Eureka, I finaly found the Holy Grail of FFB, : ).
The problem with FFB forces is slack. I found the way to balance
that slack. It's done with the Overall slider. On my system the slider
should be at 138%.
This way everything works as intended. I tried this with different
Spring/Damper/Centering Spring combinations, an it works with all of them,
even with 0/0/0, or with 0/0/100.
Of course, you'll drive car the best if FOV is natural.
Mario Petrinovic hunts for balanced FFB settings
Mario Petrinovic announced he had found how to balance force feedback slack, then kept revising his settings for the Logitech profiler's sensitivity and centering spring. Tony Rickard and FolkGT explained that 50% sensitivity is linear rather than reduced. GaryR mocked the endless self-replies, and others noted he was at least keeping the group alive.
Automated summary.
Mario Petrinovic:
Ok, that was wrong, : ).
I found out what was wrong with my FFB. I kept sensitivity of axes
in Logitech profiler at the default value of 50%, while it actually has to
be at 100%. This was what messed up my FFB.
Quoted text (8 lines)
> Eureka, I finaly found the Holy Grail of FFB, : ). > The problem with FFB forces is slack. I found the way to balance > that slack. It's done with the Overall slider. On my system the slider > should be at 138%. > This way everything works as intended. I tried this with different > Spring/Damper/Centering Spring combinations, an it works with all of them, > even with 0/0/0, or with 0/0/100. > Of course, you'll drive car the best if FOV is natural.On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 20:15:49 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
I'm pretty sure the default value in the Logitech profiler is 100%.
Quoted text (14 lines)
>Mario Petrinovic: >> Eureka, I finaly found the Holy Grail of FFB, : ). >> The problem with FFB forces is slack. I found the way to balance >> that slack. It's done with the Overall slider. On my system the slider >> should be at 138%. >> This way everything works as intended. I tried this with different >> Spring/Damper/Centering Spring combinations, an it works with all of them, >> even with 0/0/0, or with 0/0/100. >> Of course, you'll drive car the best if FOV is natural. > > Ok, that was wrong, : ). > I found out what was wrong with my FFB. I kept sensitivity of axes >in Logitech profiler at the default value of 50%, while it actually has to >be at 100%. This was what messed up my FFB.FolkGT:
You are wrong. It is very easy to check this, there is the
"Defaults" button there, just click on it, and it will give you default
settings.
It looks like those "default" settings are general in Logitech
driver for such *type* of axes (it means, for jostick, mause, trackball, and
similar axes), so probably 50% would work with the least faults ("default")
on all those axes. But, on a FFB it is ESSENTIAL that this should be at
100%, so this is the first thing a racing game developer should mention, in
general. So, before talking about anything, graphics, sound, any possible
adjustment, and especially controler, and even FFB adjustment, first thing
that develepor should mention is to put this sensitivity to 100%, because
without this everything else becomes senseless. In driving, you cannot grip
corner well, if this isn't near 100%.
Quoted text (18 lines)
>Mario Petrinovic: >>Mario Petrinovic: >>> Eureka, I finaly found the Holy Grail of FFB, : ). >>> The problem with FFB forces is slack. I found the way to balance >>> that slack. It's done with the Overall slider. On my system the slider >>> should be at 138%. >>> This way everything works as intended. I tried this with >>> different >>> Spring/Damper/Centering Spring combinations, an it works with all of >>> them, even with 0/0/0, or with 0/0/100. >>> Of course, you'll drive car the best if FOV is natural. >> >> Ok, that was wrong, : ). >> I found out what was wrong with my FFB. I kept sensitivity of axes >>in Logitech profiler at the default value of 50%, while it actually has to >>be at 100%. This was what messed up my FFB. > > I'm pretty sure the default value in the Logitech profiler is 100%.On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 00:30:44 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
My bad... you are correct. I'd never even seen this dialog box before. To
access, click on "steering wheel" and then you can see the axes
properties. You can do this for brake and steering wheel also.
Thanks Mario for pointing this out to me, but I'm hesitant to make any
changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might mean
"linear", which is desirable.
Quoted text (23 lines)
>FolkGT: >>Mario Petrinovic: >>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>> Eureka, I finaly found the Holy Grail of FFB, : ). >>>> The problem with FFB forces is slack. I found the way to balance >>>> that slack. It's done with the Overall slider. On my system the slider >>>> should be at 138%. >>>> This way everything works as intended. I tried this with >>>> different >>>> Spring/Damper/Centering Spring combinations, an it works with all of >>>> them, even with 0/0/0, or with 0/0/100. >>>> Of course, you'll drive car the best if FOV is natural. >>> >>> Ok, that was wrong, : ). >>> I found out what was wrong with my FFB. I kept sensitivity of axes >>>in Logitech profiler at the default value of 50%, while it actually has to >>>be at 100%. This was what messed up my FFB. >> >> I'm pretty sure the default value in the Logitech profiler is 100%. > > You are wrong. It is very easy to check this, there is the >"Defaults" button there, just click on it, and it will give you default >settings.FolkGT:
Well, do whatever you want, but with FFB forces used the way they
are supposed to be used (at their default values, all at 100%), with
correctly set screen perspective (correct FOV, as well as correct hight of
screen), I tested thoroughly, all the values from 60% to 88%, and finaly I
tried 100%, and 99%, and it is perfectly clear that, the higher you put it,
the better you are able to grip corners. If you try this by yourself you
will gain understanding of how sensitivity affects FFB. 100% is the only
correct value, 99% is CLEARLY wrong. When you go lower, the lack of
sensitivity gives you slack. This slack you can correct by rising Overall
FFB setting. For me, at 50% sensitivity I had to rise Overall to 143% to
overcome slack. And this just gives you ballanced slack, but still you don't
have the right grip in corner, because the lack of sensitivity messes up the
feel for grip. It is fairly understandable when you try all those values.
