Tactile Immersion - General Discussion - Hardware & Software

[Tom_Hampton]

I am pretty sure this would also be the way to go for Tom, if it was a professional problem,

Yes, exactly. Numerical methods are the way to go, if you have to actually solve this type of problem. Its not really that hard to find the relevant material properties, and get close enough to model in Matlab or any of several other options.

The way around it, is to simply make the lever plate so stiff as to not flex (significantly), and reduce the design problem to a simple lever, and the response of the seat. Divide and conquer....so to speak. The Q10B is so massive that may be a bit of a challenge to get the resonance of the lever/Q10B up above 500 Hz (10x above operating range being a typical rule of thumb), without using stupid amounts of metal.

 

[RCHeliguy]

You could also reinforce the plate with something like profile.

I didn't skimp on attachment points. There are 12 reinforcing bolts for the front plate to 30x60 profile and 10 for the rear plate to 40x40 profile.

If for some reason I felt there was an issue with the TST mount, I could add a corner brace on each side of the TST mount. For the BK, it's through bolted to 1/2" of aluminum. A 1/4" plate on top and 1/4" angle underneath that bolt to the profile with 5 xM8's on top and 4x M8's in sideways from the angle.

30x60 arrives today and will get the full 12x M8 fasteners in place. The 40x40 piece in front now is just a stop gap.

 

[Tom_Hampton]

You could also reinforce the plate with something like profile.

I completely agree.

 

[Callsign BH]

Is it now preferred/recommended to mount the BK-CT's on a platform, like @RCHeliguy , versus directly to the bottom side of the seat? Or is that just a workaround given the NLR motion seat?

Again, just trying to catch myself up for lost time being away (where I assume many "best practices" have changed).

 

[metalnwood]

I am keen to see your results with the Simhub and the DSP settings on these transducers!

(also because I have 2 min LFE left over which could come under my seat if I find enough space around my 2 BK LFE and the TST429 there. Alternatively I could screw them on the seat on the back but I have ordered 4 x 40W exiters and for ”emotional“ reasons it will be difficult for me to screw something on a race car seat…LOL)

I will play around with the dsp a bit. I sat in the chair and did a freq sweep while I recorded on the phones accelerometer. I certainly felt the highs and lows and the softare on the phone gave me a good idea of where to start setting the dsp and how much.

I dont know how important it is to get even output across the range but it can't hurt.

 

[metalnwood]

Is it now preferred/recommended to mount the BK-CT's on a platform, like @RCHeliguy , versus directly to the bottom side of the seat? Or is that just a workaround given the NLR motion seat?

Again, just trying to catch myself up for lost time being away (where I assume many "best practices" have changed).

Not sure that it will make a lot of different. I was worried that I might feel more of the LFE at the front as that was where it was mounted. Ideally I would have mounted it more ot the rear of the seat.

In the end, when its going I dont get any indication its mounted near the front so I dont think it makes much difference.

 

[vinnygee]

A few months ago I decided to incorporate tactile into my rig. I had no prior knowledge of tactile transducers and really didn’t know where to start. I’d like to share my progress, welcoming any comments, criticisms, suggestions and questions. This maybe helpful for others thinking of installing tactile and also learning from the good, bad and ugly of my own setup.

Initial setup
I started with a BK Gamer 2 attached directly to the frame of my P1-X chassis and was immediately underwhelmed with the results. The entire floor and rig were shaking while through the seat I could feel very little sensation. Looking for ways to improve the experience I discovered this thread and other useful sources of information such as the Simhub Discord channel. After spending many hours reading through the wealth of information presented here and discord, I eventually figured out a way to mount the BK Gamer 2 directly to the seat and felt a significant improvement in sensations and effects detail. That’s when I realised the potential tactile could offer and started thinking about upgrading to more powerful transducers.

In hindsight, instead of the BK Gamer 2 I would choose a BK mini LFE and Nobsound G2 amp, probably more scalable solution. The amp that came bundled with my BK Gamer 2 stopped working after two months and I ended up buying the Nobsound G2 as a replacement.

Current setup
Over the past few weeks I’ve bought some of the recommended equipment, installing a BK-CT and TST 329 directly to the seat powered by NX3000D amp. I’ve mounted the transducers as shown in the photos attached:

Both transducers are mounted directly to the seat via aluminium profile. The thinking behind this approach is to reduce hotspots and increase the surface area for energy to flow into the seat. What do you think?
Dayton DAEX32EP-4 on back order should be arriving soon and will mount directly to the seat back.
I haven’t thought about the pedal section yet. At the moment, I think all I want to feel through the pedals are wheel slip/locking effects but that may change over time.

Isolation
Isolation hasn’t been implemented yet for the seat section. I discovered after mounting transducers directly to the seat, the vibrations entering the main frame were less significant or distracting. Having said that, I do feel the higher frequency effects such as high RPM seeping through to the pedal plate. However, I personally like that since they’re very subtle add to the immersion.

The isolation solution I have in mind for the seat will probably use enclosed spring mounts attached to a metal plate. The ESMs would attach to 40x40 aluminium profile bars lowered into the subframe and the seat would bolt onto the metal plate. Essentially I’m trying to maintain the existing seat height as closely as possible:

My primary concern with isolation is introducing flex. Since it’s not affecting my enjoyment or irritating family in the house at the moment, I’ve decided to put this on the back burner.
I’d be interested to know the benefits isolation would bring, other than reducing chassis vibrations. Would there be improvements to how effects are felt even with direct seat mounted transducers?

NX3000D and DSP
Using settings shared by MrLatte on the Simhub discord as a starting point, I’ve made some tweaks to suit my installation and come up with the following configuration for the NX3000D

Channel A - BK-CT
Channel B - TST329

Filter/Crossover

BK-CT - PEQ

TST329 - PEQ

I’ve configured the PEQ with the help of an online tone generator by sweeping through the operating frequency range of each transducer. Undesirable peaks and resonant frequencies have been notched out. I’m sure there’s a more scientific way of doing this that yields better results. I’ve simply sat in the seat and landed on settings that instinctively feel decent and linear through the range.

Effects
Firstly many thanks to MrLatte, his effects are fantastic. I’ve compiled my profiles based on effects he’s shared on RaceDepartment and Discord. Here’s the profile I’m using for AC1 where I spend most of my time at the moment (delete the .txt extension and import in Simhub)

Assetto Corsa - Assetto Corsa v0.4 - BK-CT and TST.siprofile.txt 23.8 KB

I couldn’t get the smile of my face driving the Porsche 962C around Road America…absolute joy!

Apologies for the lengthy post, I’ve tried to keep it as high level as possible. Thanks for reading and hope it’s useful…cheers!

 

[Mr Latte]

Not sure that it will make a lot of different. I was worried that I might feel more of the LFE at the front as that was where it was mounted. Ideally I would have mounted it more ot the rear of the seat.

In the end, when its going I dont get any indication its mounted near the front so I dont think it makes much difference.

If tactile are placed in different positions, it can change the feel quite a bit.
Let me give an example on my seat, with steel tubes connected the full length of the seat centrally mounted/bolted to the seat's front/back steel frame (professional sports recliner). Having twin BK and one mounted at the front and one at the back of the seat positions.


Illustration only, previous design tested.

The unit at the back felt much fuller/richer than the unit at the front.
My simple explanation is that the primary energy from the unit at the back was being better delivered into my spine/shoulders/sides. While the unit at the front, it of course was still felt in the seats back, but not with the same vigor or detail.

I would assume more of its energy was directed through the front of the seat structure/frame or seeping/absorbed through the isolation prior to reaching my body as compared to the unit in the back. We also have less body contact at the front of the seat, often part of our legs/thighs may be actually raised from the seat.

I shared info on this, 1-2 years ago and found that the underside of the knees is a particularly good body region to direct tactile for increased detail. In experimentation, I used twin leather headrests as knee supports that were directly connected to the front of the metal tubing for the underside of the seat. In this scenario then no question a felt improvement was noticeable but having such makes getting in/out of a rig even more difficult and not very practical addition.


A solution I experimented with under the knees and also ankles/calves

Not shelved the idea on my own build but I will have to climb in through a roll cage design on my own build so further obstruction is not likely a good idea.

