F1 Simulator using LFS

[screenracer]

This group is asking for donations to continue the development of a hydrolic driven F1 simulator. When I first saw it, I was impressed. After about a minute into the video, I recognized the sounds and brake patten. They are racing on the Blackwood circuit using LFS to drive the program.

I don't know what to think... I think that LFS should have been mentioned as the program. That video has over 400,000 views. That would have been some great advertising!

Something interesting to add... In the video, the people are talking in French. They are asking for donation to continue the project, the youtube account is registered to someone in the United States. Sounds kinda Dirty to me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF_dnGVbXkM

[Hahmo]

Very nice indeed. Hope to get that kind of a seat someday :shy:

[azza14]

This group is asking for donations to continue the development of a hydrolic driven F1 simulator. When I first saw it, I was impressed. After about a minute into the video, I recognized the sounds and brake patten. They are racing on the Blackwood circuit using LFS to drive the program.

I don't know what to think... I think that LFS should have been mentioned as the program. That video has over 400,000 views. That would have been some great advertising!

Something interesting to add... In the video, the people are talking in French. They are asking for donation to continue the project, the youtube account is registered to someone in the United States. Sounds kinda Dirty to me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF_dnGVbXkM


+1 to that! :smileypul
If i was on that machine, id definatly throw up lols :nod:

[Mysho]

In the video, the people are talking in French.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZF_dnGVbXkM

They're speaking Czech and they're only rumouring about the driver and LFS. There already is a provider of this in Czech Republic called Force Dynamics 301.
(http://301.cz)

[Flame CZE]

"Look how he's driving... it's damn Schumacher" :D:D
Anyway, great simulation machine :)

[w126]

It seems the device is produced by this Czech company: http://www.motion-sim.com/

The copy of the video you linked to and the donation links look very fishy indeed.

[bunder9999]

perisoft (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=16033) also makes motion simulators. :thumbsup:

[lukelfs]

Waiting for him to hit red barriers and watch him fly out of the machine lool :razz:

Still it looks great, but abit too extreme?

[titanLS]

It looks fun, and almost as dangerous as real racing if certain parts fail...

[OmniMoAK]

It was in engadget

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/10/motion-sim-4dof-racing-simulator-will-take-your-retirement-fund/

and ForceDynamics beat them to it
http://www.force-dynamics.com/

Though this site has some nice stuff, better motion than frex at less cost
http://www.simxperience.com/

[bunder9999]

and ForceDynamics beat them to it
http://www.force-dynamics.com/

those are perisoft's chairs. :thumbsup:

[DoC_uk]

Waiting for him to hit red barriers and watch him fly out of the machine lool :razz:?



A valid point i think ... also post race crashers ...


However ...it does look fun , fast also , I want 1 !!!

[screenracer]

It was in engadget

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/10/motion-sim-4dof-racing-simulator-will-take-your-retirement-fund/

and ForceDynamics beat them to it
http://www.force-dynamics.com/

Though this site has some nice stuff, better motion than frex at less cost
http://www.simxperience.com/

Great links, you will find that the original creator of that video is Motion-Sim.com (http://www.motion-sim.com/) I contacted the author and suggested they file a copy right infringement on that user. I hate to see hard work stolen like this...

[AndRand]

It was in engadget

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/10/motion-sim-4dof-racing-simulator-will-take-your-retirement-fund/

and ForceDynamics beat them to it
http://www.force-dynamics.com/

Though this site has some nice stuff, better motion than frex at less cost
http://www.simxperience.com/
it looks that LFS comes with all three :thumbsup:

[AudiBG]

Look very cool, but can't get the idea of this big moving up - down - left - right ...

It is OK, but I think that they shoud make the moving shorter - now it is like riding a stunt motorbike ..

Sometimes his legs was on the level on his head !? :shrug:

Otherwise, It is pretty good for us that they use LFS in this simulation! :thumb:

[lamerr]

This dude cant drive for shit, what a noob lol

[z-ro 8]

Look very cool, but can't get the idea of this big moving up - down - left - right ...

It is OK, but I think that they shoud make the moving shorter - now it is like riding a stunt motorbike ..

Sometimes his legs was on the level on his head !? :shrug:

Otherwise, It is pretty good for us that they use LFS in this simulation! :thumb:

the extreme movements are simply to use your own bodyweight to generate g-forces...
ideally, you would want to use it in a dark room, so as not to have any visual reference points other than the screen itself.

ever hop in a carnival ride that lets you spin forward freely? think about what you feel as it pauses to let others on....

[screenracer]

the extreme movements are simply to use your own bodyweight to generate g-forces...
ideally, you would want to use it in a dark room, so as not to have any visual reference points other than the screen itself.

ever hop in a carnival ride that lets you spin forward freely? think about what you feel as it pauses to let others on....

Correct, the idea is the earth is always generating "1g". Sitting or standing straight up you don't feel it as your body is designed to hold it's self up. But when you are tipped back, it simulates the felling of the g-force by tipping you back. It might look over done, but I think that a F1 car can generate more then 1g of force on turns and acceleration.

