even with the plate cut) as the greater energy output of it will carry to both sides.

As you then have a larger more powerful unit potentially outputting both L/R bump activity and this actually causing channel crosstalk to the stereo units (lol). Although we can, however, have this unit (for bumps) use only the "Mono" bump and not the "L/R" bump effects activity to avoid this. Do you get what I am saying here?



I don't know your intentions how with effects you want to use it yet Rob. In truth, your own experimentation in placing different effects on the "SSW SUB Channel" that it I presume is using will help you determine what suits really your own preference mate.

I, would have this unit use only MONO based effects and have it focus on "engine/acceleration" with "mono bumps". You may like bringing in some deceleration as with the power it has it can really increase this sensation. However, from an axis perspective, we would want two LFE with one in the pedals then this way you would place deceleration at front and acceleration at the rear.

You certainly can combine the LFE with the stereo channels for Mono-based effects but avoid ti perhaps with Stereo based effects.

For Stereo testing on your rig or potential crosstalk maybe focus more on "Lateral G" than bumps.
Let us know how well or convincing this effect if coming across on one side/channel to the other.

 

[Mr Latte]

If people want to contest things I say, please feel free as I have no problem or people doing tests to highlight if much of it is BS or to any degree helpful or accurate.

I spend too much time trying to bring serious thought or discussion on this topic in various threads or in search of advancing the tactile experience in general.

I know what I'm achieving with my own build and improvements made along the way.
Focusing a build on stereo and channel separation was the direction that tests and experiments with also monitoring the effects output took me.

Thanks for the suggestions and feedback!
Now excuse me while I get a chainsaw to cut in half my £1100 seat as it will bring 3% improvement to my channel separation.

It appears what I need to cut in half is the time I spend on the forums.

 

[Michal Burisin]

If people want to contest things I say, please feel free as I have no problem or people doing tests to highlight if much of it is BS or to any degree helpful or accurate.

I spend too much time trying to bring serious thought or discussion on this topic in various threads or in search of advancing the tactile experience in general.

I know what I'm achieving with my own build and improvements made along the way.
Focusing a build on stereo and channel separation was the direction that tests and experiments with also monitoring the effects output took me.

Thanks for the suggestions and feedback!
Now excuse me while I get a chainsaw to cut in half my £1100 seat as it will bring 3% improvement to my channel separation.

It appears what I need to cut in half is the time I spend on the forums.

For me your input is very helpful! It got me some really nice ideas, I wouldn't probably myself thought of.

I have different view on some matters, but the discussion is very interesting for me. Most of the ideas must be tested in order to get real world gain in performance / separation of these ideas, which is not easy to do most of the time, as you can for example cut it only once

I haven't thought of this more advanced L/R separation, it makes sense to me, so I will be pursuing this actively. Once I have some results, I'll let you know.

Good luck with the chainsaw, I'm rooting for some photos of your progress!

 

[Michal Burisin]

So it fits rather nicely:

The plate on top of construction:

It would look like this:

I'm not sure whether to do 1 big piece covering whole structure like this. Or do some smaller plate and attach central BK for example on separate narrow plate and the vibration would be travelling through the construction on the sides.

I'm considering whether to cut it paritally in half most of the way to help with L/R separation. I think I'm too big of wuss to cut it all the way , as I would be worried it would make some vibrations / resonance. @Mr Latte do you think it's worth it to cut it like this or it's not even worth the bother? I'm not aiming at full separation, just like 20 - 30 % reduction from L to R would be nice.

I'm thinking about 0,5 cm thick aluminium plate. @Ceolmor do you think it's enough? What material to go for based on your plate?

They offer it in default Al99,5 material which they describe as "medium-hard". They offer also these

AlCu4Mg
AlCu4Mg1
AlMg4,5Mn0,7
AlMg3
AlMg3
AlZn5,5MgCu
AlMgSi1

Any material specialists out here? Should I go for medium-hard or ask them for something harded?

Shoud I worry about this in video below with 0,5 cm plate or it should be ok?

I see you have similiar plates for side units, is it ok on your rig @Ceolmor? I'm also not sure whether to cut holes under the BK Concerts on the side, I'm worried it would make it more prone to flex.

This part with tactile installation design is very hard and I hope I will finally get it done. When I ordered rSeat N1 based on ISRTV review and the looks , I was starting with sim racing, and I basically didn't know much about 8020 rigs and I certainly didn't know it will turn into this kind of custom project. I really love N1, but to do custom job on it is really demanding and much more problematic than on 8020 solutions. For example, I have to have side flaps with L/R Buttkickers more to the back than I would personally like. It's also like 40 cm longer and much heavier too, so It will be more problematic to go to motion. It also got much more expensive with all these customized parts than 8020 would. On the other hand I really like N1 looks .

If I would have to choose again, I would probably go with 8020, but it's too late for me now

 

[Ceolmor]

As I understand it, aluminium is a slightly better conductor of sound than steel.

My aluminium side brackets are 5.5mm thick. Not sure what grade/hardness. I'm having quite a few issues with my seat left and right BKers at the moment, but I don't think it is due to the aluminium plates.

I don't think the plates in that video are as thick as 5mm. Mine don't 'bounce" like that. I wouldn't go any thinner than 5mm for your side plates.

As for the main platform, you could go up to 10mm, due to the expanse and you will also be resting you heels on it. My 400mm wide 5mm thick mild steel plate under my seat has a little flex in it which you probably don't want.

 

[Mr Latte]

Heres what I would consider, not something you likely want to do having just had this section built.
It also requires installing each pedal to the individual section and removing the bars that the actual pedals use to connect each together.

I think its possible to have the L/R top sections separated with no horizontal bridge with the brake pedal section. (Red Circles) These sections then supported by the uprights at each side for the L and R.

The Brake pedal support could have its own independent riser section. You just need enough room for the pedal depression.

These L C R sections can go the length of the floor/base. This would help the energy match the pedal. The BK Concert could be installed on top of the central pedal section frame. The BK units for could be close to the uprights as you show.

Alu may be ideal material for the surface/floor section. 8-10mm seems good ( I have some sample cuttings). Wood and a metal could be used together but whatever you consider you could have an approx 5mm gap between each of the L C R sections. I personally have not seen actual indepth tests done in a detailed comparison to advise fully. Steel however is used on many sim rigs and obviously isnt a problem material for the tactile. BKs own plates are steel, many speaker stands are steel. Alu is meant to have a very fast rate of travel but who knows what may be best?

The only bridge sections in this concept would then be the front and back horizontal at the base/floor. (White Circles). It would even be possible to have these as fully separated sections and bolt them together with isolators in between. Just depends how much or serious you want to take the potential level of separation.

Possibly different places you could install the tactile. Although its hard to know the space you have when we dont have it sitting in front of us.


Check out my artistic skills (lol)....

Keep in mind if we have good physical channel separation in the build. For ANY effect we can determine where it goes from within Audacity own channels and how we place/build the .wav for the effect. If you want channel blending for say engine. Then we can place max energy for it on the BK Concert (Yellow). Then place (as an example only) 10-20% energy going into other L/R pedals if desired all from the design of the .wav.

For material channel blending it would be possible to use some material/object to bring a limited amount of physical channel blending. This can be done with the material for the floor section or small insertions that make some contact points.

A major difference here is that you as the user with testing would determine what or how you prefer the tactile to blend. The difference is, that such an idea or solution gives you the control. Most rig builds do not bring much or any control of channel mixing whatsoever and I have already highlighted how I think this is not ideal for maintaining the telemetry values that each channel should receive.

This can be a rather amazing rig and tbh I think its good to see alternatives to the growing 8020 options that are gradually seeing people buy popular off the shelf solutions.

All I can say is that for me I want to achieve the best out of my tactile, not just in performance but the control of it into the rig. These are part ideas I will implement into my own. Not everyone will be as bothered or focused depending on the perspective to carry such out and have it incorporated into a build.

However, clearly it is commendable the work and effort already you have put into this thus far and I think that deserves to be highlighted. How far you continue the build or what you do, has to be your own choice but I say go the extra mile, take your time let tests determine what solutions or path leads to you ultimately having a rig that brings a great deal of fun, immersion and enjoyment.

 

[Michal Burisin]

@Ceolmor Yeah, in the video, he has the flaps way too thin. I will have big BK units on these side flaps, I'm still not sure what width of aluminium to get. I would also like to start limiting the weight, with 10 mm aluminium sheet, it would get really crazy heavy. For pedal plate for resting heels, as it's not bearing structure, I think 5 mm - 6 mm might be ok. Not sure about the flaps for BKs though, if they make problems and flex, I will reinforce them from bottom with some O profile steel.

@Mr Latte Great artistic skills , many thanks, looking great, however it's too late at the moment. I would have to toss it and start completely new I'll probably finish what I have right now and see how it performs and I'll keep this in mind for possible future upgrade.

I suppose you meant it that each section would be lifted on their own isolators from bottom frame. I see couple of problems there, as I would need to direct tactile from central channel dual role to all plates in the same strength. So I would need to connect all these three plates in some manner anyway. There might be problem with rigidity, at least with brake pedal, which takes a lot of force and it would take some inventive design in order to make it rigid and not to make contact with other pedals. Also in my simpler design, it's easy to adjust spacing between pedals very easily, which would be limited with this design.

Damn, you also suggest 8 - 10 mm pedal plate , I will think about it. I'm also starting to worry about weight. In 5 mm, I think it will be 8 kg, in 10 mm it would be around 16 kg, which is crazy They made me rough price estimate and in 5 mm thickness, it will be around 80 - 90 EUR which is quite OK, but if it would be double, that's too much.

Do you think, if I go for this design, that it makes sense to do at least the partial cut in the middle as in image below or it's basically not worth it? I'm thinking that it might take some extra distance for vibration to get from one side to the other where heels are.

But as it will sit on rigid construction as shown on image below, I'm not sure it will make any difference. Also I think, if I go for it, I can probably make the middle cut very narrow - even 0,5 to 1 mm wide, so it won't be noticed at all when sliding legs across the heel plate.

I think you are right to strive for maximum control, it allows you to try different options. I'm kind of locked with this design at the moment. I think this inverted setup is way too complicated to implement the separation properly. Also it's not possible to experiment at all, as you make design, they weld it together and you can't make any substantial changes after that. With flat pedal plate design, it would be much easier to experiment and do DYI modifications. SSW makes it really easy to direct the gain wo different units which is really nice.

I never thought of it would turn into this kind of project, as in the start, I was thinking about just 4 - 5 BK Mini LFEs Thanks for all your help! It really changed my view on whole tactile solutions and also on other aspects and it directed me to more DYI solutions. It's kind of interesting work on different platform than 8020 rigs, but it involves lot of mistakes and reworking as it's not so simple to just make small changes with couple of bolts. I'm really interested how it will turn out. I will finish it with what I have as I can't scratch the whole pedal platform at the moment.

I'm getting little bit frustrated, as my hands are still recovering, I can't do any drilling etc., so I have here new amps and BK concerts sitting and I can't install them. Hopefully in like 2 weeks, I will be able to start again

 

[Mr Latte]

I understand your frustration, my own rig and ideas are limited to lack of sufficient funds and other family things keep coming up. Yet working the effects, bringing ideas to my own build in itself has become a hobby.

You will get good performance from this with decent effects no question but when you consider the money you are investing in the hardware then it makes sense if the build can help get the most out of it. I would have each pedal base mounted to a plate and then the plate positioned within your frame. This might help a bit by taking away the component that joins all 3 pedals.

Indeed 8020 brings easier modification and working with, my own tubing to some extents brings this too. I can cut a piece of tubing in 30 seconds and apply different clamps to bring options to the build or how things are positioned.

I imagine that anyway you can reduce the L/R units mixing should give you more control in maintaining the energy more to each side. So yes a gap in the middle is worth doing.

Like Rob however, if using a large central unit we have to determine how we will implement it into the build regards the effects. We dont want it to take away the L/R sensation or varations in energy each side may have in relation to the telemetry and effects operation.

The whole importance of this separation for me is that it is this that represents "motion" via the tactile be it left/right but also front and rear. Its making the most of each axis and the detail each channel can bring.

I think that people themselves can be more susceptible or have varying sensitivity to alterations in frequencies or energy in tactile than others. An example of this is that many people used the Simvibe test tone generator (tool for checking channels) to feel different Hz in them.

Yet how many people noticed, this is faulty and does not alter the Hz at all? (I did notice CM & EM use different Hz) although they do not change frequency as it makes you believe it is doing. Instead, it only changes the amplitude for the fixed frequency being used.

So often people may feel a frequency with low-increased amplitude and consider this as different frequencies happening. So it's not always so clear to people what we are actually feeling.

 

[Michal Burisin]

I understand your frustration, my own rig and ideas are limited to lack of sufficient funds and other family things keep coming up. Yet working the effects, bringing ideas to my own build in itself has become a hobby.

You will get good performance from this with decent effects no question but when you consider the money you are investing in the hardware then it makes sense if the build can help get the most out of it. I would have each pedal base mounted to a plate and then the plate positioned within your frame. This might help a bit by taking away the component that joins all 3 pedals.

Indeed 8020 brings easier modification and working with, my own tubing to some extents brings this too. I can cut a piece of tubing in 30 seconds and apply different clamps to bring options to the build or how things are positioned.

I imagine that anyway you can reduce the L/R units mixing should give you more control in maintaining the energy more to each side. So yes a gap in the middle is worth doing.

Like Rob however, if using a large central unit we have to determine how we will implement it into the build regards the effects. We dont want it to take away the L/R sensation or varations in energy each side may have in relation to the telemetry and effects operation.

The whole importance of this separation for me is that it is this that represents "motion" via the tactile be it left/right but also front and rear. Its making the most of each axis and the detail each channel can bring.

I think that people themselves can be more susceptible or have varying sensitivity to alterations in frequencies or energy in tactile than others. An example of this is that many people used the Simvibe test tone generator (tool for checking channels) to feel different Hz in them.

Yet how many people noticed, this is faulty and does not alter the Hz at all? (I did notice CM & EM use different Hz) although they do not change frequency as it makes you believe it is doing. Instead, it only changes the amplitude for the fixed frequency being used.

So often people may feel a frequency with low-increased amplitude and consider this as different frequencies happening. So it's not always so clear to people what we are actually feeling.

Yeah, for me the building and stuff around it is hobby for me as well, haven't raced for last 4 months

I really can't wait for some photos of your progress this tubing and clamps sounds very interesting.

Thanks for push, I will go for the gap!

I have blueprint ready. I still need to figure out how thick the gap should be, I think anything bigger than 1 mm should be ok, as I think it won't move much, if at all, so there shouldn't be danger if one side flexed, it would touch the other side with the corner of the plate.

I will have to check that SimVibe test, I haven't seen it yet. I also think that vibration perception will vary among people.

It's so many different feelings that can be achieved, have you for example experimented with triangle, square and other shapes of amplitudes? If I remember right, I could get stronger feeling under 5 Hz with triangle or square shape with BK Concert when I was playing with it, but it might not be very useful for simracing application.