Slaw Device vs. Saitek Rudder comparison

[some1]

 

The difference is substantial. In terms of mechanics they are simply different devices with, usually, different purpose. Dampers are usually viscous dampers which, in best case scenario, have damping >proportional to velocity of displacement<. In worst case scenario they even have different characteristic in different direction. That's the key thing and the very reason they are out of place in any sim controls. There is no significant damping in that sense in (even boosted) control systems.

 

 

You still didn't answer my original question, which is what is a damper-like friction device that is not a damper. But I assume you think that damper can only be used as a shock absorber as opposed to some device using friction pads or something. Well, a damper is also a friction device, just the one that uses fluid/gas friction instead of solid state objects. It usually has different coefficient of friction vs speed than a friction pad, but ultimately it can serve the same purpose.

 

The issue is simple. A device you introduce into a mechanism has a certain characteristic. If it does resemble a characteristic of a generic control system, it does add to the realism. If it features a completely wacko characteristic it does not add to the realism (e.g. for rudder pedals: a strong damper, a detent etc.). It only makes matters worse. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

 

So in summary:

- the dynamic pressure on a control surface is replicable by a simple spring

- the inherent control system friction is replicable by a simple friction component

- dampers have no place in sim controls; certainly not in the way hobbyst use them

 

Hmm, "resemble a characteristic of a generic control system", maybe a system like this?

 

737 feel and centering unit

 

Anyway, you are over complicating things. A hydraulic damper here or in the other simulator gear is a friction device. Can it be replaced with a simple friction component? Yes, if that component is properly designed. The advantage of a damper in this application is simply wide range of adjustment and low static friction regardless of how high you set it, which is often a problem with simple friction pads. And as I said, the level of friction in simulation controls is largely a personal preference, there is no one "realistic" setting.

 

 

Oh, com on, isn't it too early into the argument to resort to reductio ad absurdum? ;)

 

Then don't start the argument by calling something ridiculous, it's the name-calling level of dispute ;)

[toxaq]

Come on guys, if you were in a pub together, you'd be having an awesome time sharing ideas about your passion. People misinterpret each other all the time online, I'm sure no one was intending to offend any one.

 

@Bucic I don't follow your point. You're saying that a simple spring is the best we can get in terms of replicating resistance in simulators? I find myself agreeing with @some1's position. In race car simulators, they often use hydraulics to simulate pedal feel as springs are quite realistic. Hydraulics dampers add consistent resistance to a movement, this is certainly an aspect of the real world when things appear to have a "weight". I know more about cars than planes but I'd expect it's not as easy as my crappy joystick to move real flight surfaces. I also appreciate that the response from this is non-linear with air pressure on those surfaces which also varies over time. As such, I would've thought the combination of a spring and some fluid damping would feel better than a spring alone.

 

@some1 thanks for the link.

[Bucic]

You still didn't answer my original question, which is what is a damper-like friction device that is not a damper.

There was no such question but there you go: for example a typical automotive damper with at least one end cap drilled and the fluid removed.

 

 

But I assume you think that damper can only be used as a shock absorber as opposed to some device using friction pads or something. Well, a damper is also a friction device, just the one that uses fluid/gas friction instead of solid state objects. It usually has different coefficient of friction vs speed than a friction pad, but ultimately it can serve the same purpose.

We're getting nowhere with this. I have pointed out that that those are separate devices with vastly different characteristics and you've just dismissed this. It's like dismissing a post by someone noting that you can't use velocity and acceleration as synonyms.

 

You can grab a reduction gear or a Cardanus coupling and say those are 'friction devices' as they 'do friction' and no one can deny this. No one can forbid you from using those as friction devices but it's not their purpose and their characteristics likely won't be suitable to make them valid as replacements for a friction device**********. And don't try to make it 'an academic problem'. This is highschool physics/backyard thinkering at best. I don't mean to belittle you. It's just a fact. To be honest I know technical university graduates who don't get this either but that's another story.

 

Let me go back to the dismissed part of my previous post (damper vs friction device):

(..) they are simply different devices with, usually, different purpose. Dampers are usually viscous dampers which, in best case scenario, have damping >proportional to velocity of displacement<. In worst case scenario they even have different characteristic in different direction. That's the key thing and the very reason they are out of place in any sim controls. There is no significant damping in that sense in (even boosted) control systems.

 

 

Hmm, "resemble a characteristic of a generic control system", maybe a system like this?