[z-ro 8]

i thought i read about the FD 401 (http://www.force-dynamics.com/401/)it can generate up to 4g's using your own weight....

[amp88]

A valid point i think ... also post race crashers ...

Obviously from a health and safety point of view (and common sense) there are limits on the acceleration. If the software sees an accelerative force of 30Gs (for example in the event of a crash) the actual movement will be limited to a more safe level.

[AtomAnt]

Obviously from a health and safety point of view (and common sense) there are limits on the acceleration. If the software sees an accelerative force of 30Gs (for example in the event of a crash) the actual movement will be limited to a more safe level.

What he said except for accelerative no such word .


AAnt

[Nitrous13270]

i thought i read about the FD 401 (http://www.force-dynamics.com/401/)it can generate up to 4g's using your own weight....

Its possible, but the amount of time you'll feel that 4 g's will be less than a second. The only way for that machine to simulate 4 g's is to accelerate the person at 39.2 meters per second per second (130 feet/s^2). If you want to simulate 4 g's of lateral g's for let's say - 2 seconds, you'll need 78 meters (85.3 yards) of free space for the seat to move. You'll be feeling something close to 1g most of time.

An alternative to that would be strapping yourself to a centrifuge, which could easily generate 4g's of centripetal force for a long time - but it has to be spinning at a ludicrous speed.

[-NightFly-]

reading comments of that video on youtube made my head hurt.

[perisoft]

David from Force Dynamics here... these guys aren't authorized by us, and we didn't give them permission to use our design elements in their machine.

The chances of them independently developing everything from basic geometry to strut design to the strut mounts to screen position, rotation axis center, and the stainless steel drive track around the machine, are... small. Unfortunately there isn't a lot we can do about it except try to make sure people know what's really going on.

I find it somewhat ironic that someone passed off their video as his own work, without asking, and is trying to make money from it in an entirely different country!

[N15m0]

They're speaking Czech and they're only rumouring about the driver and LFS. There already is a provider of this in Czech Republic called Force Dynamics 301.
(http://301.cz)


Yes they are czech, but it is not fd 301. It is theyr own project :)

[aaltomar]

The chances of them independently developing everything from basic geometry to strut design to the strut mounts to screen position, rotation axis center, and the stainless steel drive track around the machine, are... small. Unfortunately there isn't a lot we can do about it except try to make sure people know what's really going on.

To me it seems that they have more movement in the Z-axis (up and down) compared to 401.

To me the design seems to be legit, while of course it's possible that they have been influenced by your design. By their website it looks like it was first designed to be a platform for a flight-sim. They are also manufacturing much of their electrical parts "The range of products include microprocessor based controling devices, compact industrial computers, converters for serial communication, converters for electronics signals, accessories, as well as controlling and regulating systems, including SW.", so it's not simply a "carbon copy".

http://www.motion-sim.com/about/
"The full motion platform was created on the bases of the development for the 737NG project www.737ng.cz (http://www.737ng.cz/) Its development took almost 2 years to reach the pre-serial production stage.

After a line of experiments, a concept using non-synchonous motors and cogged belt gearing was used. It was neccessary to work out a way to use these electromotors as servo drivers, especially at low RPM settings. In the end, a solution was found using intelligent converters and a specially designed control system. The result is an almost noiseless, compact platform which is able to operate without any special requirments."

Is the Force-Dynamics design identical to what's been explained above?

[perisoft]

To me it seems that they have more movement in the Z-axis (up and down) compared to 401.


Hard to say from the video. They might have a bit more strut travel, but the cuing has a huge effect on what you see going on. They seem to be pegging the limits of the struts on almost every corner, which isn't necessarily what you want. If you use the whole travel of the platform in normal circumstances, then the cuing goes horribly wrong when things are a little beyond normal - think turning your amp up too high. It's louder, but not necessarily better.


To me the design seems to be legit, while of course it's possible that they have been influenced by your design. By their website it looks like it was first designed to be a platform for a flight-sim. They are also manufacturing much of their electrical parts "The range of products include microprocessor based controling devices, compact industrial computers, converters for serial communication, converters for electronics signals, accessories, as well as controlling and regulating systems, including SW.", so it's not simply a "carbon copy".
No, definitely not - the 'moving group' is quite different, for one. There are a lot of little differences. And it looks like they're rolling their own servo control system, which is ballsy. But the basic geometry of the 301/401 is unique among motion system manufacturers; in particular I've never see anyone using a strut design which provides lateral stability the same way ours do.

If you do a quick look back and forth here (http://files.motion-sim.com/system_preview_detail_200000043-6a1146b0b2-public/motion-sim4.jpg) and here (http://www.force-dynamics.com/media/gallery/401-topdown.jpg), you can see a few other similarities - the use of clamp collars to anchor the tops of the struts, the 'clevis leg' mount point for the strut-to-mount joint, and most remarkably, the stainless steel track, screw-mounted every 10 degrees or so, for the r-axis drive wheel, complete with wear line where the wheels go!