This sensitivity simply must be 100%, because FFB simply is (it has to be)
TOO sensitive, this is the only way to use it, it cannot work correctly any
other way. When you feel a force, it simply must be spot on (to feel grip),
and the lack of sensitivity is losing that "spot on", and that way you lose
grip. If you change it by only 1% (so, instead od 100% you use 99%), it
messes things so much, that it becames undrivable. With lower values it
becames more drivable, simply because this mess transverse into a slack, so
you drive by slack tension (so, this very little slack of 99%, which creates
a big mess, widens, and transferes into a slack tension).
Quoted text (34 lines)
>Mario Petrinovic: >>FolkGT: >>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>> Eureka, I finaly found the Holy Grail of FFB, : ). >>>>> The problem with FFB forces is slack. I found the way to >>>>> balance >>>>> that slack. It's done with the Overall slider. On my system the slider >>>>> should be at 138%. >>>>> This way everything works as intended. I tried this with >>>>> different >>>>> Spring/Damper/Centering Spring combinations, an it works with all of >>>>> them, even with 0/0/0, or with 0/0/100. >>>>> Of course, you'll drive car the best if FOV is natural. >>>> >>>> Ok, that was wrong, : ). >>>> I found out what was wrong with my FFB. I kept sensitivity of >>>> axes >>>>in Logitech profiler at the default value of 50%, while it actually has >>>>to be at 100%. This was what messed up my FFB. >>> >>> I'm pretty sure the default value in the Logitech profiler is 100%. >> >> You are wrong. It is very easy to check this, there is the >>"Defaults" button there, just click on it, and it will give you default >>settings. > > My bad... you are correct. I'd never even seen this dialog box before. To > access, click on "steering wheel" and then you can see the axes > properties. You can do this for brake and steering wheel also. > > Thanks Mario for pointing this out to me, but I'm hesitant to make any > changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might mean > "linear", which is desirable.On 10/01/2012 16:49, FolkGT wrote:
> I'm hesitant to make any
> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might mean
> "linear", which is desirable.
50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic.
I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how
the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake
pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty
good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around
the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone though.
Tony R:
Hm, for linearity I use the word "linearity". For sensitivity I use
the word "sensitivity".
Well, if you ask me, this setting WORKS like "sensitivity".
I mean, what's the point in using word "sensitivity" for linearity.
"Sensitivity" is here with a reason, although it could be "linearity", it
works, and is designed to be "sensitivity".
IOW, maybe with your brake pedal the change of linearity is useful.
Well, for FFB, I would say, use it as "sensitivity".
Although, I doubt that it is "linearity" even for brake pedal.
Because, whole time I used 50% for brake pedal. Well, now I changed to 100%,
and pedal really became a bit more sensitive, but not at all non-linear.
This goes for gas pedal, as well.
On some place I've read that in Logitech profiler this doesn't have
anything to do with linearity, but instead the posibility to change
linearity is left for game developer to install it in the game. Which we
really do have in iRacing, and really, changing the "sensitivity" of brake
pedal in profiler, only changes sensitivity, not linearity, nothing like
what happens with the setting in iRacing.
Quoted text (12 lines)
> FolkGT: >> I'm hesitant to make any >> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might >> mean "linear", which is desirable. > > 50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. > > I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how the > controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake pedal > mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty good for > steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around the centre, > could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone though.Mario Petrinovic:
Well, I fiddled a bit. I would say that 50% of sensitivity is
definitely not sensitive enough. OTOH, I would also say that trying to
compensate not enough, or too much of sensitiviti with above 100%, or below
100% of Overall is not a way to go. I would say that the right way to go is
to find the right sensitivity, which doesn't have to be 100%. I'll see, I
have to test more of it.