 

http://www.737flightsim.com/feel002.jpg[/i mg]

737 feel and centering unit

No. I meant a basic set of mechanical flight controls, optionally with boosters. There's no point in throwing in such figures as even a basic flight control system is hard to grasp.

 

 

Anyway, you are over complicating things. A hydraulic damper here or in the other simulator gear is a friction device. (...) The advantage of a damper in this application is simply wide range of adjustment and low static friction regardless of how high you set it, which is often a problem with simple friction pads.

Use of dampers (if they are not modified to disable their main dampening function) in high-end sim controls doesn't change facts.

But in this bit you gave the very reason why people resort to dampers. Smooth operation even at high friction. That's it. The mystery is no more :) And I admit, any sort of cylinders are very good as ready-made friction devices.

BTW, smooth operation comes from negligible difference between static and dynamic friction coefficients of the pair of materials used. Something Thrustmaster and others can't possibly wrap their heads around if it was to save their lives :)

 

 

And as I said, the level of friction in simulation controls is largely a personal preference, there is no one "realistic" setting.

The preferences with regard to amount of friction are valid and I get that. Preferences with regard to characteristics are as valid as an opinion on which bicycle chain is more durable, narrow or wide.

 

 

Then don't start the argument by calling something ridiculous, it's the name-calling level of dispute ;)

If you build sim controls and use a device with an exponential characteristic where it should be linear, it's silly. If you use a gas spring of a typical characteristic, this is ridiculous. So you see, I only said it to differentiate and to express the scale ;)

 

 

 

 

Come on guys, if you were in a pub together, you'd be having an awesome time sharing ideas about your passion. People misinterpret each other all the time online, I'm sure no one was intending to offend any one.

Naah, what are you talking about? I'm sure we're still far from a fight :)

 

 

@Bucic I don't follow your point. You're saying that a simple spring is the best we can get in terms of replicating resistance in simulators? I find myself agreeing with @some1's position.

You're confusing A and B components as described in post #26.

 

 

In race car simulators, they often use hydraulics to simulate pedal feel as springs are quite realistic.

I assume you meant 'aren't quite realistic'. Yes, I'm familiar with the racing sim controls designs as well (I've been tracking the subject for many years). First, the cushy feel of car pedals are replicable (within an arbitrary 95%) using just springs (specifically selected for the purpose), for fraction of the cost of a solution using 'hydraulics'. Second, in many cases it looks flashy in features list. Third, car controls are not exactly comparable to aircraft controls. Not because 'cars are not aircraft'. Simply because the force characteristics are different, displacements are vastly different etc.

 

'Smoothness of resistance' - see my reply to some1, bottom part of this post.

 

 

As such, I would've thought the combination of a spring and some fluid damping would feel better than a spring alone.

'Better' as in 'more interesting'. Maybe. But not >more true to life< / more realistic. As I said before, forces in basic A/C control systems are not dependent on the velocity of movement of flight controls. To any significant degree at least.

[some1]

Bucic, I'm not denying the different characteristics of a wet damper, dry damper, friction pad, or whatever. My point is that it doesn't matter in this application, well maybe if you strap a full size automotive shock absorber to your joystcik, that would cause problems. But we're not moving our controls at 100 km/h, and the input frequency is 2-3Hz at best. The damper works in very limited speed range, in which its friction might as well be constant, or linear if you prefer.

 

Point is, no matter if I move the pedals slow or fast, I don't feel the changes in friction you're talking about. For me it is a smooth, maintenance-free, adjustable friction element. Period.

 

BTW, smooth operation comes from negligible difference between static and dynamic friction coefficients of the pair of materials used. Something Thrustmaster and others can't possibly wrap their heads around if it was to save their lives

 

To be fair, the Warthog throttle works smooth out of the box, no problems with that after several years, the joystick is okay too as long as you grease it every odd month or so.

[agrasyuk]

Damper:

Do you actually mean a damper or just a dumper-like (the looks and layout) friction device. I'm asking because I've noticed some people/small companies sell their pieces fitted with dampers of significant dampening. There's no significant dampening in control systems. Not even in boosted ones. Not even in helicopters. WW2 fighters: Close to zero.

 

It's a gimmick. Some people even use gas springs. Ridiculous from the realism standpoint.

 

Let me try to answer this.

I used Slaw's cam load pedals for couple weeks before damper arrived. The center is not a sharp deten, it does taper of a bit, creating tiny area of near 0 resistance. With all ballbearing mechanics it feels like super sensitive center. even though input levels from that area are almost negligible in sim it still has a very funny tactile feedback at one's feet.