Theirs is also red and grey. ;)

So, yeah, all of those things together could have been developed independently, but it seems quite unlikely.


After a line of experiments, a concept using non-synchonous motors and cogged belt gearing was used. It was neccessary to work out a way to use these electromotors as servo drivers, especially at low RPM settings. In the end, a solution was found using intelligent converters and a specially designed control system. The result is an almost noiseless, compact platform which is able to operate without any special requirments."

Is the Force-Dynamics design identical to what's been explained above?No, of course it's not identical. And they may well have experimented with motion systems slung inside the struts before. But their '401' is so similar to ours that people are confusing them on a regular basis. Except they're saying 'slightly dangerous-looking' and 'needs refinement' about the motion-sim simulator. I'm not terribly pleased with the idea of people thinking, "That thing from Force Dynamics looks dangerous and rickety", and I've already seen it happening.

The major difference appears to be, as I said above, that it seems that their servo control system is their own. We went with an off-the-shelf servo control system from Galil and MCG motors because it's very difficult to make a powerful, reliable, high performance servo system. You're competing with people who make tens of thousands of the things; it's a bit like building a race car and trying to save money by making your own tires.

You can save money if you do it yourself, but there's significant risk involved if you don't get your specs dead on, and we felt it wasn't worth it given the relatively small amount we'd save percentage-wise.

The motion-sim guys tell me that they'd never even heard of us before I contacted them. Given the similarities between the products in a broad, broad range of disparate areas, I find that difficult to believe. I'm personally less inclined to be charitable than if they had just come out and said, "Yeah, you inspired us but, we think we should be able to sell these things anyway."

[screenracer]

Its great to see my first post has generated such a good conversion.

To everyone who works to create these devices, my hats off to you and your amazing effort. Regardless of similarities or tech, you all have the same goal to create something very special. :thumb: Thank you to all of you for your dedication.

But to bring it back full circle a bit, I contacted the original creator of the posted video and suggested they file a copy right infringement with youtube ASAP. This group is trying to scam people into donating to them on something that so blatantly stolen.

[Becky Rose]

The first thing I'll say to you Perisoft is that ideas are free. You can even sign up to daily emails of ideas (if memory serves right one such list is ideaaday.com but I'm on my phone and can't easily check URL). My point being that an idea in itself isn't worth any money.

I am more than happy to impart what I have learned about ecommerce (which is a reasonable amount) and I'd do it for free. It costs me nothing to do. The ideas and knowledge i've accrued in my job is in itself worthless. (although I mention this as an example, if you do want to know some stuff I'll happily do it), of course if you want me to use my skills to help you - then that's where I start charging. I've always shared my methods, knowledge and skills as a programmer, and in the past I've even sent product concepts to companies with no copyright just because I thought the idea was cool (some even became real products, but if I said which you'd call me a right geek lolz).

Aside from patents, which are in my view a ridiculous system designed to benefit the rich, and slightly unworkable since China ignores them, there is no protection for ideas.

To be sucessful as a manufacturer you need a good product, but to market it sucessfully you need an edge. Calling your product dangerous is as good as halving the price, because it makes the product remarkable: A remarkable product is any product that causes someone to remark about it. Being remarkable is easy, you take something to the limit, and push it that little bit further - it's a concept called Edgecraft (If interested I'd recommend Reading Free Prize Inside by Seth Godin. It's a remarkable book. It's got a free prize inside...).

The point I'm making is not to begrudge this other company, as otherwise the only remarkable thing anyone will remember about Force Dynamics is something about toys and prams, but to simply beat them by being more remarkable. Make it your you tube video that is next posted on these forums, make your next innovation so far on the edge of one aspect or another that we all talk about it. Can the everyday simmer afford or have space for a motion platform? Why not. Can a motion platform spin through 360 degrees? Why not. Can a motion platform pack into a box under my desk? Why not. All these things are from edge thinking, whilst I wore his paragraph. Sure half the ideas are implausable (unless you dare to imagine), but ou can have them for ... Free ;)

[AndRand]

If you do a quick look back and forth here (http://files.motion-sim.com/system_preview_detail_200000043-6a1146b0b2-public/motion-sim4.jpg) and here (http://www.force-dynamics.com/media/gallery/401-topdown.jpg), you can see a few other similarities - the use of clamp collars to anchor the tops of the struts, the 'clevis leg' mount point for the strut-to-mount joint, and most remarkably, the stainless steel track, screw-mounted every 10 degrees or so, for the r-axis drive wheel, complete with wear line where the wheels go!

David, sorry to say, but the similarities you described and I can see are very general: using struts and circular turning base for yaw. I wouldnt be surprised if that is the optimal layout - IMO the rest are the differences between producers of the type of products.

btw. I know you got Polish roots, so greetz from Poland. btw2: I was trying to convince Pawel Tomczyk to run an event company for couple (3-4) of FDs but Polish market is too small and not sim-educated :tilt: for that kind of business :shrug: