Authorised Vendor DK Sigma Motion System | USA Made

[SigmaMotion]

Good catch. We used and tested transducers for a some time before implementing EV. To me it was always lackluster, not enough punch, specially if not mounted properly. But they are cost effective and have two other notable advantages:

1) Transducers can be localized or mounted in specific locations.
2) They represent the higher frequencies well or up to 200Hz. Which is where most motion systems struggle. After 200Hz - 300Hz the transducers become speakers.

That is a good question and it really does come to tunning and preference. I personally like just the DK2 system and its more than enough to represent the haptics. I don't think the two systems will clash if they are setup properly as OlaGB outlined above. Personally though I like the simple DK2 only solution. :-P

 

[NetLawMan]

Good catch. We used and tested transducers for a some time before implementing EV. To me it was always lackluster, not enough punch, specially if not mounted properly. But they are cost effective and have two other notable advantages:

1) Transducers can be localized or mounted in specific locations.
2) They represent the higher frequencies well or up to 200Hz. Which is where most motion systems struggle. After 200Hz - 300Hz the transducers become speakers.

That is a good question and it really does come to tunning and preference. I personally like just the DK2 system and its more than enough to represent the haptics. I don't think the two systems will clash if they are setup properly as OlaGB outlined above. Personally though I like the simple DK2 only solution. :-P

Fair enough. Currently I only have one transducer tied to the soundtrack. I no longer use transducers for haptics driven by telemetry, as my current Dbox system does it sufficiently for me. If I were to move to sigma, it sounds like I would not have to change that approach.

 

[SigmaMotion]

Fair enough. Currently I only have one transducer tied to the soundtrack. I no longer use transducers for haptics driven by telemetry, as my current Dbox system does it sufficiently for me. If I were to move to sigma, it sounds like I would not have to change that approach.

Correct.

 

[SigmaMotion]

Latest Software Update ver. 1.3.106 features:

- Much better lower intensity tunning of engine vibrations.
- Global keyboard shortcuts, able to start.
- Various other UI improvements.
- Added a new fancy DK logo

Fixed issues:
- Fix keyboard shortcuts

 

[SigmaMotion]

DK Motion Systems Comparison Chart

 

[NetLawMan]

DK Motion Systems Comparison Chart
View attachment 553933

Basically between the DK2+ and the DK6, it’s a question of travel vs price, right? Still looking forward to seeing the DK6 in action!

 

[SigmaMotion]

Yes. We are working on it. Will be some time yet.

Finalizing manufacturing processes. Demo products or one offs are easy. Mass production, repeatable quality production, that's the hard part. Consistency is key.

 

[SigmaMotion]

DK2+ ... Transducers being removed by client...

 

[SigmaMotion]

Sigma has developed and is releasing a predictive AI algorithm to completely remove any latency in the DK Motion System. This industry first and revolutionary engineering advancement will soon be added to our software as a slider under the trademark Negative Latency (TM)*.

Combined with our vast effects library, extreme haptics, and tacit tactile feedback, this Negative Latency (TM)* layer should technically give us the feeling of having 7 DOF's. To keep things simple, the slider will scale from 0 to 10 and add latency to the negative latency layer to achieve a latency as desired by the driver. Similar to traction loss systems, that never lose traction, we believe that the professional sim racing industry will fully accept this incredible achievement of science.

Tomorrow's motion is available today. Welcome Today. Thank.

* Pending FIA approval.

 

[SigmaMotion]

DK2+ Review from Sim Racing Garage coming soon.....
https://www.instagram.com/p/Cb2_X7ugabl/

 

[SigmaMotion]

General FYI for DK system users or future users. You are able to rotate or position the motor to best fit your chassis design and cable routing requirements.

 

[SigmaMotion]

Trying new anodizing coating for the DK Motion System.

 

[SigmaMotion]

Having some fun in Dirt Rally 2.0 trying to show (unsuccessfully) rather than just explain the new dynamic scaling algorithms that allow for the full use of the 2" of available mechanical travel.

Rally is unforgiving, so failed at the overall stage (hard to talk and drive ). Had to place 10th or lower, and placed 12th instead, but I hope the point comes across of how lively the system is (even at medium settings) compared to other high travel systems that just segmentize their available layers (Ex. heave gets 50mm, pitch 50mm, roll 50mm and hence why often why such systems do need 150mm of travel and cannot effectively do 50mm or less [we tried] ). ;-)

 

[dethgrind666]

 

[NetLawMan]

Having some fun in Dirt Rally 2.0 trying to show (unsuccessfully) rather than just explain the new dynamic scaling algorithms that allow for the full use of the 2" of available mechanical travel.

Rally is unforgiving, so failed at the overall stage (hard to talk and drive ). Had to place 10th or lower, and placed 12th instead, but I hope the point comes across of how lively the system is (even at medium settings) compared to other high travel systems that just segmentize their available layers (Ex. heave gets 50mm, pitch 50mm, roll 50mm and hence why often why such systems do need 150mm of travel and cannot effectively do 50mm or less [we tried] ). ;-)

I did not follow “and hence why often why such systems do need 150mm of travel and cannot effectively do 50mm or less [we tried] ).”
Can you clarify what you mean by this?

 

[SigmaMotion]

Most motion system have static allocations of travel for specific motion layers like pitch, roll and heave. In a simple example lets assume pitch is allocated 0.5", roll is 0.5" and heave is 0.5" in a 1.5" system. Once roll saturates in a turn, then the 0.5" of available travel is used and 1" remains unused or unallocated or waiting for the other layers to activate them.

It's especially wasted if you have 3" or less of available travel and/or if the actuators are mounted very far from the driver/chassis, further reducing effective roll/pitch. I still don't understand why so many integrators continue to install the actuators so far out on some of their motion chassis designs. You lose out on so much roll and pitch.

So in order to have better representation of the dedicated layers in the physically limited amount of travel, its easier to just add more stroke than to build dynamically allocated algorithms. More stroke solves this problem but also introduces other problems. It's always a compromise.

More detailed information on the Dynamic Scaling algorithm can be found here:
https://www.sigmaintegrale.com/document-dynamic-scaling-algorithm/

Hope that helps! Thanks.

 

[NetLawMan]

Most motion system have static allocations of travel for specific motion layers like pitch, roll and heave. In a simple example lets assume pitch is allocated 0.5", roll is 0.5" and heave is 0.5" in a 1.5" system. Once roll saturates in a turn, then the 0.5" of available travel is used and 1" remains unused or unallocated or waiting for the other layers to activate them.

It's especially wasted if you have 3" or less of available travel and/or if the actuators are mounted very far from the driver/chassis, further reducing effective roll/pitch. I still don't understand why so many integrators continue to install the actuators so far out on some of their motion chassis designs. You lose out on so much roll and pitch.

So in order to have better representation of the dedicated layers in the physically limited amount of travel, its easier to just add more stroke than to build dynamically allocated algorithms. More stroke solves this problem but also introduces other problems. It's always a compromise.

More detailed information on the Dynamic Scaling algorithm can be found here:
https://www.sigmaintegrale.com/document-dynamic-scaling-algorithm/

Hope that helps! Thanks.

The examples on your website show a rig of 30" wide, yet most 80/20 rigs are 21-22inches wide. How does that impact your calculations?

Also, are there examples of systems that have static calculations? I ask because while understanding the benefits of static vs dynamic is cool, its more helpful if it can be translated into buying-decision facts. Is d-box static? PT?


Thanks!!

 

[SigmaMotion]

Great question.

Chassis widths of 21-22" require less travel to reach the target allocations for pitch and roll and so the Dynamic Scaling algorithm won't have to work as hard. This is automatically calculated within our software by inputting the width and length of your specific chassis. This is something I always forget to input as well after reinstalling software packages and the difference is not as noticeable as you would think.

I am not sure why other companies don't close the loop by specifying the actually dimensions of the chassis in real life, its a good metric to validate against and get the most from your motion system. And I can't comment on other systems, but usually you can tell/see this in systems with 6" of travel where maximum pitch or roll saturates and there is still a lot of travel left on the actuator.

Cheers!

 

[NetLawMan]

Great question.

Chassis widths of 21-22" require less travel to reach the target allocations for pitch and roll and so the Dynamic Scaling algorithm won't have to work as hard. This is automatically calculated within our software by inputting the width and length of your specific chassis. This is something I always forget to input as well after reinstalling software packages and the difference is not as noticeable as you would think.

I am not sure why other companies don't close the loop by specifying the actually dimensions of the chassis in real life, its a good metric to validate against and get the most from your motion system. And I can't comment on other systems, but usually you can tell/see this in systems with 6" of travel where maximum pitch or roll saturates and there is still a lot of travel left on the actuator.

Cheers!

So if I understand correctly, even though it is a six inch system, the majority of movements (pitch/roll) may use half or less of that? In other-words, is it the case that game telemetry is determined in units of degrees, and so actuator travel is only of tangential relevance, with the dimensions of the rig determining the amount of actuator travel necessary to achieve the intended effect?

If that is the case, based on your experience developing support for various car racing games, is there even a benefit to going with a 6” travel system? Or given the typical rig width of 21 or so inches, can all of the intended game effects be achieved with your 2” system? The only types of games I could imagine needing more than two are games like dirt rally or other off-road titles.

See this Demo for off-road actuator movement that might benefit from longer travel.

 

[SigmaMotion]

1) Yes correct, most systems allocate, partition or shard a specific amount of travel per motion layer. This is probably the easiest method to implement motion from game to chassis.

2) Regarding game telemetry interpretation, this can be done in many ways, and its beyond the scope of this forum. There are many scientific papers online explaining motion cueing theories or how to best represent real-world displacement into actuators with a limited amount of travel. It's really a science and a deep topic.

3) From my experience, for most applications there is no need to go more than 6" if you have good motion cueing and smart allocation (algorithms). These advanced algorithms take a long time to develop and are also very difficult to market, without simply sitting in different systems and just feeling the difference. We try to explain our algorithms (our advantage) with technical articles on our website.

4) 6" systems present other problems as well, including their integration with certain games. Boosted media covered this issue well with a sway system they reviewed, which swayed them more than the vantage point in the car. It looked awkward moving around the cabin like that and they implemented a neat solution. Shorter travel systems, are therefore better at communicating the detail and the attitude of the car without throwing you around past the limits of the game, screen location and going down the rabbit hole of perfect integration. ;-) Cookie or Louise is awesome, love seeing her crush it in DR20. That was her first use of motion in that video, but you can see some discrepancies already (moving more than her over the hood view point). Stroke is easy to market as its something relatable to most but stroke and speed are definitely not everything and can be used as a distractions.

5) Not any one system can completely and fully achieve all intended 'effects'. Its really a compromise and also subjective or independent to each driver and person. At Sigma we understand and enjoy the technical/scientific challenge of motion simulation, and don't rely on 'effects' but smart algorithms that are more raw and give you what is being presented in the game with the discussed limitations. We put the onus on the game developer to give us the correct telemetry at the Hz or frequency necessary. Forza or Gran Turismo is probably never going to give us more than 60Hz physics, as almost any game from Codemasters. So for those games, using effects is great and fun, with some false positives that only dedicated drivers pick up on. Otherwise games like iRacing, rFactor, and BeamNG support our niche ecosystem quite well.