The damper is a cheap motorcycle steering one (i would never put one anywhere near my bike ). when installed, while it does hamper precision somewhat, it does remove that strange behavior near the center. To me the damper add-on for slaw's pedals does make sense. I do find the lightest setting to stiff however - will be looking into modding the damper

 

As far as realism, I only got to fly once (old beechcraft sundowner) . during that hour I was mostly busy being in shock so I might be remembering things wrong , but I did get to fight choppy Chicago lakefront side winds.

IMO Slaw's kit feels closer to real thing with damper installed then without.

 

ADD:

And I don't think it will be surprising to anyone when I say slaws kit feels much much closer to real thing (at least to me) then combatp pedals from saitek.

Instead of "oh! So definetly Buy them if you have chance!" Il just say I really wish Slaw gets more time to work and make more of these excellent simming devices

Edited September 16, 2015 by agrasyuk

[Slaw]

Excuse me, but I understand very little English. So I write in Polish, though it's not my native language, too.

Nawet mój Google tłumacz nie daje radę z tłumaczeniem ostatnich postów.

Po pierwsze - nie latałem prawdziwym samolotem jako pilot. Dla tego nie mogę mówić o realistyczności uczuć. Ale zdecydowana większość nowoczesnych samolotów nie ma bezpośredniego powiązania sterów z urządzeniami w kokpicie. Rudder steruję elektroniką (lub hydrauliką z małym ciśnieniem), elektronika (lub hydrauliką z małym ciśnieniem) steruję hydrauliką, a hydraulika sterami. Na przykład rudder Boeing. Centrowanie pedałów i wstępne obciążenie - za pomocą krzywki i sprężyny, jak i w moich. Ale w zależności od rzeczywistego oporu na sterach (od prędkości i od kąta pochylenia sterów), zwiększa się opór w siłowniku. Robi to elektronika, i zależy ten opór od ustawienia elektroniki. Można nawet zrobić tak, żeby w każdym przypadku pilot odczuwał tylko opór od sprężyny przez krzywkę, a całą pracę będzie wykonywać wspomoganie.

Co do dampera na rudderze. Można go nie instalować, rudder działa i bez niego. Ale chyba dobrze mieć możliwość zainstalowania? Może nie dodaje to prawdziwych uczuć, ale robi różnicę. Czuć pod nogami hydrauliczne urządzenie, i to mi się podoba. Teraz wszystkie moje ruddery będą miały możliwość zainstalowania dampera.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Slaw

[Bucic]

The damper works in very limited speed range, in which its friction might as well be constant, or linear if you prefer.

'The damper' or 'dampers in general'?

 

Point is, no matter if I move the pedals slow or fast, I don't feel the changes in friction you're talking about. For me it is a smooth, maintenance-free, adjustable friction element. Period.

If the difference in resistance between extremely slow movement and the fastest you can move the pedals is close to zero, then period indeed, I agree :) But only then.

 

To be fair, the Warthog throttle works smooth out of the box, no problems with that after several years, the joystick is okay too as long as you grease it every odd month or so.

I meant the stick. As you noted yourself it's not OK out of the box as far as smooth operation goes.

 

 

@agrasyuk

I see.

 

ADD:

And I don't think it will be surprising to anyone when I say slaws kit feels much much closer to real thing (at least to me) then combatp pedals from saitek.

I must say comparing Saitek pedals to Slaw's pedals in any case is on the edge of being offensive ;)

Edited September 16, 2015 by Bucic

[Bucic]

Excuse me, but I understand very little English. So I write in Polish, though it's not my native language, too.

Nawet mój Google tłumacz nie daje radę z tłumaczeniem ostatnich postów.

Po pierwsze - nie latałem prawdziwym samolotem jako pilot. Dla tego nie mogę mówić o realistyczności uczuć. Ale zdecydowana większość nowoczesnych samolotów nie ma bezpośredniego powiązania sterów z urządzeniami w kokpicie. Rudder steruję elektroniką (lub hydrauliką z małym ciśnieniem), elektronika (lub hydrauliką z małym ciśnieniem) steruję hydrauliką, a hydraulika sterami. Na przykład rudder Boeing. Centrowanie pedałów i wstępne obciążenie - za pomocą krzywki i sprężyny, jak i w moich. Ale w zależności od rzeczywistego oporu na sterach (od prędkości i od kąta pochylenia sterów), zwiększa się opór w siłowniku. Robi to elektronika, i zależy ten opór od ustawienia elektroniki. Można nawet zrobić tak, żeby w każdym przypadku pilot odczuwał tylko opór od sprężyny przez krzywkę, a całą pracę będzie wykonywać wspomoganie.

Co do dampera na rudderze. Można go nie instalować, rudder działa i bez niego. Ale chyba dobrze mieć możliwość zainstalowania? Może nie dodaje to prawdziwych uczuć, ale robi różnicę. Czuć pod nogami hydrauliczne urządzenie, i to mi się podoba. Teraz wszystkie moje ruddery będą miały możliwość zainstalowania dampera.

(Slaw referring to boosted and fly-by-wire systems with artificial force feedback)

 

Sure, there are some differences. But keep in mind that when designing artificial force feedback or even spring sets the aim is to reflect the feeling of a classic mechanical control system characteristics. The reason is simple. Characteristics of such systems provide smooth control and pronounced forces, you could almost say they feel natural. It's simply desirable/recommended design practice. Now, you can read plenty of: 'Oh, but I'm a real Hawk/MiG-21/Mirage 2000/Su-25 etc. instructor pilot and my aircraft has a detent in the center of the pitch axis topped with 3 degree deadzones in both axes'. It doesn't change what I said. I'm not saying I'm smarter than Mikoyan bureau engineers. I'm just saying if the recommendation I was talking about is not followed in a particular real craft it is most probably due to a need to achieve some design compromises.

 

(Slaw saying that's it's better to have the option of a damper rather than not having the option)

If what some1 is saying about the particular damper is true, then sure!

 

Slaw, congratulations on your project! I kind of like to see Eastern and Central Europe becoming renowned for no-bollocks sim control designs. I maight just use this phrase for marketing my own project one day ;)

[some1]

The damper as my damper in my pedals. :) I haven't really looked at other flightsim designs with dampers or gas springs.

Though I have a yoke with bungee rope inside if you are interested :P

 

I meant the stick. As you noted yourself it's not OK out of the box as far as smooth operation goes.

 

That's not what I said. Thrustmaster stick is fine out of the box, but needs to be lubricated periodically to keep it in that shape.

[Bucic]

The damper as my damper in my pedals. :) I haven't really looked at other flightsim designs with dampers or gas springs.

Rgr.

 

That's not what I said. Thrustmaster stick is fine out of the box, but needs to be lubricated periodically to keep it in that shape.

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood. But it goes contrary to what some people on internet forums say about the WH stick. Let's not go there in this thread though, please.

[VO101_MMaister]

Damper:

Do you actually mean a damper or just a dumper-like (the looks and layout) friction device. I'm asking because I've noticed some people/small companies sell their pieces fitted with dampers of significant dampening. There's no significant dampening in control systems. Not even in boosted ones. Not even in helicopters. WW2 fighters: Close to zero.

 

It's a gimmick. Some people even use gas springs. Ridiculous from the realism standpoint.

 

I need to comment this, because I am on a very different point of view.

Damping is the best thing you can do to achive a more realistic stick behavior within a acceptable price range.

 

A ball bearing hinged, steel spring loaded stick will wobble and literally have no friction at all, hence it is very easy to over control.

 

in real planes:

The air pressure on the control surfaces gives a very different feedback on controls, there is a lot of friction between the airstream and the control surfaces therefore there is no wobbling at all on the control devices if you release them. In addition the mechanically connected controls have a lot of internal mechanical friction which is an important addition to the control feeling.

All in all if you move a flight stick during flight what you feel is the dynamic air pressure and the friction of the air stream and the mechanical friction. If you deflect a flight stick and then release it, it will never wobble but will slowly return to center (if it returns at all!!!, sometimes the friction is higher then the returning forces). The friction helps a lot to avoid overcontrolling.

 

The only cheap and good way to simulate it (at least to my knowledge) is the damper.

Of course setting it up correctly is crucial, it should not be the dominating resistance element. It should only supplement the spring load and eliminate the wobbling.

 

Here is a video of my flight stick`s motion with viscous dampers and steel spring load. I could not be happier with it. You can never achieve a similar result with springs only.

 

[toxaq]

Slowly getting my head around @bucic's points I think. You're obviously coming from an area of significant expertise over where I'm at. I think what VO101_MMaister has written and what his video shows is more the effect I'm after. I wouldn't be flying sims if I could afford to fly real planes so my experience is limited to a few hours in a 172 and gliders. I'm not looking to replicate the feedback from the control surfaces, I'm trying to stop spring bouncing and add some slight resistance as would exist in a cable system (I'm a huge P-51 fan). I did spend some time thinking about this topic yesterday and was thinking how cool it would be you could have a damper hooked up with an adjustable valve connected to the airspeed so that resistance did increase in reaction to pressure on the control surfaces :)

 

Great to see Slaw post, love your work, translated your post and understood what you were saying.