Spoiler: More For Those Interested/ Hidden For Those Not

These are just opinions I have based on things I have done or feedback given on previous tactile experimentation or effects creation. People do not need to agree with them and I am not seeking additional discussion on these, nor will I respond to people wanting to debate over them. They are here to be read and each person can take from them what they want or ignore them.

An amusing thing for me is, who on these forums, has actually experienced the concept that I am seeking to offer and with the ongoing beta effects? Including the attempt to bring an installation/isolation solution to the community via a reputable and established company or companies?

Some are telling me, there are alternative approaches. Sure okay, yeah but maybe the approach found works rather well no? How do you improve or better an approach you as yet have not even experienced or tried? Yet the person that has tried it and knows what the general feedback from it, betters the common approaches or what they previously owned regards the tactile they have experienced.

I am told, sales of the very hardware I have recommended continue to be bought up and purchased. The very hardware that I use to develop my own effects and will be implemented on my own rig build. So clearly a lot of people take on board, what or at least certain aspects of things I recommend.

Yet we have people it appears who, want to take that hardware, to attempt to copy a partly shown solution for part of the concept I have and now it appears to bring a new approach to installations effects creation using science-based understandings.

So I do not question the intelligence of others here and I may not agree that the approach they want to go with will succeed but I am not seeking to begin to apply a new approach/method to what has so far worked well for me and those that have sampled what my concept so far offers.

Regarding what I have been seeking to do....
May I propose something here, If certain ideas I came up with, are then co-created by experienced/talented people and submitted for potential isolation/installation solutions for sim cockpits.

Such companies may also have their own professional design engineers or seek to adapt improve on these creative options. It may suit them to implement something like the springs but adapt how/where they are installed if necessary to suit their own cockpit/product requirements.

Yet if such companies are interested, then different solutions (already pre-considered) to work in combination with the springs, could be tested by their own installation/teams and collaborating with them on effects suited for that installation or product.

Also if desired, they can conduct tests with *(entry level/popular) makes/models of transducers and with solutions that make installing either these or indeed the (recommended specification hardware). The installation solution(s) can be designed to accommodate both. A company wanting to sell a bespoke product/cockpit of their own or something that will appeal to owners of 8020 based rigs.

If it was discovered necessary that a solution may need to be adapted with the (additional options) between higher-end transducers and common entry-level models. Be this even for differences in the pedals/seat.

We believe this is possible, but are not yet convinced how "necessary" it really is. Modified DSP may be enough to suit the installed transducer on the materials/installation placement it is designated. Then more (simplified) or tailored effects are made to work with entry-level hardware.

A lot of thought has been put into what the problems are with tactile and what could be viable solutions.


Part 2 / Differences In Approaches / Opinions

Measured Vibes:
Collecting data for some can be fun and much may be understood from readings or interesting things in comparisons between the different output characteristics or abilities different transducer units have. I certainly will do more of this on resuming work for my own build (via iPad / dual iPhones) and some software that seems fairly decent. However, based on my application/test, I did not need readings from devices to help me determine, simply what feels better. My body regions and nerves are the sensor/pickup that matters.

Monitoring effects is useful, (again from my own opinion here) I use such to determine how/what frequencies and the dB they are generating regards the operation of the A) Individual effects B) Combination of effects on a specific channel. We can then shape the effect to suit the specific or intended transducer or a combination of them to represent those effects. From this, we can see what Hz we may want to lower or boost in determining what is going to the transducer. This lets us avoid excessive amplitude of particular frequencies (taking into account the applied DSP per unit).

Additionally, from my own perspective if I want to compare in real time a specific effect but apply multiple revisions/variations of it, (different settings or Hz applied) then this is no problem because I am taking the readings from the soundcards, not the seat. Its not uncommon for me to compare 8 channels or variations of an effect at once. I can record upto 32 channels with a single button if I wish to analyze the generated waveforms. Or replay video recordings of the visualization for each channel (in slo-mo).

I would love to see, how long it takes people to go through the amount of effort some effects require to develop if having to build those by doing multiple, variations of effects, testing one at a time to then capture individual measurements/readings via a seat that it produces or how its frequencies travel through the seat.

User Feedback
I will say this based on the experience of working on people's feedback for effects.
Measured readings from a seat will not be what defines how/where (I personally) would implement the creation of the effects and or what channels certain or all layers of an effect is placed. Nor has one person come to me to say, I need to do measurements on my seat/pedals to improve this.

Additionally, even with a more fixed hardware installation like the approach, I have sought to take. People have their own preferences in how/where, with different effects, they may want an effect to output. Using more advanced multilayers, while this, adds some complication to effects control, it's a different approach than what most of you have used with singular make/model and its point of installation representing the generation of the complete effect.

As with Simhub, we can apply "specific layers only" to be channeled to certain transducers, or all of them. Also with the user having control of these individual "layer volumes", it gives the user the ability to adapt the "output mix" to suit their mood or preference. This is another key benefit of the RaceBass concept to typically used methods.

Usage Cases / Moods:
These I believe are also a big contributing factor to consider with effects creation or deployment. The feedback I have been given so far shows that users would enjoy "generalized" settings for effects to suit "Relaxed" / "Seat Of The Pants" & "Race" usage case scenarios.

To some extent, they want "Car Specific" or "Sim Specific" profiles but these can take a lot of time to really bring as much possible, differences in "emotion/character" one car may have over another. The RPM/Speed/G-Force-based effects are where we can perhaps exploit this most as those are 3 factors that vary greatly between different types of cars.

Personally, I did not need readings from devices connected to the rig or seat/pedals to help me determine how to build better effects. Nor have people testing effects said to me they needed such. Quite simply in comparisons "what feels better" over-rules what some "measured reading" informs us. Our body regions are the sensor/pickup and with experience, like in many things we learn to develop certain skills or methods that work well with effects. If cancellation is happening or phase issues with multiple possible combinations of frequencies operating at once, then the user will feel whats better/worse. So they will apply effects combinations or settings of these that work well or decide not to use certain effects together. This is a challenge I feel is more part of developing the effects than it is to try to understand the data of whats happening within the seat/pedal sections.

For me (again personally) "measurements/readings" from the rig will not be what defines how/where I would implement the creation of the effects and or what channels certain or all layers of an effect is placed. I have solutions and methods that appear to work, certain improvements, and things still to do and learn. Yet, I don't see the need to change the path I am currently on.

I certainly will keep an eye on the alternative approaches some of you want to explore and see what others can come up with

 

[cnhoff]

A few months ago I decided to incorporate tactile into my rig. I had no prior knowledge of tactile transducers and really didn’t know where to start. I’d like to share my progress, welcoming any comments, criticisms, suggestions and questions. This maybe helpful for others thinking of installing tactile and also learning from the good, bad and ugly of my own setup.

Initial setup

Abbreviated

Thanks Vinny for sharing that, very interesting read.

Curious question to you or any other that has mounted heavy transducers directly to the shell of a bucket:

Have you experienced damage to the shell by the weight and moreso by effects over time? Is this a long-lasting approach?

I see you are mounting the transducers to profile first to spread the strain over more area and probably there is some structure inside the seat to support those, just interested in your answers.

 

[RCHeliguy]

I have my transducers mounted as rigidly as possible to my seat brackets. The only transducers directly mounted to my seat are adhesive mounted exciters.

My transducer setup has changed enough that if I had mounted all my transducers directly to the seat, it would look like swiss cheese now.

YMMV.

 

[cnhoff]

I have my transducers mounted as rigidly as possible to my seat brackets. The only transducers directly mounted to my seat are adhesive mounted exciters.

My transducer setup has changed enough that if I had mounted all my transducers directly to the seat, it would look like swiss cheese now.

YMMV.

I understand the approach for exciters, but for LFEs or TSTs you would have to be tremendously careful with volume if mounted directly to the seat shell, i guess. Anyway, just curious...

 

[vinnygee]

@cnhoff No noticeable signs of wear and tear but also haven't had them mounted long enough to verify any long lasting affects.
I did consider this before going ahead and figured (rightly or wrongly), since its an FIA approved seat designed to protect a driver in a high impact situation, it should be able to handle buttkickers
Also with the transducers mounted closer to the body, I find the effects come through stronger so its possible to use moderate volume levels.

 

[vinnygee]

I've used large penny washers, rubber washers and 6mm flanged bolts from the inside of the seat like this:

 

[Atak_Kat]

My BK CT is direct mounted to the bottom of my Sparco seat. I tapped the mounting holes (on the BK) with M8 tap, drilled 4 holes in the seat bottom, used M8 countersunk bolts (so that they don't stick up very far and I don't feel them through the seat padding). There are actually 3 other holes in similar area of the seat, because originally I did the same with the BK Mini, but later changed to the CT.

It's been that way for over a year now. I recently did a big tear-down and re-configuration of my rig (including better cable management etc), and had a look at the seat where it's mounted. Didn't see any sign at all of stress or cracking.

 

[EsxPaul]

Have you experienced damage to the shell by the weight and moreso by effects over time? Is this a long-lasting approach?

I've not noticed any cracking/damage at all. I used M6 load spreading cone washers on top and penny washers underneath.

I understand the approach for exciters, but for LFEs or TSTs you would have to be tremendously careful with volume if mounted directly to the seat shell, i guess.

You definitely have to be careful with the volume level. It's very easy to get them to a level where your eyeballs shake to the point of blurred vision

 

[Deleted member 1449502]

Hey guys, I've recently spent alot more time in AC, used to be exclusively in ACC. I've been having issues with getting the gear effects to feel right in AC, in ACC they are beatiful with the 3 layers Mr Latte offers. Can anyone post a good gear effect that works well for them in AC?

 

[metalnwood]

Hi @Mr Latte , thatnks for your reply. Yes, I can imagine the placement of them does effect how you feel and is why I really wanted the lfe at the back. It was the height restrictions that got in the way as anything towards the back of the seat is only about 60mm above the ground.

It was good to feel that I couldnt tell where it was coming from, may arrangement is fairly rigid so its doing a reasonable job of delivering through the seat frame.

I didnt see the hidden part of your text in the reply until a little later but replying to some of it. You spend so much time, as you say, doing things because you like it and you fully expect others wont want to spend that time. So if I hop on the rig and use a tool to take a measurement because I find it interesting then there is really not much argument about me doing it. No one else needs to do it.

I agree that sitting in the seat, sweeping the frequencies is all you need to do to set up the EQ.

I am guessing that people that use your effects who have not done this may all get different versions of your effects, some with peaks in freq's wondering why you did that when it's just a matter of their rig amplifying a freq or two.

This kind of tech should actually be useful to a high end company selling a solution that should just work. Even 20 years ago on my home theater receiver I could plug in a microphone and map out a room so the receiver would automatically equalise out the room.

All that I did was sweep the freq's using a sensor and an app and see the results. Not only did it easily show me what were problem freq's but it shows you the freq range that is a problem, so you then have two values, the PEQ value and the freq. It's a pretty simple way and doesnt take much time.

Imagine simtag selling a $20 sensor with their solution that all you have to do is sit in your seat and firmly hold it agains the chair while it sweeps the freq. After that it spits out a file ready to load in the the behringer amp that already equalises your system to give you a good base to use the provided effects.

Its stuff thats been around for ages, this sciency stuff is what gives the end user the best experience.

 

[Deleted member 1451080]

Deleted

 

[Tom_Hampton]

This kind of tech should actually be useful to a high end company selling a solution that should just work. Even 20 years ago on my home theater receiver I could plug in a microphone and map out a room so the receiver would automatically equalise out the room.

That capability goes a LOT farther back than 20 years....closer to 40. I had a stereo when I was in high school with a dual channel 10 band graphic equalizer....back in 1984. That EQ had a microphone input as well as both White noise and Pink noise generators.

Yes. I'm getting old.

 

[metalnwood]

That capability goes a LOT farther back than 20 years....closer to 40. I had a stereo when I was in high school with a dual channel 10 band graphic equalizer....back in 1984. That EQ had a microphone input as well as both White noise and Pink noise generators.

Yes. I'm getting old.

I imagine 20 years ago I was very much in to my home theater, 40 years ago my audio extended to making a crystal radio