hegykc

I have all kinds of belts and pulleys. I'll put together a rig to test how smooth they feel. I also laser cut my own custom gears, software generated not hand designed so they mash together quite well, for low speed applications at least. I'll test them on a joystick-type rig too. Can a simple testing sketch be made for arduino and L298? Just a left-right sweep to test the smoothness of different systems and test stalling torques? I'm ordering these two. A cheaper brushed motor, and a more expensive brushless. Each of them with enough torque to potentially drive a desktop joystick on 1:1 ratio http://www.ebay.com/itm/31ZY-DC-12V-6500rpm-Magnetic-Tubular-Motor-High-Torque-Brushed-Motor/172311967490?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131003132420%26meid%3D250d69b143a344e0be791bb3317af347%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D322099951495 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brushless-DC-Motor-36V-4000-RPM-DC-3-Phase-4-Poles-/141770872702?var=&hash=item210233d77e:m:mIOUJ5YdO6iXZRTBZ40WJtw I have the dimensions already so I'll start on the mechanical rig right away.

As all of my projects are tied together, right now I'm finishing up pcb's for hall effect sensors, analog and digital input/output expanders for arduinos, and some other custom made electronics needed to make the hardware come alive...

I think all the FFB racing wheels use belts. And they had dozens of engineers and millions of dollars to come to that solution. So it might be best to just go with that.

Alright so brushless DC motor it is. I can test laser cut gears, 3d printed gears (not the hobby FDM printers but industrial quality), V-belts, tooth belts... you name it, I can make it and test it. For torque, let's say a desktop joystick shaft is 15cm in length. And let's say we want close to 1kg torque at the top. That would require a 15kg/cm torque motor. (or weaker with gear reduction) What about rc hight torque digital servos? Those are exactly 15kg/cm, 0.14 second 60 degree rotation, metal gears and cost 5$ and eliminate the need for a driver board? http://www.electronicoscaldas.com/datasheet/MG996R_Tower-Pro.pdf

Yeah I can't help with software/firmware/coding. I am a mechanical engineer and expert cad designer. I design and build my own automated CAM machinery (for cheap, low end, low volume applications just like this), which is where I get my limited arduino motor/motion control knowledge. But you guys just tell me what motor, what driver board, and what controller board you use, and I'll design and build both the gimbal/joystick base now, and the equipment to manufacture the gimbal/joystick base later.

I would be interested in ffb that is dcs or fsx/prepar3d specific, and non DIY. Especially if that greatly simplifies the test. For a DIY solution most of the work would go to into designing restrictions and making manuals and tutorials. For starters, let's just try to make a dcs specific ffb that "works". Doesn't matter if it's 10x too weak, not smooth enough or wires brake. Just a proof of concept to build up on.

I have every type of arduino on hand: pro, mini, micro, mega, uno, due you name it. Also a teensy 2.0++ and can order 2.0 or 3.1, what ever works. But that doesn't mean we need to go that route. What ever works for you to program it. If I don't have it, I'll order it. For me to start on the testing rig mechanics, all I needed was type of motor, type of driver and type of position control. For the position control I have potentiometers but I'm making my own hall effect sensors with custom made smd pcb's and custom housings. I have a bunch of those L298 drivers on hand, but you can search for "arduino motor control" on ebay and pick any driver board you want/need and I'll order it: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xarduino+dc+motor+module.TRS0&_nkw=arduino+dc+motor+module&_sacat=0 The same for controllers, and it doesn't even need to be arduino compatible. EDIT: what about just a high torque RC servo? Those are 15kgcm so 10x more powerfull than all we listed above and ready-to-go all-in-one package for 5$?? I have these on hand: http://www.ebay.com/itm/MG996R-Metal-Torque-Gear-Digital-Servo-For-Futaba-RC-Truck-Car-Boat-Helicopter-/311619663165?hash=item488dfab53d:g:FeYAAOSwqfNXlbXV

We can go with a real gimbal testing rig right away.I don't have time at the moment to read up on ffb documentation, but there isn't really a need to anyway. You just supply me with the electronic hardware info like what we need: So, a DC motor + H-bridge driver + potentiometer right? After I design the testing gimbal I can provide you with the info you need, like the motor gear ratio/turns/range of movement or potentiometer range used etc. I'm dealing with arduino based motor control right now so I have a moderate understanding of it. I see you mentioned on the page before you use "atmega32u4", Is that for actual motor control or something else? What chip would be used with this test?