Quoted text (34 lines)
> Tony R: >> FolkGT: >>> I'm hesitant to make any >>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might >>> mean "linear", which is desirable. >> >> 50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. >> >> I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >> the >> controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake pedal >> mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty good >> for >> steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around the centre, >> could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone though. > > Hm, for linearity I use the word "linearity". For sensitivity I use > the word "sensitivity". > Well, if you ask me, this setting WORKS like "sensitivity". > I mean, what's the point in using word "sensitivity" for linearity. > "Sensitivity" is here with a reason, although it could be "linearity", it > works, and is designed to be "sensitivity". > IOW, maybe with your brake pedal the change of linearity is useful. > Well, for FFB, I would say, use it as "sensitivity". > Although, I doubt that it is "linearity" even for brake pedal. > Because, whole time I used 50% for brake pedal. Well, now I changed to > 100%, and pedal really became a bit more sensitive, but not at all > non-linear. This goes for gas pedal, as well. > On some place I've read that in Logitech profiler this doesn't have > anything to do with linearity, but instead the posibility to change > linearity is left for game developer to install it in the game. Which we > really do have in iRacing, and really, changing the "sensitivity" of brake > pedal in profiler, only changes sensitivity, not linearity, nothing like > what happens with the setting in iRacing.On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 23:54:48 +0000, Tony R
<[email hidden]> wrote:
That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity =
linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too
twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite.
Quoted text (12 lines)
>On 10/01/2012 16:49, FolkGT wrote: >> I'm hesitant to make any >> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might mean >> "linear", which is desirable. > >50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. > >I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake >pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty >good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around >the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone though.FolkGT:
Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to see what
is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, you'll get
"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what this
slider does.
It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB,
anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which behaves
very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack of
sensitivity.
50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less linear.
Quoted text (17 lines)
>Tony R: >>FolkGT: >>> I'm hesitant to make any >>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might >>> mean "linear", which is desirable. >> >>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. >> >>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake >>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty >>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around >>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone though. > > That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = > linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too > twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite.On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:25:41 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default 50%?
Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would turn up
the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just
muddle about on your own.
You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some
other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider at
something other than 50% is just a compensation.
Quoted text (28 lines)
>FolkGT: >>Tony R: >>>FolkGT: >>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might >>>> mean "linear", which is desirable. >>> >>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. >>> >>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake >>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty >>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around >>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone though. >> >> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = >> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too >> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. > > Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to see what >is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, you'll get >"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what this >slider does. > It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which behaves >very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack of >sensitivity. > 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less linear.FolkGT:
You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" screen
clearly shows that you are right, thanks.
But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this is
the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the
problem.
Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only thing
that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle with.
Here somewhere I must be getting slack.
Thanks again, : ).
Quoted text (42 lines)
>Mario Petrinovic: >>FolkGT: >>>Tony R: >>>>FolkGT: >>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might >>>>> mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>> >>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. >>>> >>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake >>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty >>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around >>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>though. >>> >>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = >>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too >>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. >> >> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to see >> what >>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, you'll >>get >>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what this >>slider does. >> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which behaves >>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack of >>sensitivity. >> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less linear. > > Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default 50%? > > Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would turn up > the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just > muddle about on your own. > > You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some > other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider at > something other than 50% is just a compensation."Mario Petrinovic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:jen8dc$d5e$[email hidden]...
Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration is
simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God).
Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put Overall
at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered Spring (S),
Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, so I am
too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll resume
tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and tried
57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O and
S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close.
Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more than
pleased. It behaves just like it should.
Quoted text (54 lines)
> FolkGT: >>Mario Petrinovic: >>>FolkGT: >>>>Tony R: >>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% might >>>>>> mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>> >>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. >>>>> >>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with brake >>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems pretty >>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around >>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>>though. >>>> >>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = >>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too >>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. >>> >>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to see >>> what >>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, you'll >>>get >>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what this >>>slider does. >>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which behaves >>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack of >>>sensitivity. >>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less linear. >> >> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default 50%? >> >> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would turn >> up >> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just >> muddle about on your own. >> >> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some >> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider at >> something other than 50% is just a compensation. > > You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" screen > clearly shows that you are right, thanks. > But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this is > the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the > problem. > Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only thing > that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle with. > Here somewhere I must be getting slack. > Thanks again, : ).Mario Petrinovic:
Oops, it is 54%, maybe even less (who knows, it could be 50%),
meintenance disturbed testing. It isn't more.
Quoted text (72 lines)
>Mario Petrinovic: >> FolkGT: >>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>FolkGT: >>>>>Tony R: >>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% >>>>>>> might mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>>> >>>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below logarithmic. >>>>>> >>>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of how >>>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with >>>>>>brake >>>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems >>>>>>pretty >>>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive around >>>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>>>though. >>>>> >>>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = >>>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too >>>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. >>>> >>>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to see >>>> what >>>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, you'll >>>>get >>>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what this >>>>slider does. >>>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >>>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which >>>>behaves >>>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack of >>>>sensitivity. >>>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less linear. >>> >>> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default 50%? >>> >>> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would turn >>> up >>> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just >>> muddle about on your own. >>> >>> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some >>> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider at >>> something other than 50% is just a compensation. >> >> You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" screen >> clearly shows that you are right, thanks. >> But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this is >> the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the >> problem. >> Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only thing >> that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle with. >> Here somewhere I must be getting slack. >> Thanks again, : ). > > Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration is > simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God). > Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put Overall > at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered Spring > (S), > Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, so I > am > too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll resume > tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and tried > 57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O and > S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close. > Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more than > pleased. It behaves just like it should.Mario Petrinovic:
Ok, I am having some progress.
Yes, it should be 50%. Centering Spring should be 50% (and it is
responsible for slack). Spring and Damper is per individual preference, as
long as they are equal. One can even run them at 0% if he wants "pure"
forces.
This is for Overall = 100% and natural FOV. I don't know if
Centering Spring should be other than 50% if Overall isn't 100% and FOV
isn't natural. Maybe I'll test this some day.
Quoted text (81 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >>Mario Petrinovic: >>> FolkGT: >>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>Tony R: >>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% >>>>>>>> might mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below >>>>>>>logarithmic. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of >>>>>>>how >>>>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with >>>>>>>brake >>>>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems >>>>>>>pretty >>>>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive >>>>>>>around >>>>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>>>>though. >>>>>> >>>>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = >>>>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too >>>>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. >>>>> >>>>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to see >>>>> what >>>>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, >>>>>you'll get >>>>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what this >>>>>slider does. >>>>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >>>>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which >>>>>behaves >>>>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack of >>>>>sensitivity. >>>>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less linear. >>>> >>>> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default 50%? >>>> >>>> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would turn >>>> up >>>> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just >>>> muddle about on your own. >>>> >>>> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some >>>> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider at >>>> something other than 50% is just a compensation. >>> >>> You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" >>> screen >>> clearly shows that you are right, thanks. >>> But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this is >>> the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the >>> problem. >>> Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only thing >>> that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle with. >>> Here somewhere I must be getting slack. >>> Thanks again, : ). >> >> Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration is >> simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God). >> Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put >> Overall >> at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered Spring >> (S), >> Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, so I >> am >> too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll resume >> tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and tried >> 57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O and >> S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close. >> Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more than >> pleased. It behaves just like it should. > > Oops, it is 54%, maybe even less (who knows, it could be 50%), > meintenance disturbed testing. It isn't more.Mario Petrinovic:
Hm, it turned out that it isn't just any Spring and Damper (equal)
the best. Too low, too spring, too high, too dampy. It turned out that the
best is 71%. Well, this isn't good. Why? Because if I put 100/71/71/50, then
50 is 71% of 71, which means that Spring and Damper are equaly distanced
from Overall, as Centering Spring is from Sping and Damper. Not good. Well,
too late today, I'll have to resolve this puzzle some other day, : ).
Quoted text (94 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >> Mario Petrinovic: >>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>> FolkGT: >>>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>Tony R: >>>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% >>>>>>>>> might mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below >>>>>>>>logarithmic. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of >>>>>>>>how >>>>>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with >>>>>>>>brake >>>>>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems >>>>>>>>pretty >>>>>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive >>>>>>>>around >>>>>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>>>>>though. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity = >>>>>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is too >>>>>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to >>>>>> see what >>>>>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, >>>>>>you'll get >>>>>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what >>>>>>this slider does. >>>>>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >>>>>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which >>>>>>behaves >>>>>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack >>>>>>of sensitivity. >>>>>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less >>>>>> linear. >>>>> >>>>> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default >>>>> 50%? >>>>> >>>>> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would >>>>> turn up >>>>> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just >>>>> muddle about on your own. >>>>> >>>>> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some >>>>> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider at >>>>> something other than 50% is just a compensation. >>>> >>>> You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" >>>> screen clearly shows that you are right, thanks. >>>> But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this >>>> is >>>> the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the >>>> problem. >>>> Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only >>>> thing >>>> that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle >>>> with. Here somewhere I must be getting slack. >>>> Thanks again, : ). >>> >>> Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration is >>> simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God). >>> Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put >>> Overall >>> at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered Spring >>> (S), >>> Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, so I >>> am >>> too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll resume >>> tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and tried >>> 57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O >>> and S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close. >>> Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more than >>> pleased. It behaves just like it should. >> >> Oops, it is 54%, maybe even less (who knows, it could be 50%), >> meintenance disturbed testing. It isn't more. > > Ok, I am having some progress. > Yes, it should be 50%. Centering Spring should be 50% (and it is > responsible for slack). Spring and Damper is per individual preference, as > long as they are equal. One can even run them at 0% if he wants "pure" > forces. > This is for Overall = 100% and natural FOV. I don't know if > Centering Spring should be other than 50% if Overall isn't 100% and FOV > isn't natural. Maybe I'll test this some day.Mario Petrinovic:
A new day, : ).
Since 100/100/100/100 works well if sensitivity is 100%, I wouldn't
be surprised if all this doesn't have something with the position of
sensitivity.