Edited September 16, 2015 by toxaq

[Harle]

I need to comment this, because I am on a very different point of view.

Damping is the best thing you can do to achive a more realistic stick behavior within a acceptable price range.

 

A ball bearing hinged, steel spring loaded stick will wobble and literally have no friction at all, hence it is very easy to over control.

 

in real planes:

The air pressure on the control surfaces gives a very different feedback on controls, there is a lot of friction between the airstream and the control surfaces therefore there is no wobbling at all on the control devices if you release them. In addition the mechanically connected controls have a lot of internal mechanical friction which is an important addition to the control feeling.

All in all if you move a flight stick during flight what you feel is the dynamic air pressure and the friction of the air stream and the mechanical friction. If you deflect a flight stick and then release it, it will never wobble but will slowly return to center (if it returns at all!!!, sometimes the friction is higher then the returning forces). The friction helps a lot to avoid overcontrolling.

 

The only cheap and good way to simulate it (at least to my knowledge) is the damper.

Of course setting it up correctly is crucial, it should not be the dominating resistance element. It should only supplement the spring load and eliminate the wobbling.

 

Here is a video of my flight stick`s motion with viscous dampers and steel spring load. I could not be happier with it. You can never achieve a similar result with springs only.

 

 

How did you implement that damping in the joystick?

[VO101_MMaister]

How did you implement that damping in the joystick?

 

I used high quality adjustable rotary viscous dampers attached to the pivot shafts.

[Harle]

Thanks!

Too bad those won't fit in my joystick.

[Slaw]

I used high quality adjustable rotary viscous dampers attached to the pivot shafts.

 

Hi.

Where I can buy it?

[VO101_MMaister]

Hi.

Where I can buy it?

 

I bought these on ebay.

[Sokol1_br]

http://www.debmfg.com/prod02.htm

[Slaw]

http://www.debmfg.com/prod02.htm

 

Thank you.I write them a message. I asked about the price. Waiting. Maybe somebody knows the price?

[Harle]

Slaw, a bit off topic question, but...

What's your country of origin?

[Slaw]

Slaw, a bit off topic question, but...

What's your country of origin?

 

Belarus.

[Lehmen]

Just got my new Slaw Device Viper-RX pedals. Previously I had used Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals. What a difference! My favorite module in DCS is UH-1H Huey, which needs a precise rudder control. Slaw rudders are much smoother than Saitek, and have tons of adjustments available. Installed hydraulic damper, which gives even more adjustments and unique feeling of the rudder control. I haven't tried every other pedals on the market, but now I don't think I have to. Slaw pedals have everything I want, and more. Flying my helio was never before as pleasant, as it is now. Slaw, you have one very, very satisfied customer here :)

[Slaw]

While there's no doubt that these pedals are great, it really means nothing if one can't buy them. I see people saying others should give them a try, but they don't mention how I'm supposed to get that done as Slaw has stated that they refuse to take anymore orders and won't for any foreseeable future. While it's nice that you have them, no one else can purchase them so telling us how great they are and that we should try them is pointless,

 

Hi, All.

Unfortunately I am alone. So I can not produce more than a few dozen pieces a year. Also I can not produce more than two types of pedals. But I want to design a new devices. I have a registered company, but work like a hobby.

With regard to pedals BF109 - I was trying to upgrade them. But I have to stop work until the beginning of September. Therefore, for those who are on the waiting list at the BF109 pedal, you get these pedals in June. Sorry for delay. I would like that you would have received upgraded pedals. But I did not have time to do it.

I'm sorry, I can not do the pedals for all comers.

[Slaw]

Just got my new Slaw Device Viper-RX pedals. Previously I had used Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals. What a difference! My favorite module in DCS is UH-1H Huey, which needs a precise rudder control. Slaw rudders are much smoother than Saitek, and have tons of adjustments available. Installed hydraulic damper, which gives even more adjustments and unique feeling of the rudder control. I haven't tried every other pedals on the market, but now I don't think I have to. Slaw pedals have everything I want, and more. Flying my helio was never before as pleasant, as it is now. Slaw, you have one very, very satisfied customer here :)

 

Спасибо.:thumbup: