RaceDepartment Store

Do you ever race in VR?

  • Yes

    Votes: 181 37.6%
  • No

    Votes: 300 62.4%

Upcoming Events

AC events on Simracing.GP ACC events on Simracing.GP R3E events on Simracing.GP Weekly rFactor 2 events Join TCR Virtual today!

More transducers, or belt tensioning for next upgrade?

mgh24

Premium
I have a basic, simple, bass shaker setup, which gives me some extra feedback. There is plenty I could do to improve that system, but it would take a considerable investment. Just to add one large BK unit, a TST exciter, and amp, could be pushing $1k, and if adding additional BK units, well over that price. (As an aside, many people have had great results putting exciters directly on their seats, but my seat does not allow me to do that).

The Simxperience G-belt and adapter would be $1050, plus cost of harness, so in the same ballpark for cost as upgrading transducer setup. I do not think it is within my abilities to build my own tensioning system, so would be buying something commercially available.

The G-belt seems to be a neat system, that could potentially provide better directional feedback than going the transducer route. Seems like the pull on harness could do a great job of simulating braking force, and hopefully turning forces also.

Question for those that have used a belt tensioner system - what do you think of the experience? Happy with results?

Can anyone compare the two approaches, tactile transducers to belt tensioners?

Just looking forward to what to look at for the next investment in my rig. At the moment, need to make a choice, one or the other.

Of course there is a third option, just leave it the heck alone and drive :)
 

mgh24

Premium
Looks like I found my answer here:

 
Upvote 0

blekenbleu

Premium
just leave it the heck alone
That is crazy talk

I found your tactile setup here:
That configuration seems fairly typical for racing seats tactile installations,
although others rigidly cantilever shakers outside the seat rather than beneath,
but both suffer from the same compromise:
* bolts transferring tactile energy vertically into the seat
also transfer energy into cockpit rails, preferably thru elastomers.

Consider an alternative:
* Mount shakers to external cantilevers
* fasten inside edges of cantilevers to seat rails, perhaps by hinges
* pivot cantilevers on elastomer isolators over cockpit rails that are outside of seat rails

More shaker tactile energy can transfer vertically into seat rails by leverage,
with tactile energy motion at cockpit rails more rocking than vertical
being absorbed by elastomers.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mgh24

Premium
That is crazy talk
LOL
I found your tactile setup here:
That configuration seems fairly typical for racing seats tactile installations,
although others rigidly cantilever shakers outside the seat rather than beneath,
but both suffer from the same compromise:
* bolts transferring tactile energy vertically into the seat
also transfer energy into cockpit rails, preferably thru elastomers.

Consider an alternative:
* Mount shakers to external cantilevers
* fasten inside edges of cantilevers to seat rails, perhaps by hinges
* pivot cantilevers on elastomer isolators over cockpit rails that are outside of seat rails
I want to make sure I understand what you are writing about when you say "seat rails".
I was thinking the seat rails are what I have the board mounted under as in the photo.
So mounting them outside the main frame, but still attached between the seat mounts and seat rails? That alone will give me better energy transfer to the seat?
My seat has side mounts, which seems like it would be challenging to attach directly to the seat mounts themselves. I would think that would give me the best transfer of energy to the seat, but I haven't figure out how to accomplish that.
I do have some isolation between the seat rails and the main cockpit chassis, as in the second photo, so the seat rails are at least not in direct contact with the chassis. There are only large rubber grommets there, so I have no idea how effective they actually are.
More shaker tactile energy can transfer vertically into seat rails by leverage,
with tactile energy motion at cockpit rails more rocking than vertical
being absorbed by elastomers.

Thanks for the help!
 
Upvote 0

blekenbleu

Premium
Yes, those are what I meant by seat rails. Something like the existing board
may still be wanted to tie those left and right rails together for horizontal stability.
Mounting shakers outside cockpit rails on cantilevers more or less balance the weight of driver and seat inside cockpit rails,
provided that the elastomer isolators on which cantilevers pivot are nearer to seat rails than shakers.
cantilever.jpg


Because seat rails would no longer be vertically constrained by cockpit rails immediately beneath,
the seat (and you) would be able to absorb more vertical tactile energy.

I do have some isolation between the seat rails and the main cockpit chassis, as in the second photo
I do not see isolators, unless they are below extrusions and corner brackets.
I would have expected something thicker, between extrusions and the board.

For use as pivots, isolators something like this:
6309k58-c1--807e59a04ac1593186137-p9@halfx_637287649506657492.png
from McMaster-Carr
 
Upvote 0

mgh24

Premium
Dang, was hoping to source the isolators locally so I could hold them in my hands to have a better idea of best way to install them. I for sure want to try installation per your sketch.

Still seems to me I would get more immersion detail with G-belt added to my setup, after making shaker installation changes.

Can't follow @Mr Latte's suggestion on seat mounted exciters unless I buy a new seat :( ,and not at all sure I want to try isolating pedal mount, more shakers/exiters, etc.

That said, so far no luck finding info on what folks have done to mount G-belt their non-Simxperience rigs. I imagine that has its own challenges.
 
Upvote 0

metalnwood

Premium
You have an 8020 rig, on those rigs every seatbelt I have seen not mounted on to the seat has been mounted on to either the base of the rig with 4040 profile going vertically up behind the seat and the seatbelt going over the top of that.

Or secondly 4040 coming off the base of the rig vertically to behind the seat, just about the seatbelt holes and mounting it there.

Just like the one in this video from another post https://www.racedepartment.com/threads/sfx-100-or-g-belt.206954/post-3420715

You are just paying attention to what the seatbelt is hanging over in the video. could mount on or below that.
 
Upvote 0

mgh24

Premium
Yesterday reconfigured my setup using @blekenbleu sketch as a guide.

This is what I started with:
transducer:
https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetai...FCuo4z4Tq2Q==&countrycode=US&currencycode=USD

In second photo below, I have rubber grommets between the rails and the main chassis to try to add some isolation.
seat mount.jpg

seat rail.jpg


This is what I ended up with:
Board attached to seat mount like this.
Board to seat mount.jpg


Final configuration.
Note: the transducers were mounted on the bottom, not on top as shown in this photo.
Went to Lowes hardware, and found some rubber bushings, similar to these:


One bushing on top of the board, and another between the board and the main chassis rail.

final config.jpg


I did not have a lot of wood on hand to work with, and I have no idea what is an optimal size.
I ended up with two pieces, 12" X 11.25", with the longer dimension going out away from chassis. The 11.25" does not entirely cover the bottom of the seat mount.

End result was a much more efficient transfer of vibration to the seat. Ended up turning Road Impacts volume down from 60% to 30%. and may need to go lower still!
 
Upvote 0

blekenbleu

Premium
Upvote 0
Top