TM Cougar sealed magnetoresistive/ hall sensor kits - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-28-2018, 07:28 PM   #11
The_Nephilim
Member
 
The_Nephilim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rel4y View Post
You are the same Nephilim from SimHQ, right? I will make another batch once the first is gone, so dont worry.

Yes that is me too from SimHQ OK as long as you will make a new batch. I will purchase these as soon as I can..
__________________
MSI MPG Z390 Gaming Plus / Intel i7 9700K @ 4.8Ghz / Coolermaster 212x / 2 - Samsung 960 Evo RAID 0 / Asus 1080GTX OC / G. Skill RipJaws 32GB RAM 3200MHZ XMP PRofile / Samsung Odyssey Plus VR / HOTAS Cougar & MFD's / Buttkicker game simulation
The_Nephilim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 09:20 AM   #12
Dudikoff
Senior Member
 
Dudikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Croatia / Lebanon
Posts: 2,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rel4y View Post
As shown in the pictures above the Throttle sensor directly replaces the potentiometer without any fancy mounts. But as it communicates via digital SPI protocol (6 wires), it only works with my USB standalone adapter.
Yeah, I got this impression, hence why I asked to be sure. Thanks for the prompt reply.

For me that would be a no then, since the main reason I switched to my previously unused TM Cougar is the programming options that TM Target software provides (which started after getting the TM MFD's alongside my Saitek X65 and quickly realizing how it would actually be great to be able to combine them with the HOTAS).

Not sure how big is the market for such a variant, but MilesD sold a number apparently and I didn't get one in time.
__________________
i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Last edited by Dudikoff; 10-01-2018 at 09:23 AM.
Dudikoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2018, 10:51 AM   #13
rel4y
Member
 
rel4y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dudikoff View Post
Yeah, I got this impression, hence why I asked to be sure. Thanks for the prompt reply.

For me that would be a no then, since the main reason I switched to my previously unused TM Cougar is the programming options that TM Target software provides (which started after getting the TM MFD's alongside my Saitek X65 and quickly realizing how it would actually be great to be able to combine them with the HOTAS).

Not sure how big is the market for such a variant, but MilesD sold a number apparently and I didn't get one in time.

Ok I understand. Like I said, the main problem is not making it, but the two 3,3 and 5V versions of the Throttle. People need to figure out which one they need and that will cause trouble. If you are interested I can probably make one the next weekend. Would you want a simple hall sensor one or a magnetoresistive one? I think I still have a bunch of Allegro 1324s laying around.


But for that you need to tell me which PCB version you have, check here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...&postcount=130

Last edited by rel4y; 10-01-2018 at 11:25 AM.
rel4y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2018, 06:45 AM   #14
Dudikoff
Senior Member
 
Dudikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Croatia / Lebanon
Posts: 2,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rel4y View Post
Ok I understand. Like I said, the main problem is not making it, but the two 3,3 and 5V versions of the Throttle. People need to figure out which one they need and that will cause trouble. If you are interested I can probably make one the next weekend. Would you want a simple hall sensor one or a magnetoresistive one? I think I still have a bunch of Allegro 1324s laying around.
Is there a noticeable difference in the throttle precision and response between the two sensors?

I'm sure I have the later PCB as I bought a new Cougar quite late (last stocks) fearing it might be the last of its kind given how the flight sim market seemed that back then. The serial number is like 31 thousand something.
__________________
i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Last edited by Dudikoff; 10-02-2018 at 06:47 AM.
Dudikoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2018, 11:51 AM   #15
rel4y
Member
 
rel4y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 813
Default

Well, in theory if both types of sensors are set up perfectly there should be no discernible difference. In the real world however you have to mount the sensors somehow and neodymium magnet strength varies by a huge amount. I tested a batch of N52 magnets and found that they varied up to 30% in magnetic field strength.

As I have mentioned before, hall sensor output is a product of their sensitivity for (eg the very sensitive Allegro 1324 5mV/G), the magnetic flux density they experience and the angle they are set to the magnetic field. So if your flux density varies from magnet to magnet by 30% you will experience huge problems making a fixed mount work. You have to set up every hall sensor at the perfect distance for each individual magnet to get correct readings. Not to mention they should also be perfectly on axis of the magnetic field, to make the output as linear as possible.

Now magnetoresistive sensors alleviate that problem since their relative independence on magnetic flux density and robustness to axis offset. They usually are also of higher sensitivity. It makes my job of setting up the sensor much easier and makes for a more consistent product. A few drawbacks however are, you need to make a PCB with a high quality op amp in your circuit (= higher price) and the temperature stability is much worse. But since we use these sensors indoor in our living rooms and problems start upwards of 70°C, its a non issue.