Quoted text (109 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >> Mario Petrinovic: >>> Mario Petrinovic: >>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>> FolkGT: >>>>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>Tony R: >>>>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% >>>>>>>>>> might mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below >>>>>>>>>logarithmic. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of >>>>>>>>>how >>>>>>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with >>>>>>>>>brake >>>>>>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems >>>>>>>>>pretty >>>>>>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive >>>>>>>>>around >>>>>>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>>>>>>though. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity >>>>>>>> = >>>>>>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is >>>>>>>> too >>>>>>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the opposite. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to >>>>>>> see what >>>>>>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, >>>>>>>you'll get >>>>>>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what >>>>>>>this slider does. >>>>>>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with FFB, >>>>>>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which >>>>>>>behaves >>>>>>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack >>>>>>>of sensitivity. >>>>>>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less >>>>>>> linear. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default >>>>>> 50%? >>>>>> >>>>>> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would >>>>>> turn up >>>>>> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just >>>>>> muddle about on your own. >>>>>> >>>>>> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked some >>>>>> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider >>>>>> at something other than 50% is just a compensation. >>>>> >>>>> You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" >>>>> screen clearly shows that you are right, thanks. >>>>> But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this >>>>> is >>>>> the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the >>>>> problem. >>>>> Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only >>>>> thing >>>>> that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle >>>>> with. Here somewhere I must be getting slack. >>>>> Thanks again, : ). >>>> >>>> Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration >>>> is >>>> simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God). >>>> Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put >>>> Overall >>>> at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered Spring >>>> (S), >>>> Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, so >>>> I am >>>> too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll resume >>>> tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and >>>> tried >>>> 57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O >>>> and S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close. >>>> Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more than >>>> pleased. It behaves just like it should. >>> >>> Oops, it is 54%, maybe even less (who knows, it could be 50%), >>> meintenance disturbed testing. It isn't more. >> >> Ok, I am having some progress. >> Yes, it should be 50%. Centering Spring should be 50% (and it is >> responsible for slack). Spring and Damper is per individual preference, >> as >> long as they are equal. One can even run them at 0% if he wants "pure" >> forces. >> This is for Overall = 100% and natural FOV. I don't know if >> Centering Spring should be other than 50% if Overall isn't 100% and FOV >> isn't natural. Maybe I'll test this some day. > > Hm, it turned out that it isn't just any Spring and Damper (equal) > the best. Too low, too spring, too high, too dampy. It turned out that the > best is 71%. Well, this isn't good. Why? Because if I put 100/71/71/50, > then > 50 is 71% of 71, which means that Spring and Damper are equaly distanced > from Overall, as Centering Spring is from Sping and Damper. Not good. > Well, > too late today, I'll have to resolve this puzzle some other day, : ).Mario Petrinovic:
Hm, Spring and Damper at 71% work well with Centering Spring at
100%. I'll see if there is more to it.
Quoted text (119 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >> Mario Petrinovic: >>> Mario Petrinovic: >>>> Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>> FolkGT: >>>>>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>>Tony R: >>>>>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>>>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% >>>>>>>>>>> might mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below >>>>>>>>>>logarithmic. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph of >>>>>>>>>>how >>>>>>>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with >>>>>>>>>>brake >>>>>>>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems >>>>>>>>>>pretty >>>>>>>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive >>>>>>>>>>around >>>>>>>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any deadzone >>>>>>>>>>though. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering sensitivity >>>>>>>>> = >>>>>>>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is >>>>>>>>> too >>>>>>>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the >>>>>>>>> opposite. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to >>>>>>>> see what >>>>>>>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, >>>>>>>>you'll get >>>>>>>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what >>>>>>>>this slider does. >>>>>>>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with >>>>>>>> FFB, >>>>>>>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which >>>>>>>>behaves >>>>>>>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a lack >>>>>>>>of sensitivity. >>>>>>>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less >>>>>>>> linear. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default >>>>>>> 50%? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would >>>>>>> turn up >>>>>>> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and just >>>>>>> muddle about on your own. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked >>>>>>> some >>>>>>> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider >>>>>>> at something other than 50% is just a compensation. >>>>>> >>>>>> You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" >>>>>> screen clearly shows that you are right, thanks. >>>>>> But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and this >>>>>> is >>>>>> the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is the >>>>>> problem. >>>>>> Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only >>>>>> thing >>>>>> that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle >>>>>> with. Here somewhere I must be getting slack. >>>>>> Thanks again, : ). >>>>> >>>>> Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration >>>>> is >>>>> simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God). >>>>> Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put >>>>> Overall >>>>> at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered Spring >>>>> (S), >>>>> Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, so >>>>> I am >>>>> too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll resume >>>>> tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and >>>>> tried >>>>> 57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O >>>>> and S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close. >>>>> Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more than >>>>> pleased. It behaves just like it should. >>>> >>>> Oops, it is 54%, maybe even less (who knows, it could be 50%), >>>> meintenance disturbed testing. It isn't more. >>> >>> Ok, I am having some progress. >>> Yes, it should be 50%. Centering Spring should be 50% (and it is >>> responsible for slack). Spring and Damper is per individual preference, >>> as >>> long as they are equal. One can even run them at 0% if he wants "pure" >>> forces. >>> This is for Overall = 100% and natural FOV. I don't know if >>> Centering Spring should be other than 50% if Overall isn't 100% and FOV >>> isn't natural. Maybe I'll test this some day. >> >> Hm, it turned out that it isn't just any Spring and Damper (equal) >> the best. Too low, too spring, too high, too dampy. It turned out that >> the >> best is 71%. Well, this isn't good. Why? Because if I put 100/71/71/50, >> then >> 50 is 71% of 71, which means that Spring and Damper are equaly distanced >> from Overall, as Centering Spring is from Sping and Damper. Not good. >> Well, >> too late today, I'll have to resolve this puzzle some other day, : ). > > A new day, : ). > Since 100/100/100/100 works well if sensitivity is 100%, I wouldn't > be surprised if all this doesn't have something with the position of > sensitivity.Mario Petrinovic:
Hm, interestingly, 143 to 100 is in similar correlation as 71 to 50,
or as 100 to 71.
Quoted text (126 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >> Mario Petrinovic: >>> Mario Petrinovic: >>>> Mario Petrinovic: >>>>> Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>>> FolkGT: >>>>>>>>Mario Petrinovic: >>>>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>>>Tony R: >>>>>>>>>>>FolkGT: >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm hesitant to make any >>>>>>>>>>>> changes from the default of 50%, because I'm concerned that 50% >>>>>>>>>>>> might mean "linear", which is desirable. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>50% is indeed linear, above this is exponential and below >>>>>>>>>>>logarithmic. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I seem to recall earlier profilers actually displayed the graph >>>>>>>>>>>of how >>>>>>>>>>>the controller profile was being mapped. Non linear can help with >>>>>>>>>>>brake >>>>>>>>>>>pedal mappings (iRacing include this option in sim) linear seems >>>>>>>>>>>pretty >>>>>>>>>>>good for steering though. 100% is making it much more sensitive >>>>>>>>>>>around >>>>>>>>>>>the centre, could be why it feels like it is removing any >>>>>>>>>>>deadzone though. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That is my understanding. A value of 50% for steering >>>>>>>>>> sensitivity = >>>>>>>>>> linear response. Reducing the value would cure steering that is >>>>>>>>>> too >>>>>>>>>> twitchy around the center, and increasing it would do the >>>>>>>>>> opposite. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, I just tested it. With Ford Falcon it is very easy to >>>>>>>>> see what >>>>>>>>>is going on. BTW, if you click with right mouse button on slider, >>>>>>>>>you'll get >>>>>>>>>"What's this" box. Clicking on it, you'll get explaination of what >>>>>>>>>this slider does. >>>>>>>>> It is very simple, with 100% you get direct contact with >>>>>>>>> FFB, >>>>>>>>>anything less loses contact with FFB, and introduces slack, which >>>>>>>>>behaves >>>>>>>>>very much like a dead zone, only it isn't dead zone, but just a >>>>>>>>>lack of sensitivity. >>>>>>>>> 50% isn't linear, 100% is linear, anything else is less >>>>>>>>> linear. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then you have to ask yourself... why did Logitech make the default >>>>>>>> 50%? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Two people have told you that 50% = linear. A Google search would >>>>>>>> turn up >>>>>>>> the same answer. You can go with that, or ignore the facts and >>>>>>>> just muddle about on your own. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You should certainly consider the possibility that you've jacked >>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>> other setting up so much that what you're "feeling" with the slider >>>>>>>> at something other than 50% is just a compensation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You guys are right, thanks. Steering wheel on the "Options" >>>>>>> screen clearly shows that you are right, thanks. >>>>>>> But, this isn't that easy. 100% drive so beautifully, and >>>>>>> this is >>>>>>> the ultimate judge. But, thanks, you are right, somewhere else is >>>>>>> the problem. >>>>>>> Well, I already checked absolutely everything, and the only >>>>>>> thing >>>>>>> that is left is the calibration process, which I started to fiddle >>>>>>> with. Here somewhere I must be getting slack. >>>>>>> Thanks again, : ). >>>>>> >>>>>> Ok, I found it. With calibration everything is ok, calibration >>>>>> is >>>>>> simple process, and it doesn't affect FFB significantly (thanks God). >>>>>> Regarding removing slack, I did the same like when I've put >>>>>> Overall >>>>>> at 143%, only this time I left Overall (O) at 100%, and lowered >>>>>> Spring (S), >>>>>> Damper (D) and Centering Spring (CS) equally. I tested a lot today, >>>>>> so I am >>>>>> too tired to find "the right" value for S, D and CS today (I'll >>>>>> resume >>>>>> tomorow). It is somewhere between 58 and 70%. I tested 50-56%, and >>>>>> tried >>>>>> 57%, and it is above those. It isn't 57%, so the difference between O >>>>>> and S/D/CS isn't the same like before, but it is close. >>>>>> Regarding how this behaves (so far), excelently. I am more >>>>>> than pleased. It behaves just like it should. >>>>> >>>>> Oops, it is 54%, maybe even less (who knows, it could be 50%), >>>>> meintenance disturbed testing. It isn't more. >>>> >>>> Ok, I am having some progress. >>>> Yes, it should be 50%. Centering Spring should be 50% (and it is >>>> responsible for slack). Spring and Damper is per individual preference, >>>> as >>>> long as they are equal. One can even run them at 0% if he wants "pure" >>>> forces. >>>> This is for Overall = 100% and natural FOV. I don't know if >>>> Centering Spring should be other than 50% if Overall isn't 100% and FOV >>>> isn't natural. Maybe I'll test this some day. >>> >>> Hm, it turned out that it isn't just any Spring and Damper >>> (equal) >>> the best. Too low, too spring, too high, too dampy. It turned out that >>> the >>> best is 71%. Well, this isn't good. Why? Because if I put 100/71/71/50, >>> then >>> 50 is 71% of 71, which means that Spring and Damper are equaly distanced >>> from Overall, as Centering Spring is from Sping and Damper. Not good. >>> Well, too late today, I'll have to resolve this puzzle some other day, >>> : ). >> >> A new day, : ). >> Since 100/100/100/100 works well if sensitivity is 100%, I >> wouldn't >> be surprised if all this doesn't have something with the position of >> sensitivity. > > Hm, Spring and Damper at 71% work well with Centering Spring at > 100%. I'll see if there is more to it. Hm, now suddenly everything looks almost all right at
100/100/100/100. Maybe really it is calibration process (I changed something
in it, recently).
Mario Petrinovic:
> Hm, now suddenly everything looks almost all right at
> 100/100/100/100. Maybe really it is calibration process (I changed
> something in it, recently).
Regarding calibration, it definitely should say 900 when turned left
(if in Profiler also is 900). Otherwise FFB loses sensitivity, which
produces slack.
Regarding everything else, well it looks like Centering Spring works
at 125%. It could be that if in Profiler sensitivity (linearity) is 100%,
then everything works at 100%, if it is 50%, then 125% works, and if 0%,
then 150% works. I am not sure, didn't test all these. For now, it looks
like 125 is the number, while on my system things are working well at 127%.
Have to test more, : ).
Mario Petrinovic:
Well, this theory is wrong, because Centering Spring definitely is
133%. This means that, if Centering Spring is locked by iRacing at 75% I
will never be able to center this car correctly, because in that case
Centering Spring is 133.33%. Well, Centering Spring is THE MOST IMPORTANT,
and probably the only really important setting in FFB, and FFB is the most
important thing in sim racing. Well, this can explain poor numbers of
simracers on servers very easily. Hm, how many simulations will we have to
waste until somebody figures out some things.
Good thing is that I found out that Overall doesn't change Centering
Spring. This means, 133% works whotever the rest of settings are.
Quoted text (16 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >> Hm, now suddenly everything looks almost all right at >> 100/100/100/100. Maybe really it is calibration process (I changed >> something in it, recently). > > Regarding calibration, it definitely should say 900 when turned > left > (if in Profiler also is 900). Otherwise FFB loses sensitivity, which > produces slack. > Regarding everything else, well it looks like Centering Spring > works > at 125%. It could be that if in Profiler sensitivity (linearity) is 100%, > then everything works at 100%, if it is 50%, then 125% works, and if 0%, > then 150% works. I am not sure, didn't test all these. For now, it looks > like 125 is the number, while on my system things are working well at > 127%. Have to test more, : ).Mario Petrinovic:
Well, this was wrong, again.
Now I have different settings, but I will not write about them. It
doesn't matter, anyway, who cares.
Interesting thing happened, the Sensitivity slider that I was
talking about some days ago, well suddenly it stopped working, all by
itself. How this can happen? Whatever I do, it isn't reflected in the sim.
Well, who cares, it looks like I am the only one who thinks that
this joke is important.
Bye, bye. Whatever I do, well I will certainly not write about it.
Quoted text (29 lines)
> Mario Petrinovic: >> Mario Petrinovic: >>> Hm, now suddenly everything looks almost all right at >>> 100/100/100/100. Maybe really it is calibration process (I changed >>> something in it, recently). >> >> Regarding calibration, it definitely should say 900 when turned >> left >> (if in Profiler also is 900). Otherwise FFB loses sensitivity, which >> produces slack. >> Regarding everything else, well it looks like Centering Spring >> works >> at 125%. It could be that if in Profiler sensitivity (linearity) is 100%, >> then everything works at 100%, if it is 50%, then 125% works, and if 0%, >> then 150% works. I am not sure, didn't test all these. For now, it looks >> like 125 is the number, while on my system things are working well at >> 127%. Have to test more, : ). > > Well, this theory is wrong, because Centering Spring definitely is > 133%. This means that, if Centering Spring is locked by iRacing at 75% I > will never be able to center this car correctly, because in that case > Centering Spring is 133.33%. Well, Centering Spring is THE MOST IMPORTANT, > and probably the only really important setting in FFB, and FFB is the most > important thing in sim racing. Well, this can explain poor numbers of > simracers on servers very easily. Hm, how many simulations will we have to > waste until somebody figures out some things. > Good thing is that I found out that Overall doesn't change > Centering > Spring. This means, 133% works whotever the rest of settings are. Ha, ha, interesting thing happened. Now, suddenly, everything is
working "as advertised", at least with the MX-5, and there is no reason why
it shouldn't work with other cars, as well.
