A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Simulators
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

New PC's FFB



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 14th 12, 03:40 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Well, I got new PC, and there are some changes. On this PC I can
clearly feel where I am regarding latency (cockpitLookDeadZone setting).
Here, my latency definitelly is somewhere around 0.038500. Well, this has
more sense than what I wrote previously.
Thankfully now I can clearly distinguish where I am with my latency,
so I can experiment with different settings (if I find time to do that).
Regarding the feel of FFB, if latency is too low, your are chasing car, if
it is too high, car is chasing you. When it is too low, car runs away from
you, but you cannot catch it. This isn't so easy to distinguish, but it is
very easy to distinguish too high latency. In short, with too high latency
FFB behaves somehow like a yo-yo. Like it has a spring in itself, and this
spring acts exactly like a yo-yo. It is controlable, but of course, because
of latency it plays around, and in adjsuting to this, all feels just like a
yo-yo.
Well, now that I am sure what is what, now I can freely experiment
with different video settings, to see how they affect latency.
----------------------

There is some development, here.
Up till now I chased the divide between, yo-yo zone and no yo-yo
zone. Well, this was wrong. On my system that divide is at
cockpitLookDeadZone = 0.038570/0.038569. Well, the prefered value of
cockpitLookDeadZone is deeply into yo-yo zone. I still didn't determine
where exactly (I had enough of testing for today), but it is somewhere
around 0.08. Good news is that it looks like it doesn't have to be so
precise, it looks like three decimal places should do.
Also, on my system the fps lock at 84 is too low, regarding FFB. 169
is good. 169 is better than "no lock". "No lock" is much better than 84, and
almost as good as 169. I still didn't have time to see how low can I go
regarding this, but 84 is clearly too low.

Ads
  #12  
Old April 25th 12, 12:19 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Mario Petrinovic:
Well, I got new PC, and there are some changes. On this PC I can
clearly feel where I am regarding latency (cockpitLookDeadZone setting).
Here, my latency definitelly is somewhere around 0.038500. Well, this has
more sense than what I wrote previously.
Thankfully now I can clearly distinguish where I am with my latency,
so I can experiment with different settings (if I find time to do that).
Regarding the feel of FFB, if latency is too low, your are chasing car, if
it is too high, car is chasing you. When it is too low, car runs away from
you, but you cannot catch it. This isn't so easy to distinguish, but it is
very easy to distinguish too high latency. In short, with too high latency
FFB behaves somehow like a yo-yo. Like it has a spring in itself, and this
spring acts exactly like a yo-yo. It is controlable, but of course, because
of latency it plays around, and in adjsuting to this, all feels just like a
yo-yo.
Well, now that I am sure what is what, now I can freely experiment
with different video settings, to see how they affect latency.
----------------------

There is some development, here.
Up till now I chased the divide between, yo-yo zone and no yo-yo
zone. Well, this was wrong. On my system that divide is at
cockpitLookDeadZone = 0.038570/0.038569. Well, the prefered value of
cockpitLookDeadZone is deeply into yo-yo zone. I still didn't determine
where exactly (I had enough of testing for today), but it is somewhere
around 0.08. Good news is that it looks like it doesn't have to be so
precise, it looks like three decimal places should do.
Also, on my system the fps lock at 84 is too low, regarding FFB. 169
is good. 169 is better than "no lock". "No lock" is much better than 84, and
almost as good as 169. I still didn't have time to see how low can I go
regarding this, but 84 is clearly too low.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I tested all this.
First, FFB has to be precise to all 6 decimal places. My setting is
0.086551 (the default is 0.050000).
With finetuned FFB I could feel better what the right FOV is, and
now the best is 63. This means that the (horizontal) distance from my eyes
to the edge of table where wheel is attached is 40 cm. The FOV is extremly
important, with wrong FOV you cannot negotiate corners correctly. Too bad
you cannot adjust it more precisely (one decimal place should be enough).
Regarding what fps, the more, the better. "No lock" fps is better
than 169.
I tested with Skippy on Jefferson Reverse, which is a good
combination for testing.

  #13  
Old April 25th 12, 03:13 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Mario Petrinovic:
Mario Petrinovic:
Well, I got new PC, and there are some changes. On this PC I can
clearly feel where I am regarding latency (cockpitLookDeadZone setting).
Here, my latency definitelly is somewhere around 0.038500. Well, this has
more sense than what I wrote previously.
Thankfully now I can clearly distinguish where I am with my latency,
so I can experiment with different settings (if I find time to do that).
Regarding the feel of FFB, if latency is too low, your are chasing car, if
it is too high, car is chasing you. When it is too low, car runs away from
you, but you cannot catch it. This isn't so easy to distinguish, but it is
very easy to distinguish too high latency. In short, with too high latency
FFB behaves somehow like a yo-yo. Like it has a spring in itself, and this
spring acts exactly like a yo-yo. It is controlable, but of course, because
of latency it plays around, and in adjsuting to this, all feels just like a
yo-yo.
Well, now that I am sure what is what, now I can freely experiment
with different video settings, to see how they affect latency.
----------------------

