Jump to content

Thadiun Okona

Members
  • Posts

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thadiun Okona

  1. Print a 20mm cube. If it measures 20.00 in x/y and z you are fine. If it's off at all you should calibrate your printer. If this is not relevant to you it may be to others. It's a pain but well worth doing, even it's only a tiny bit off.. stock settings are usually just off enough to make bearings have trouble. You will need to flash the settings on your printer, so first you need a 3rd party program that can do it. I use Pronterface.. lightweight, free and does what you need it to. https://www.pronterface.com/ Start by calibrating the extruder, everything downstream is affected by that so ensure it's proper first. https://mattshub.com/blogs/blog/extruder-calibration Next follow this guide (has links to test objects in guide..) I found 20mm cubes to be great but also used 100mm xyz thing too https://all3dp.com/2/how-to-calibrate-a-3d-printer-simply-explained/ Mention was made of oversizeing holes when designing, same applies to undersizing bosses for the same reason.. interpolated circles in modeling programs either inscribe or circumscribe a series of straight line segments because curves don't exist in digital format. Another thing that might be causing issue is the 'elephant foot' that may be forming a tighter lip on your hole than the nominal id. That said, you can also heat the part/bearing to make it more compliant to pressing it in
  2. The followup question is: has the printer ever been precisely calibrated? *Most are not accurate out of the box... they're close enough to make parts that fit with parts printed on that particular machine but not precise enough to reliably press bearings into. Bearings are made to standard dimensions so if your printed part has a hole that's just slightly off no matter what orientation it's printed the part will crack. *Prusa's are the only ones I know of that are able to print dimensionally accurate parts without first manually verifying or calibrating x/y/z and extruder axes, and even then only because Prusa calibrates them at the factory and the cost reflects it.
  3. Roland's page is still in tact http://www.simprojects.nl/ms_siderwinder_ff2_hack.htm
  4. To use your grip on a Warthog base it needs a board inside the grip with I2C shift registers to turn the 18 or so buttons into the 5 wire output the base expects. You can scavenge the board from a Warthog or Cougar grip as well as from older FLCS units. There might be something made by the community to fill this role as well
  5. The roll axis motor is at the bottom of the carriage below the pitch pivot and the pitch motor is on the fixed frame, looks sensible to me. The roll motor will not be easy to cool in a pocket like that, also no provisions for belt tensioning yet.
  6. I hope I'm not contributing to thread drift so my apologies to Propeller and those following if so. Huh.. this is an interesting approach I haven't seen or considered before. Would have to do some investigation to figure out the mechanical advantage required to achieve desirable forces is practical or not. Even if the printer type x/y gantry design as is not practical, the underlying concept of Cartesian-drive for force feedback is intriguing and can take other forms. Like a small but powerful ballscrew x/y mechanism at the bottom and the spherical joint at the top might be able to be quite strong yet still compact. An advantage that jumps out with this form factor is that by adjusting the vertical/z-distance of the spherical bearing to the x/y plate driving it you could directly adjust final mechanical leverage and achieved range of motion in one swoop. The practical advantage of that is being able to easily compensate torque/range of motion for longer or shorter shaft lengths using a universal base.
  7. It's a neat form factor that looks easy to keep cool but a few things jump out to me that might be a problem. The shaft is only 3mm dia with 5mm of projection which could make mounting/coupling a pain but maybe there's nifty heli prop mounting solutions? It's also heavy -nearly double the weight of the APS which is probably why it's more powerful. It also seems like it's optimized for high rpm being aimed at RC helis, where do you find info that it's designed for torque/low rpm?
  8. Nice, I'm on almost the opposite path lol. I'm not doing any mechanical until I've got the hardware/electronics/digital fully accounted for first. Not until I have a clear and coherent parts list and related software readily available. Without the software (cog smoothing/drive stuff, middleware to interpret DirectInput from sims, interface to adjust parameters, USB board stuff etc), this $3-400 of hardware will be a lifeless pile of metal and magnets plastic and silicon. If I understood the digital underpinnings I would have already built my own ages ago, which is why the hot rodded MSFFII approach had so much appeal to me. Once parts and more importantly software gets sorted/is made available I'm going to build different gimbals to incorporate them. For me there are still too many unknowns related to key ingredients to fire up Solidworks and do design work let alone print parts cut metal or order hardware. For me the mechanicals are the fun part of the meal though, like dessert. As much as I want to eat this yummy pie it's best saved until after the meat and veggies, especially since mechanical is where most of the cost is sunk.
  9. I love the weathering on these, really makes them not look like printed parts.. same with the texturing like the faux turning grooves on the face of the trim wheel, nice to see attention to detail like this, temps me to build a WWII pit even though I have little interest in those planes
  10. Awesome. I'm nearing a point where I'm ready to start ordering parts and diving into this, but need a sanity check before committing and also checking on the status of the firmware and whatever software is needed to smooth out the bldc motor as well as to communicate with the computer/sims, without which the hardware is useless. I'll likely use an odrive (clone) for the drive, assuming you already made firmware to make it work with this motor? There's still some parts I'm unsure on like encoders.. don't know what type/spec/values to use for this. Also unclear what type of brain/main board you are using for interfacing the drive to the computer and also what software is being used to interpret DirectInput signals from sims/games to the drive which is one of the key ingredients. My plan is to run at 24v, since it's a common psu size and halves the amps from 12v at the same wattage. part model qty APS motor 5065 x2 Encoder ????? x2 odrive clone v3.6 x1 psu 24v/20A x1 USB/interface ????? x1 Besides power transmission and gimbals parts, is there anything missing from that list?
  11. Yes but there are no motors listed by APS with 5063 as their designation. Lots of similar numbers but not that one.
  12. Nice to see some progress in this thread. Any chance of just posting a complete hardware list of the mechanicals? I'm really interested in the specifics on the motors/drives/software to smooth their response or adjust parameters and of course to communicate with computer/sims. Beyond that I have my own designs for FF gimbals based on craft I intend to use it for (sailplanes, pitch coupled 50mm longer than roll) and enough basic engineering knowledge to integrate the hardware.
  13. Amazing.. I love projects like this. Reminds me that when doing some contract work at a place that was making mil sim hardware for the army they had something very similar that used a Buttkicker miniLFE installed in the tip for recoil
  14. Both are variable resisters that serve similar functions and work on the same principal but are not the same thing. Rheostats are used for high voltage and can be used directly with RMS loads (fans, lights, heating elements etc) involving actual current. Potentiometers have higher precision but only rated for very low power and are not used directly on RMS loads unless they are tiny. They are generally only used for signal, not load. Joysticks and other input devices use pots as they req precision and there are no RMS loads.
  15. I didn't make these, the work was done by @TomVR but these are the go to standard if you don't want to model your own.. there are 2 3 and 4 ways and a multitude of hats that were modeled off of real ones, plus the source files if you wanted to start customizing them https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3452944 As far as the switches themselves, you can use any 6x6x4.3mm tact switch but imo the best ones are the 500 gram force ones by Omron.. they cost 2-3 times more than the typical ones but it's not like you need a lot so go for performance. Typically they're about 1/2 the force of actuation which end up feeling mushy too. Thrustmaster uses 280gf versions in theirs for reference https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/omron-electronics-inc-emc-div/B3F-1006/1129851
  16. I bought some of those with high hoped but those Alps switches to feel really mushy and have a strangely long throw for how short the stick is. I prefer printing and making my own 4 ways using nice tact switches
  17. Ahhh.. very cool and now my brain is wrapping around this approach and skateboard motors/drives seem like a great choice. Yeah skewed armatures brush motors are indeed expensive.. luckily after a bit of searching ebay I landed 4 suitable motors for projects for like $30 apiece. I needed brushed motors for the MSFF II hack method using a modded version of the h-bridge circuit and new psu to deliver 400% the current. Still a great approach since you get plug and play functionality for DirectInput and can augment it with FSForce but then builds are limited to the scope of what can be done with that mod. Looking forward to learning more about the BLDC approach and already have designs it can be applied to. I never bothered because without being able to interface DirectInput you have a paperweight imo way too many wheels to reinvent for every plane/sim you want to fly it with.
  18. BLDC is better if you can make it work but did you use brushed motors engineered for low cogging? They are available with skewed armatures for this though not common. Pittman makes a line of suitable motors about the size of Redbull cans that I'm working with.. very nice. I'm using Pittman Lo Cog 14303.. here's what it looks like inside
  19. Neat project, watching with fascination. I'm really interested in the motors/drives and software that is used for this project. I have no interest in replicating MSFFII gimbals architecture (my least favorite gimbals arrangement) however gimbals are easy to make but motor selection/drives and particularly the software to interface it with DirectInput is not, especially if there's a tuning gui as well. OP, how much torque to these motors put out? (peak/hold) and what is your pulley ratio? Details seem a bit vague and there is talk of 8nm in its final form but that's the same output of my Fanatec CSW2.5 wheel which has a 7a psu and double belt step up to achieve in a form factor the size of a watermelon for a single axis. These motors looks a lot smaller than the Fanatec BLDC and only have a single mechanical increase that looks ~5:1. I've designed but not implemented FF setups up to 5Nm and those are getting pretty beefy even with 25:1 double pulley, but were based around brushed motors which are not as efficient as BLDC.
  20. Heh thanks, and no problem. For this mod which doubles the current (adding 1 resistor on top of the old ones) a 3a psu is more than sufficient since 2.8a is the max combined draw. I have tested it both with the stock one and the bigger one and while there is a difference it's not night and day in use but it's easily noticed on the bench. With the stock unit, if you only hold 1 axis off center against the force there is basically enough juice to run it but if you hold both axes off center at the same time the total force developed is noticeably stronger with the bigger psu. I forgot exactly but the stock motors at 1.4a are like .8nm iirc. In use it's unlikely you're holding both axes off center but more power leaves more headroom for effects as well as reversals, especially important the heavier the grip and longer the shaft is. I kept mine super light for this reason, with a carbon stick and printed grip. I also have a 7a brick that will be used for the 'big boy' version I'm working on.. it uses motors the size of redbull cans (Pittman 14203) that will utilize the full capacity of the full mod (400% current, 2.8a/motor) and be belt driven but use the same form factor gimbals as my current version. It comes out to around 3.5nm. I have the parts but end up simracing/tinkering on my racing setup more than flying these days so it's backburnered. The motors have skewed armatures and are engineered for low cogging though and are the perfect voltage/resistance for this mod. I actually have 2 pairs of the motors and if there is definitive progress on using MSFF II in MS2020 I'll use them to build a FF yoke. Still waiting to see how it pans out with FS Force but it's likely they figure it out but I digress...
  21. You can do the mod without it but it will not be able to develop the full power potential using the stock psu. Stock one barely supplies more than than the standard current sensing circuit allows, which is like .7a per motor. This mod pushes that up to 1.4a per motor though, well above the stock psu output. Luckily it super easy to change though because it uses a discrete psu. Mine has a 24v/3a psu in the form of a cheap power brick. https://imgur.com/a/4PHsM3V Here's a link to Roland van Roy's site that got this mod started in the first place, he explains it a lot better than me. http://simprojects.nl/ms_siderwinder_ff2_hack.htm "Note on DC supply: The original AC/DC 24V supply is quite weak, it cannot deliver much more than the power for original drive. So for higher motor currents, you have to use a 24V supply that can deliver more current."
  22. If you mean the MSFF II that's exactly what this stick is. Sadly it was the best attempt at commercial FB for the masses but luckily it used a discrete power supply and a good h bridge circuit manipulating current. This is why it's possible to do mods like the op.. change the resistance value in the current sensing circuit and you can get up to 400% the stock torque. OP's conversion is the simple version where you just add a few resistors and get 200% the torque, though if he kept the original psu it's not achieving full power. If you add even more resistors and add some caps and diodes and change the mosfets you can get 400% and power motors the size of coke cans. A modded MSFF II is still the best FF option for normal sims. CH also made one around the same time as MS but it was outperformed by the Sidewinders, as was the G940 and Wingman. The $1500 Brunner is nice but practically a paperweight because it doesn't process DirectInput (standard FF output for flight sims), though Microsoft inexplicably don't support it on FS2020 or else I'd have already made my yoke with big motors/belt drive. If the FS Force project to bring it to FS2020 https://www.fs-force.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1468 is successful (looks like it might be working now?) than I'll proceed with my yoke and already have a modded MSFF II (200% power, new psu/gimbals/shaft/grip) for gliding though that's used with Condor.
  23. DIY seats can be nice but there's more to it than good foam, the contour of the seat needs to follow a certain form in order to properly support your back for extended periods of sitting. Look at what an ACES II seat looks like before the seat cushions are on it. There is distinct bolstering along the sides and the top curves forward. This is hard to replicate using foams but you can make rigid structure to form the compound curves. I made my own seat for a mechpit a while back using plywood for the structure and first with foam wedges for bolstering but later cut/sanded 2" thick eps foam blocks to form the contours. For the cushion I first lined it with yoga mat then 2" Luxfoam for the seat and 1? memory foam and regular foam for the back with Sunbrella fabric covers. Memory foam is good and used in real cockpits too but usually a laminated construction using 1/2" thick sheets of different densities with firm at the bottom, med in the middle and soft on top. It's hard to find 1/2" density rated memory foam for low cost though and in the end you can buy a nice racecar seat for not much more. I have a sailplane simpit that has a kerf-bend formed seat/back to replicate the semi-supine position and likewise use sculpted eps to form the compound curves for the lummbar. That one doesn't even have a cushion and just has a sheepskin cover on it and it's pretty comfy too but would need a thin cushion as well for longer flights. No pics of it finished but here's a wip sot showing basic seat contour Alternatively I picked up a Cipher AR9 for $100 on Offerup for my simracing rig and man is it comfy though...
×
×
  • Create New...