|
Post by capacitor on Oct 6, 2015 10:54:49 GMT
Update
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 6, 2015 11:02:25 GMT
In your design the the two adjacent joint (1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6) should be as close as possible about 50-80cm. The simulator see this two joint as one, so if too far the movement with be a bit off. sorry i meant 50mm-80mm not 50cm-80cm Got it, I had read your suggestion in Billo' post, he folow your suggestion and modify the distance from 100mm to 50mm.
|
|
|
Post by tronicgr on Oct 6, 2015 13:42:57 GMT
Says video is private... Maybe switch it to unlisted at least?
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 7, 2015 0:06:35 GMT
Make sure arms are in mid stroke, rad_b is your blue circle, rad_u is your green circle. I clarified rad_b with Ian when I was setting mine up. I believe ang_sub is similar to what you have, but instead of intersecting gearbox use the rod ends on the blue circle. Thank you Mitch. I redraw the figure, suppose the arms are in mid stroke, then the rad_b is 191.62/2, rad_u is 162.37/2 and ang_sub is 64.35°? So all the parameters 's base point should be the rod ends instead of the gearbox?
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 7, 2015 0:18:20 GMT
Says video is private... Maybe switch it to unlisted at least? Oh, the video was set to be private, but I don't know why. I modify it to public now.
|
|
|
Post by clyevo on Oct 7, 2015 2:50:07 GMT
the dimensions are how it suppose to be, good job Edit : what is the software u used to animate the 3d?? just curious
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 7, 2015 23:25:15 GMT
the dimensions are how it suppose to be, good job Edit : what is the software u used to animate the 3d?? just curious Thank you Clyevo. The soft wear is Solidworks
|
|
|
Post by clyevo on Oct 8, 2015 0:35:40 GMT
the dimensions are how it suppose to be, good job Edit : what is the software u used to animate the 3d?? just curious Thank you Clyevo. The soft wear is Solidworks Sorry for offtopic, which one is easier to learn? solidworks or sketchup with sketchy physics?
|
|
|
Post by clyevo on Oct 8, 2015 6:51:52 GMT
the dimensions are how it suppose to be, good job Edit : what is the software u used to animate the 3d?? just curious actually the bigger the platform compared with the length of the lever (the one connected to the gearbox shaft and to the arm), the smaller the movement of the platform, if you can try creating the animation with smaller platform, you will see the more movement/displacement of the platform. Car racing sim doesnt need big movement but it should be fast. If you build it for flight sim you will need bigger movement even though it will be slower.
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 8, 2015 13:53:29 GMT
Thank you Clyevo. The soft wear is Solidworks Sorry for offtopic, which one is easier to learn? solidworks or sketchup with sketchy physics? I have used Sketchup, the Icon I used now is designed by Sketchup. But I have not used sketchy physics. After I order the Thanos controller board, I want to design the 3D platform more accurate and simulate the motion. I compare the comments of sketchy physics and solidworks, and decide to learn solidworks. Solidworks is very powereful, and very easy to use, espacially if you have the experience of Sketchup. It just took me 5 days to learn it.
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 8, 2015 13:57:26 GMT
I need to some clarification of BFF parameter meaning again. What I comprehaned of H_mid, Crank_Radius and Act_Stroke are as figures show, is that correct? Thank you in advance~
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 8, 2015 14:29:16 GMT
the dimensions are how it suppose to be, good job Edit : what is the software u used to animate the 3d?? just curious actually the bigger the platform compared with the length of the lever (the one connected to the gearbox shaft and to the arm), the smaller the movement of the platform, if you can try creating the animation with smaller platform, you will see the more movement/displacement of the platform. Car racing sim doesnt need big movement but it should be fast. If you build it for flight sim you will need bigger movement even though it will be slower. Thanks Clyevo. I want to build a platform for the flight sim, looks the lever I used now is not long enough, I will modify it.
|
|
|
Post by Mitch on Oct 9, 2015 3:07:35 GMT
The dimension you have titled as 'act_stroke' should be your height of upper platform at mid stroke (off the top of my head I think this is called h_mid). 'Stroke' is essentially 2x your crank radius, subtracting for the electrical feedback range of your sensor. It's the distance you will move the actuating rod. My mid position is not horizontal with the floor, at full heave my crank is almost in line with the actuating rod, so mid position for me is about 30deg.
|
|
|
Post by capacitor on Oct 9, 2015 22:58:56 GMT
The dimension you have titled as 'act_stroke' should be your height of upper platform at mid stroke (off the top of my head I think this is called h_mid). 'Stroke' is essentially 2x your crank radius, subtracting for the electrical feedback range of your sensor. It's the distance you will move the actuating rod. My mid position is not horizontal with the floor, at full heave my crank is almost in line with the actuating rod, so mid position for me is about 30deg. Thank you Mitch. according to the comprehension to your clarifcation, I draw 3 figure, show the your case. if the act_stroke=crank_radius*(sin(alpha_max)-sin(alpha_min)), then your act_stroke equal about 1*crank_radius only when the alpha_min is -90°, and the alpha_max is 90°, the act_stroke can reach 2*crank_radius Is my comprehension correct?
|
|
|
Post by Mitch on Oct 10, 2015 3:26:12 GMT
Seems right. 0 alpha in your example is neutral +90 is max heave in the up direction, -90 is max heave in down direction. Last picture represents my mid at 30deg.
Your sensor will only operate in an arc of 180 degrees and will have some unusable range near the limits. Actual stroke represents the top to bottom range of travel of the crank arm within the feedback constraints of your sensor.
|
|