There is some development, here.
Up till now I chased the divide between, yo-yo zone and no yo-yo
zone. Well, this was wrong. On my system that divide is at
cockpitLookDeadZone = 0.038570/0.038569. Well, the prefered value of
cockpitLookDeadZone is deeply into yo-yo zone. I still didn't determine
where exactly (I had enough of testing for today), but it is somewhere
around 0.08. Good news is that it looks like it doesn't have to be so
precise, it looks like three decimal places should do.
Also, on my system the fps lock at 84 is too low, regarding FFB. 169
is good. 169 is better than "no lock". "No lock" is much better than 84, and
almost as good as 169. I still didn't have time to see how low can I go
regarding this, but 84 is clearly too low.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I tested all this.
First, FFB has to be precise to all 6 decimal places. My setting is
0.086551 (the default is 0.050000).
With finetuned FFB I could feel better what the right FOV is, and
now the best is 63. This means that the (horizontal) distance from my eyes
to the edge of table where wheel is attached is 40 cm. The FOV is extremly
important, with wrong FOV you cannot negotiate corners correctly. Too bad
you cannot adjust it more precisely (one decimal place should be enough).
Regarding what fps, the more, the better. "No lock" fps is better
than 169.
I tested with Skippy on Jefferson Reverse, which is a good
combination for testing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, now that I've set up the things reasonably well, I tried to
see how car behaves with cockpitLookDeadZone values higher than 0.1.
Previously I didn't go higher than that since iRacing has set it to 0.05 as
a default. Well, now I tried all the values. And look at that...
So, now I have really well set up all the things, so, lets see how
this will go. This value can be set in a range from 1.0 to 0.0. The middle
of this is 0.5. And, look at that, this value works excellently, just like
it should. Safe, and you can correct driving even if in the middle of spin
(actually, it really behaves like a real car), and control it in 99% of
situations.
So, this SHOULD actually be the default setting. Why iRacing has put
it at 10x lower value, who in the whole world knows. My God, will I spend
whole my life clearing THE MESS iRacing is leaving behind. At least if they
would leave some info, or whetever. But not, they are actually blocking any
discussion about this. Unbelievable.
So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
to the edge of table as 40 cm.

  #14  
Old May 3rd 12, 07:46 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
to the edge of table as 40 cm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
important.
BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.

  #15  
Old May 3rd 12, 05:51 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
FolkGT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default New PC's FFB

On Thu, 3 May 2012 08:46:30 +0200, "Mario Petrinovic"
> wrote:

>Mario Petrinovic:
> So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
>first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
>at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
>FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
>to the edge of table as 40 cm.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
>important.
> BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
>This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.


Interesting. I'm beta-testing pCARS right now and with that game you
definitely have to check that option. I'm surprised other games don't
have the same requirement.
  #16  
Old May 4th 12, 06:32 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

FolkGT:
Mario Petrinovic:
>Mario Petrinovic:
> So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
>first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
>at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
>FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
>to the edge of table as 40 cm.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
>important.
> BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
>This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.


Interesting. I'm beta-testing pCARS right now and with that game you
definitely have to check that option. I'm surprised other games don't
have the same requirement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you having Damper, Spring and Centering Spring (Centering Spring
unchecked) at 100%? Well, if you don't have, then some strange things happen
(which are also unlinear), so, in that case, if game developer expects you
to have unlinear FFB settings, he can try to flatten this unlinearity by
adjusting settings (also in ulinear way). This is the case with iRacing, who
is suggesting some non-linear FFB settings.

  #17  
Old May 4th 12, 08:13 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Mario Petrinovic:
So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
to the edge of table as 40 cm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
important.
BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, there are some corrections. Now that I've set up hight of
screen, it turned out that FOV was wrong. The correct one is 66 (was 63).
Previously, 63 allowed me to go through corners better, but it turned out
that it was because lower FOV losenes car, and this is beneficial with
default tight setups. Now, with hight of screen set correctly, I realize
that 66 is the right FOV.
This means that the distance from eyes to the edge of table is 36
cm, not 40 cm.

  #18  
Old May 4th 12, 11:18 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

Mario Petrinovic:
Mario Petrinovic:
Mario Petrinovic:
So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
to the edge of table as 40 cm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
important.
BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, there are some corrections. Now that I've set up hight of
screen, it turned out that FOV was wrong. The correct one is 66 (was 63).
Previously, 63 allowed me to go through corners better, but it turned out
that it was because lower FOV losenes car, and this is beneficial with
default tight setups. Now, with hight of screen set correctly, I realize
that 66 is the right FOV.
This means that the distance from eyes to the edge of table is 36
cm, not 40 cm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ha, ha, I just figured out one important thing.
Well, with my new PC I decided to start from the begining, from "the
first state", to not change anything, to see how it will go. And
immediatelly I noticed far crispier FFB. Well, I thought, that's ok, why
not, : ). But I didn't know why. I ran Profiler before, I am running it now,
everything was the same. Except that I noticed that I cannot change the
properties of wheel axes. This is strange, I thougt. Well, today I realized
that this is because I didn't have any profile loaded/selected into the
Profiler. So, today I decided to make one profile, and look at that,
immediatelly I noticed how much lag a profile is adding to FFB. A lot of
lag, car becames almost "uncechable". Well, why don't try to turn Profiler
completly off? So I did this, and guess what, things started to be even
better, car became even more "catchable" (it means, when car starts to drift
away, I can catch it, Watkins Glen is good track to test this, because there
car slides a lot under power) than before when only Profiler without a
profile was running.
Well, this certainly is a good news. So, no Profiler from now on.

  #19  
Old May 7th 12, 08:22 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
FolkGT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default New PC's FFB

On Fri, 4 May 2012 07:32:55 +0200, "Mario Petrinovic"
> wrote:

>FolkGT:
>Mario Petrinovic:
>>Mario Petrinovic:
>> So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
>>first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
>>at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put in-game
>>FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from eyes
>>to the edge of table as 40 cm.
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
>>important.
>> BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
>>This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.

>
>Interesting. I'm beta-testing pCARS right now and with that game you
>definitely have to check that option. I'm surprised other games don't
>have the same requirement.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Are you having Damper, Spring and Centering Spring (Centering Spring
>unchecked) at 100%? Well, if you don't have, then some strange things happen
>(which are also unlinear), so, in that case, if game developer expects you
>to have unlinear FFB settings, he can try to flatten this unlinearity by
>adjusting settings (also in ulinear way). This is the case with iRacing, who
>is suggesting some non-linear FFB settings.


I see. The devs at pCARS recommend the following settings:

Overall Effects Strength: 100-104
Spring Effect Strength: 0
Damper Effect Strength: 0
Enable Centering Spring: Unchecked. (so it doesn't matter the setting)
Degrees of Rotation: 900 (different steering setups are done per car
within the game)
Allow game to adjust settings: Checked
  #20  
Old May 8th 12, 07:45 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default New PC's FFB

FolkGT:
Mario Petrinovic:
>FolkGT:
>Mario Petrinovic:
>>Mario Petrinovic:
>> So, it is actually all very easy, just put this value to 0.5, put
>>first of FFB settings (Overall) to whatever you like, put the rest of them
>>at 100% (I would also uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings"), put
>>in-game
>>FFB values at max., and set FOV so that you count in the distance from
>>eyes
>>to the edge of table as 40 cm.
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Oh, it turned out that setting the hight of screen is also very
>>important.
>> BTW, I would definitely uncheck "Allow game to adjust settings".
>>This setting gives unlinearity to FFB.

>
>Interesting. I'm beta-testing pCARS right now and with that game you
>definitely have to check that option. I'm surprised other games don't
>have the same requirement.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Are you having Damper, Spring and Centering Spring (Centering
> Spring
>unchecked) at 100%? Well, if you don't have, then some strange things
>happen
>(which are also unlinear), so, in that case, if game developer expects you
>to have unlinear FFB settings, he can try to flatten this unlinearity by
>adjusting settings (also in ulinear way). This is the case with iRacing,
>who
>is suggesting some non-linear FFB settings.


I see. The devs at pCARS recommend the following settings:

Overall Effects Strength: 100-104
Spring Effect Strength: 0
Damper Effect Strength: 0
Enable Centering Spring: Unchecked. (so it doesn't matter the setting)
Degrees of Rotation: 900 (different steering setups are done per car
within the game)
Allow game to adjust settings: Checked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Once I discussed this with Ade Allen, he made Real Feel plugin fo
rFactor, and he also didn't now that, and since the developers of both,
iRacing and pCARS don't mention this specifically anywhere, I presume that
they don't know too. Centering Spring works even if unchecked. Centering
Spring is a part of FFB, and it works so that if it is more than 100% it is
harder than natural for you to turn wheel away from center, and if it is
below 100% it is easier than natural (or something like that). Anyway, 100%
is the natural strength of FFB forces (this goes for Damper and Spring,
too).
When Centering Spring is checked, it works indepemdetly of FFB. IOW,
this checked Centering Spring ISN'T a part of FFB, but unchecked is a part
of FFB. If you see the description of this (put mouse arrow over the text),
you'll see that by checking it you "enable centering forces in force
feedback games which do not have a centering force". For force feedback
games that do have a centering force you don't have to check this box, and
this slider adjusts this force unchecked. It really is confusing (it was for
me, also), and there is nowhere an closer explaination, and the whole
simcommunity is convinced (just like you) that this slider doesn't work if
unchecked, but this isn't so. For example, iRacing recommends this slider to
be at 100%. Which means that iRacing's FFB works on "Overall", AND
"Centering Spring".

 




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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FFB latency Mario Petrinovic Simulators 2 March 20th 12 11:14 PM
FFB progress Mario Petrinovic Simulators 5 February 14th 12 05:36 PM
FFB (so far) Mario Petrinovic Simulators 0 September 25th 11 10:57 AM
FFB Mario Petrinovic Simulators 26 September 5th 11 08:52 AM
G25 v. ECCI - To FFB or not to FFB [email protected] Simulators 1 August 17th 07 02:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.