I need to check if I can get the circuit of the magnetoresistive sensor fit within the Throttle mount, since the trim pot I need for setting the center position is fairly large. Fitting a hall sensor in there is no problem, but has the disadvantages I mentioned above.
rel4y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2018, 03:44 PM   #16
BlacleyCole
Senior Member
 
BlacleyCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,954
Default

Are you able to create a hall sensor replacement for pots? I’m wanting to update a maxflight collective too hall sensors. Plus other upgrades likeminded a huey carol head and use a leobednar pcb so i can add other. Switches on a separate panel using cat5/6 connectors into a central pcb box to make use of all the connections on the pcb.the collective is already wired this way
__________________
BlackeyCole 20years usaf
XP-11. Dcs 2.5OB
Acer predator laptop/ i7 7720, 2.4ghz, 32 gb ddr4 ram, 500gb ssd,1tb hdd,nvidia 1080 8gb vram


New FlightSim Blog at https://blackeysblog.wordpress.com. Go visit it and leave me feedback and or comments so I can make it better. A new post every Friday.
BlacleyCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 12:26 AM   #17
rel4y
Member
 
rel4y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 813
Default

After acting as a human pick and place machine for a few hours I have just finished the second batch, half of which is already reserved. If your interested shoot me a PM.




I have also pretty much finished on the CH pot replacement. These pots fit the CH Fighterstick, Combatstick, Pro Throttle and Pro Pedals.

Just the trim pot needs to move to the side and its perfect. My next project will be a combi-shield usable in the CH Combat/Fighterstick + Pedals + Throttle based on the 32 Bit ARM STM32F1 controllers also used in Drones. That microcontroller is much more powerful than the Arduinos and has internal 12 Bit ADCs. I plan to make that one open source and upload it to OSH Park. These sensors would be a perfect fit for such an upgrade from 8 to 12 Bit, as the standard CH pots just dont cut it at 12 Bit.




Quote:
Originally Posted by BlacleyCole View Post
Are you able to create a hall sensor replacement for pots? I’m wanting to update a maxflight collective too hall sensors. Plus other upgrades likeminded a huey carol head and use a leobednar pcb so i can add other. Switches on a separate panel using cat5/6 connectors into a central pcb box to make use of all the connections on the pcb.the collective is already wired this way
Yeah, thats pretty much what I am doing. What sort of pot do you need? Do you have a picture?

Last edited by rel4y; 10-05-2018 at 01:15 PM.
rel4y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 10:58 AM   #18
Dudikoff
Senior Member
 
Dudikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Croatia / Lebanon
Posts: 2,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rel4y View Post
I need to check if I can get the circuit of the magnetoresistive sensor fit within the Throttle mount, since the trim pot I need for setting the center position is fairly large. Fitting a hall sensor in there is no problem, but has the disadvantages I mentioned above.
OK, but would the magnets be fixed in this solution or I'd have to mount them myself?
__________________
i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Dudikoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 06:57 PM   #19
Sokol1_br
Veteran
 
Sokol1_br's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,905
Send a message via MSN to Sokol1_br
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dudikoff View Post
For me that would be a no then, since the main reason I switched to my previously unused TM Cougar is the programming options that TM Target software provides (which started after getting the TM MFD's alongside my Saitek X65 and quickly realizing how it would actually be great to be able to combine them with the HOTAS).
If you want keep your TQS in original fashion - plugged in Cougar base, but replace their pot' axis, get an Bi-Tech 6127 HALL Sensor with <60º of "electric angle" - this is most important detail to observe when buy pot or sensor for joystick.

For assembly is required manufacture a mount in style of Cub'Pilot HALL kit, with aluminum 'L' sheet, R/C linkage or 3D Print some adapter, since 6127 is bigger than original pot is not a "PnP" replacement. Since this sensor work in analog mode, the electrical connection is identical of original pot.

Another alternative is get GVL224 MagRez PCB, who require adaptation for assembly, but can just use hot glue, this sensor too work in analog mode, the electrical connection is identical of original pot.
Sokol1_br is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2018, 08:55 PM   #20
rel4y
Member
 
rel4y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sokol1_br View Post
If you want keep your TQS in original fashion - plugged in Cougar base, but replace their pot' axis, get an Bi-Tech 6127 HALL Sensor with <60º of "electric angle" - this is most important detail to observe when buy pot or sensor for joystick.

For assembly is required manufacture a mount in style of Cub'Pilot HALL kit, with aluminum 'L' sheet, R/C linkage or 3D Print some adapter, since 6127 is bigger than original pot is not a "PnP" replacement. Since this sensor work in analog mode, the electrical connection is identical of original pot.

Another alternative is get GVL224 MagRez PCB, who require adaptation for assembly, but can just use hot glue, this sensor too work in analog mode, the electrical connection is identical of original pot.
That Bi-Tech 6127 HALL Sensor is prohibitively expensive for a simple hall sensor.. I can make a 3D printed Hall Sensor for half that price, but as plug and play option.

My MR sensors are basically the same as a MagRez Sensor, just in a sealed housing and with ball bearings. But I cant make the PCB small enough to fit in the Throttle pot holder.

Last edited by rel4y; 10-04-2018 at 09:20 PM.
rel4y is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
cougar, hall, sensor, standalone, thrustmaster

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:38 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.