1. Do not share user accounts! Any account that is shared by another person will be blocked and closed. This means: we will close not only the account that is shared, but also the main account of the user who uses another person's account. We have the ability to detect account sharing, so please do not try to cheat the system. This action will take place on 04/18/2023. Read all forum rules.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. For downloading SimTools plugins you need a Download Package. Get it with virtual coins that you receive for forum activity or Buy Download Package - We have a zero Spam tolerance so read our forum rules first.

    Buy Now a Download Plan!
  3. Do not try to cheat our system and do not post an unnecessary amount of useless posts only to earn credits here. We have a zero spam tolerance policy and this will cause a ban of your user account. Otherwise we wish you a pleasant stay here! Read the forum rules
  4. We have a few rules which you need to read and accept before posting anything here! Following these rules will keep the forum clean and your stay pleasant. Do not follow these rules can lead to permanent exclusion from this website: Read the forum rules.
    Are you a company? Read our company rules

Question 3 DOF Seat mover concept stage

Discussion in 'DIY Motion Simulator Projects' started by 3DSensory, Apr 20, 2020.

  1. 3DSensory

    3DSensory New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2020
    Messages:
    4
    Balance:
    44Coins
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Hi all

    I’d like to build my own sim. It would mainly be a car racing sim, but I’d like it to be modestly capable as a flight sim to.

    My idea is for a seat mover design like the CXC but with an extra actuator on the front to give three axes of movement. See below

    First of all, I’m seeking feedback on this general concept before proceeding to build a scale model.

    I'm unsure of the actuator types, I've drawn two linear actuators on the back like the CXC and a lever type actuator on the front. Is it possible to mix the two types?

    Thanks for your feedback, big or small, as to whether this is a design worth pursuing.


    upload_2020-4-20_20-34-42.png
  2. noorbeast

    noorbeast VR Tassie Devil Staff Member Moderator Race Director

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    20,549
    Occupation:
    Innovative tech specialist for NGOs
    Location:
    St Helens, Tasmania, Australia
    Balance:
    145,112Coins
    Ratings:
    +10,778 / 52 / -2
    My Motion Simulator:
    3DOF, DC motor, JRK
    How will it maintain equal movement geometry between the front and rear actuators?
  3. 3DSensory

    3DSensory New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2020
    Messages:
    4
    Balance:
    44Coins
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Hi Noorbeast, thanks for your question, It's a good one and honestly I'm not sure!

    Could the software handle this? using ratios of lever arms and such
  4. noorbeast

    noorbeast VR Tassie Devil Staff Member Moderator Race Director

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    20,549
    Occupation:
    Innovative tech specialist for NGOs
    Location:
    St Helens, Tasmania, Australia
    Balance:
    145,112Coins
    Ratings:
    +10,778 / 52 / -2
    My Motion Simulator:
    3DOF, DC motor, JRK
    I guess you could play around with axis limiting to try have a somewhat even actuator range, or restrict the front axis to just surge and pitch, but it would be better to design it as a traditional 3DOF in the first place.
  5. 3DSensory

    3DSensory New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2020
    Messages:
    4
    Balance:
    44Coins
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Okay so by the sounds of it mounting the actuators up high like the CXC wouldnt really give any advantage in this case because I'd have to dial them down to match the front actuator, hence a traditional 3 dof design would be better?
  6. 3DSensory

    3DSensory New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2020
    Messages:
    4
    Balance:
    44Coins
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I see, so having the additional mass of the seat unsupported in this design effectively cancels out the mechanical advantage of the mounting up high.

    How about shifting the 3rd actuator position back to where the uni balance point would usually be located? In this case the full weight of the seat is supported by the 3rd actuator, therefore providing full mechanical advantage to the two actuators mounted high on the seat, yet maintaining vertical axis movement. In my mind vertical axis movement seems like it is important to a flight sim, is that actually the case?

    If this idea also doesn't stack up, i'd be split between a traditional 3DOF and a CXC style 2DOF. Which would give the best compromise for a 3/4 car sim 1/4 flight sim?