It looks like the problem was in calibrating. I alredy noticed that
you have to work pedals before calibrating them. The range of pedals is 0 -
255, but if I don't work them, I get numbers like -1, or 256. Since I
started to work them, I always get 0 - 255. I thought this isn't necesseary
for the wheel, because it works itself (actually, "calibrates" itself) at
the startup. And also, it is a digital device, so this shouldn't make
problems, but it looks like this isn't so. Now I turn wheel few times, all
the way to the right and left, and now everything is just fine. Ha, ha,
beutiful, this was what I was searching for, and this was what made
problems.
Mario - You are single-handidly keeping this newsgroups alive! If it
wasn't for your "I figured it out, wait, it's not that, wait, it's
this, wait, it's something else, wait, I have it now, wait, it's just
the opposite, wait, it's the opposite of the opposite, wait, it's the
default setting for an Amiga 1000, wait it's chapter 17 of the
Bible".....
Now I know where Super Mario Bros. got it's name...
:-)
GR
Quoted text (15 lines)
>On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:46:14 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Ha, ha, interesting thing happened. Now, suddenly, everything is >working "as advertised", at least with the MX-5, and there is no reason why >it shouldn't work with other cars, as well. > It looks like the problem was in calibrating. I alredy noticed that >you have to work pedals before calibrating them. The range of pedals is 0 - >255, but if I don't work them, I get numbers like -1, or 256. Since I >started to work them, I always get 0 - 255. I thought this isn't necesseary >for the wheel, because it works itself (actually, "calibrates" itself) at >the startup. And also, it is a digital device, so this shouldn't make >problems, but it looks like this isn't so. Now I turn wheel few times, all >the way to the right and left, and now everything is just fine. Ha, ha, >beutiful, this was what I was searching for, and this was what made >problems.On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:20:44 -0500, GaryR <[email hidden]>
wrote:
>Mario - You are single-handidly keeping this newsgroups alive! If it
>wasn't for your "I figured it out, wait, it's not that, wait, it's
>this, wait, it's something else, wait, I have it now, wait, it's just
>the opposite, wait, it's the opposite of the opposite, wait, it's the
>default setting for an Amiga 1000, wait it's chapter 17 of the
>Bible".....
He doesn't hold a candle to a clown calling himself Skybuck Flying.
Check out the nvidia groups, I've seen threads with 95 replies
which is him replying 95 times to himself. Been doing it for years.
Rod:
You never reply to yourself?
Quoted text (11 lines)
> GaryR: >>Mario - You are single-handidly keeping this newsgroups alive! If it >>wasn't for your "I figured it out, wait, it's not that, wait, it's >>this, wait, it's something else, wait, I have it now, wait, it's just >>the opposite, wait, it's the opposite of the opposite, wait, it's the >>default setting for an Amiga 1000, wait it's chapter 17 of the >>Bible"..... > > He doesn't hold a candle to a clown calling himself Skybuck Flying. > Check out the nvidia groups, I've seen threads with 95 replies > which is him replying 95 times to himself. Been doing it for years.On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:33:50 +1100, Rod <[email hidden]> wrote:
LOL. I killfiled him years ago. Mario's posts are at least interesting
and based on some kind of reality. Skybuck's is just a 'tard.
Quoted text (13 lines)
>On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:20:44 -0500, GaryR <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>Mario - You are single-handidly keeping this newsgroups alive! If it >>wasn't for your "I figured it out, wait, it's not that, wait, it's >>this, wait, it's something else, wait, I have it now, wait, it's just >>the opposite, wait, it's the opposite of the opposite, wait, it's the >>default setting for an Amiga 1000, wait it's chapter 17 of the >>Bible"..... > >He doesn't hold a candle to a clown calling himself Skybuck Flying. >Check out the nvidia groups, I've seen threads with 95 replies >which is him replying 95 times to himself. Been doing it for years.On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:16:37 +0100, "Mario Petrinovic"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>> He doesn't hold a candle to a clown calling himself Skybuck Flying.
>> Check out the nvidia groups, I've seen threads with 95 replies
>> which is him replying 95 times to himself. Been doing it for years.
>
> You never reply to yourself?
There's is a difference between correcting yourself (which you've done
here) and holding an endless conversation with yourself (as Skybuck
does). If you want to see wack-a-doodle then head over there and read
a complete loon.
Rod:
Yes, you are right. When I find something that I wrote previously
was wrong, I simply have no other option but to correct myself. Saying that,
I also sometimes reply to myself just because I have something to add to
what I previously wrote.