Oh, I didn't really mean arduino specifically. Any micro controller, doesn't matter to me. What I can do is immediately design and prototype a mechanical gimbal for it, including all electrical hardware too. Powerful servos are expensive so that's out. But making my own is easy. So can FFB work with a stepper? I can implement axis position with a pot, no problem. Or does it need to be dc motor + H-bridge + potentiometer? We can do it with the weakest/cheapest components off ebay first. If proof of concept works, we scale it up. I have a bunch of these H-bridge arduino 2A dc motor drivers: http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-L298N-DC-Stepper-Motor-Driver-Module-Dual-H-Bridge-Control-Board-for-Arduino-/191674305541?hash=item2ca0adcc05:g:WFsAAOxyni9S~v5g Up to these 30A full bridge ones: http://www.ebay.com/itm/221994167638?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT Bunch of small dc motors on hand, but I'll order some stronger ones. I'm building my own servos anyway. It just can't be with a worm gearbox because it only works one way. Motor can turn the shaft, but shaft cant turn the motor. So watch out for "powerful dc motor" listings on ebay, most of them are with worm gearboxes. Regular spur gear reduction might be ok, but if ratio is too high / has too many gears it will make the shaft hard to turn or not smooth. What about a motor like this for testing: http://www.ebay.com/itm/31ZY-DC-12V-6500rpm-Magnetic-Tubular-Motor-High-Torque-Brushed-Motor/172311967490?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131003132420%26meid%3D250d69b143a344e0be791bb3317af347%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D322099951495 12V, 1.6A, 1000gcm stalling torque. On a 10:1 belt drive it would make it 10kgcm. Typical jostick shaft is 15cm so that would give us 600 grams of force at the grip. Enough for testing, and cheap. If a stepper motor + driver + custom potentiometer/hall sensor position control can work, those are 12.6kgcm stalling torque on the shaft, for 25$.

I have every kind of motor and driver on hand. Stepper, servo or DC. If anyone writes a full arduino sketch for X,Y,Z motors for joystick and rudders, not interested in buttons at this moment. I will immediately make elegant FFB gimbal testing rigs, and send them around for testing, as many as needed. I will see if the motors can run it 1:1 or they need to be on a gear/belt ratio.

Thanks for the detailed response. I am planing and designing my projects to be manufactured in quantities, with a high degree of automation. So I have to design them with simplicity and engineering elegance in mind, no tinkering or garage hacking methods. But mechanical/electrical hardware is my job and my problem. For example, I'm using custom made pcb's with surface mount components. So for an RWR (if standalone tft/arduino is possible) the potentiometer pcb could sit on top of the lcd, with a surface mounted potentiometer, covering the part of the tft that's not used/too large. Without any clearance or alignment problems. But, if what's needed to make a tft/arduino RWR, is another monitor with RWR viewport exported to it, then it defeats the purpose of the tft/arduino simplicity. Then I would just go with small lcd with video input board. Anyway, I have components for both arduino and video solutions on hand so I'll make both prototypes and we'll see what can be made to work.

Quick theoretical question: Does the sim export data to program an RWR with tft lcd, arduino and custom symbols, like the CDU? Or is the only way a viewport and lcd with video input board?

Well it must all be in my mind then. Only strange thing is I have the cad files of the products I was trying to replicate for you to make, like the MFCD's, glare shield etc. You worked on custom cut lcd screens, replica rubber keypad for the cdu... should I continue?? My engine instruments being the one that got you mad because I designed and offered to sell them on my own, "behind your back". Those are your own words by the way. And all this time you're weren't actually trying to manufacture anything. Well, silly me. Posting in my other thread that my projects are "SWAG (scientific wild-ass guess )" and when I call you out on it, I'm misunderstanding you? My English might not be perfect, but I can tell the difference between someone looking to contribute logical and meaningful content, and someone trying to stir things up. This thread is about fixing the cdu code. So when I ask for contributions, you don't have to look up the dictionary, or play a lawyer with my words, just use common sense. We need code. In the last 3 years I haven't once posted on any of your projects, let alone something in mean spirit. I would ask you to give me the same courtesy back. Just ignore me and all my projects.

Yes, one mod for both stock and extended warthog, with 2 sets of springs. I am costing myself money here, because I could sell you one now, and another when you extend your stick. But my goal is to make this hobby cheaper, I'll make money on different products, rather thank milking a single one. Pictures of the head tracker prototype in October. Sales of spring mod as soon as the new parts are checked and tested. Yeah, me too. If I could combine the two, it would be a perfect solution, but not possible at this point. But that doesn't mean I need to choose one or the other. I'll get my mission planing, plane managing and procedure fix from my simpit, and my flight enjoyment from my VR. I just don't know what all the VR fans are doing promoting VR in my simpit building thread :) There is literary a whole sub-forum titled VR :) Save

I'm just wondering why someone who doesn't want/need a simpit built, is posting in a thread about building simpits. Hope I didn't sound too sensitive there :) You sir are a total partybraker. Don't you see we should go talk about simpit products in the VR subforum? :) An opportunity opened up to include a couple of other, much more important prototypes while I waited on parts for the spring mod, and I took it. We now have a fully working CDU I can manufacture for 1/10 of what it costs now. And the CDU, being the most complex part in the entire side panel module, was holding up the whole thing. So something that was planned for the middle of next year, or hoped for I should say, just became a reality right now. And the cost was a month of delay on the silly spring mod. Worth it, if you ask me. Also I wanted to standardize the parts for both stock Warthog and extended warthog spring mod, but that didn't work out, so I had to make a few modifications, and re-order all the parts. Head tracker is manufactured by CNC milling, which I'm starting in October. Bring it baby :) I am manufacturing my ass off right now. About 1 working prototype each week, and it'll only get better. Any bitter or spiteful sarcasm you got, I'll take it. It's quite a motivation. Although I would much prefer to compete against your prototypes you have been working on for years, if sarcasm and remarks is all you got, I'll take you on :) Save

You can always pm me your sarcastic remarks Deadman. There's really no reason for you to mock our efforts to create a free program for the community to run their CDU's. I could understand it when I was posting renders, but these are actual working prototypes. Prototypes manufactured on automated computer controlled machinery I designed and built myself. I cannot post a better picture because this is the very first unit out of the manufacturing line and has some errors. I will however post many more pictures of the next one, and much better pictures of the final version. Unless you have code writing skills I don't see a reason to offer you a free unit. Or did you mean you can offer me dimensions? Dimensions that are available on multiple places online? I know you are working on your own CDU, along with the rest of the simpit products, and I'm beating you to it. But instead of mocking me you should focus your energy on actual manufacturing... you know, like me.

On the other hand, looking back at the tft with just the modified font, it looks fine to me? And I'm pretty certain mine is a 480x320: Characters seem to be 20x32 to me. It's 1 thickness spacing between characters, and 2 thicknesses spacing between paragraphs. Just like in game graphics. So, why are we re-doing the font? :) Save

Wait, I need spacing between the letters, right? Half the thickness on each side. And then I could make the under/over spacing also half thicknes, like this:

Haha right, in that case no one need anything cause there's a mouse and keyboard. No VR, no controllers. It's like saying I'm an 4x4 off road fanatic and I can't wait to get that 4x4 jeep. Gotta have that 4x4 jeep man. Oh wait, look a motorcycle, oh I'm definitely going with that, I don't even have room for a 4x4 :) Were you really an off road fanatic? No. If you want a simpit, you know it. If you're wondering do you need a simpit, you don't want it. Or here's a better one. WarThunder/IL2 will eliminate the need for DCS, it is just simpler/cheaper etc. Better graphics, less hassle. Well, are you all flying those and only those? Didn't think so :) Save

So before I commit, is this what I need to do for each character? The image under the pixel matrix is a screenshot straight from in-game CDU. It's a 20x32 pixel matrix, the thickness of the letter is 4 pixels, and the empty space under is also 4 pixel. This looks and matches quite ok. And lastly I supply you with a single string of 64 hex numbers in a text file, for each charachter? Confirm and I will do this for the rest of them... Save

Thanks, I'm on it.

And when they include hand gesture gloves with VR, is that going to be the end of joysticks and throttles?? What does VR have to do with replica controllers for planes with 200+ inputs and study flight sims? How are you going to do your start up, shut down and in flight management? My latest prototype is a CDU unit, how does VR compete with that, or vice versa? This is not War thunder, Cliffs of Dover or Il-2 Sturmovik. Not that there's anything wrong with those. I for sure am going to be flying them on VR. But I still need a physical simpit to fly my F-18, F-14and other study level sims. VR is for the masses, millions of gamers. I'm here to satisfy the demand of a few hundred to a thousand serious fliers wanting to learn and enjoy procedures and physical realism. There is no way for VR to replace that, even if it were priced at 99$. It would be bought in addition to a full simpit, and used with point-and-shoot flying sims. How on earth are you going to control a RIO or WSO seat position, who's only job is to flip switches and push buttons?

Alright, thanks for taking a look at it. So, a font should be created like in the tutorial you provided. So a symbol would be 20 pixels wide and 32 pixels high? So, single string of 32 hexadecimal numbers, for each symbol, made by the instructions from your link? I do a lot of graphical design, I can put that into my graphic program and make those hexadecimal strings no problem. What are all the symbols the CDU has? Ok that may be a stupid question. Anything other than what's on the keyboard? P.S. Free CDU's for anyone making a contribution, including the original poster of course.

US patent laws prohibit even replicating for personal usage, EU laws allow it. Or vice versa I don't remember. But I don't think any of it should concern you because as stated above, the patented is the game pad shaker. Nothing at all to do with a 2-axis servo driven force loading system. Anyway, if anyone wants to get into ffb firmware and electronics, I will provide backup in the mechanical department, anything needed to be built to test it, I'll do it...

Thanks to this, I was able to get a cdu working on the first try. Well, minus the upside down lcd :) [/url] But even with the Arduino Due it's not the fastest refresh rate. It can even get stuck at half screen, then refresh teh other half in 2-3 seconds. Apparently it is the "clear" command used when switching CDU pages? As explained in here: http://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?topic=196682.0 the "clear" function re-draws every pixel separately, all 320x480 of them. I have zero lcd programming knowledge but I would guess that's what happens when you switch pages on the cdu? The current sketch uses the clear command? If I'm right then the lcd would have no problems even on Arduino Uno, if the sketch used a different command to re-draw the screen when changing CDU pages. Can someone take a look at it? Instead of the "clear" command when changing CDU pages, maybe use a "draw 320x480 black rectangle" command? Save Save