Tactile Immersion - Upgrade to 6 Transducers

[Ceolmor]

This thread is for anyone who is thinking of installing 6 transducers to their sim rig, either from scratch or as an upgrade.

My existing setup was two Buttkickers Advances bolted to a 80/20 rig, one attached under the pedals and one under the seat, both powered by a single Behringer iNuke 1000DSP. For anyone interested in my journey to that point, see the thread Getting into Tactile Immersion - Help Please?

Recently, an opportunity arose to purchase 2x Buttkicker Advances; 1x Buttkicker LFE; 1x Clark TST239; 2x Behringer iNuke 3000DSP; & an assortment of cables.

But before starting, firstly my thanks to @Mr Latte, without whose expertise and willingness to share that expertise none of this would be possible, and thanks to @signman for the opportunity, and to whom I wish all the best in his future ventures.

The plan is:

• Two Buttkicker Advances one either side of the seat, in 'Chassis' mode;
• Two Buttkicker Advances, one to the left and one to the right underneath the pedals, in 'Chassis' mode;
• One Buttkicker LFE central under the seat in 'Dual Role' mode.
• One TST239 attached somewhere for the seat, to work with the LFE in 'Dual Role.'

So, initially I spent quite a bit of time working out how I would attach the transducers and how to wire everything up.

My existing setup had the seat, pedals and Buttkickers isolated from the 80/20 rig using two H shaped 5mm mild steel plates. I wanted to continue this arrangement for (hopefully) best results.

For the seat arrangement I sourced two new 5mm aluminium plates for the BK Advances either side of the seat.

I bolted together the central H plate, two new outer aluminium plates and two seat brackets to create a complete platform to which to attach the Buttkickers and seat.

BKA either side, LFE central underneath.

The seat arrangement bolted to the rig. The 4 isolators results in the seat/Buttkicker section and 80/20 rig being separated from one another. Note a homemade rubber washers at the top of the bolt holding the plate to the 80/20 profile to help reduce the vibration travelling to the rig. On initial testing this is all working quite well.

The pedal area has been more problematic.

The H shape plate under the pedals have been cut in half to create two T shape plates onto which to bolt each BK Advance. This is to reduce the signal from the left travelling to the right, and vice versa.

Initially, I bolted the pedal section to the 80/20 profile via 4 isolators, similar to the photo below.

This should again isolate the pedal section from the 80/20 rig. However, on initial testing I was getting very little vibration in the pedal area, and if I whacked up the gain I would get excessive piston pang.

My theory is that the brackets which hold the Heusinkveld Pro pedal aluminium baseplate are not rigid enough to hold the cantilevered steel plates and Buttkickers below, sitting purely on a rather spongy isolator.

This results in too much movement and flex when the Buttkickers vibrate, reducing significantly the amount of vibration that actually makes its way into the pedals and the base plate.

Therefore, I have changed it so that for now I have bolted the steel plates directly bolted to the 80/20 rig, with no isolation.

Initial testing shows that this gives better vibration. Although there is a bit more bleed of the vibration into the rig, it is not too bad, and certainly not as bad as the piston pang I was getting before. But this is a temporary solution and I will have to revisit this area later.

Currently, the whole setup looks like this.

The TST239 is on the back burner (and remains in its box) until I get the above sorted and work out how best to attach the last transducer. So okay, yes, at the moment it is an upgrade to 5 transducers!

Future episodes include, "Initial Testing" and "Adding the 6th transducer."

Any comments, suggestions or questions will be gratefully received.

 

[Hiro Abe]

This is a rather timely thread. I'm working on upgrading my 2 unit set-up to a 4 unit. I have a 3/4" ply heel deck that has worked really nicely with the 1 ADX mounted directly underneath. I am replacing that heel deck with another 3/4" ply but smaller and more isolated. It will be a bit wider to house 2 ADX for L/R effects and a TS209 in the middle. I then have my LFE mounted under my seat which is also going thru a bit of a transition to employ some isolation.

It will be interesting to compare notes on the improvements we feel but from rather different solutions.

I'm scratching my head a bit on the SSW waveform end of things and jumping into 6 channels. I've been reviewing Andre's guide and some of the info provided by Rod but still working on putting 2 and 2 together when I'm sitting in front of Audacity. I'm going to be playing with some interesting combinations of effects per shaker so I need to get proficient at working with multiple channels. The 2 channel stuff was easy.

 

[Balroque]

Hello Ceomar
great progress, Im glad to see your solution for seat part of the rig as I'm planning almost identical thing and looking forward to hear from you , how happy you are with it or if any more adjustments will be necessary

With pedals, look bellow for pictures as again Im in quite similar situation. I designed new plate with heel plate for HE pedals from aluminium and isolate it from the rig. And attach butt kickers straight to this plate, as it will be bigger then original HE plate. I also made plate for butt kickers, which is ready to mount LFE, Advanced, mini LFE, TST and ADX

 

[Ceolmor]

This is a rather timely thread........
It will be interesting to compare notes on the improvements we feel but from rather different solutions.........
I'm scratching my head a bit on the SSW waveform end of things ..........

I'll keep you updated on my progress and findings. I spent tonight cutting, copying and pasting wav. files in Audacity to direct effects to specific shakers, in particular the LFE.

 

[Ceolmor]

Hello Ceomar
great progress, Im glad to see your solution for seat part of the rig as I'm planning almost identical thing and looking forward to hear from you , how happy you are with it or if any more adjustments will be necessary

With pedals, look bellow for pictures as again Im in quite similar situation. I designed new plate with heel plate for HE pedals from aluminium and isolate it from the rig. And attach butt kickers straight to this plate, as it will be bigger then original HE plate. I also made plate for butt kickers, which is ready to mount LFE, Advanced, mini LFE, TST and ADX
View attachment 249627 View attachment 249628 View attachment 249629 View attachment 249631 View attachment 249632

Genius, pure genius.

I too have been coming to the conclusion that for best results the Buttkickers need to be bolted direct to the HE baseplate, and your brilliant custom baseplate would certainly achieve that. Will that be 10mm aluminium? The downside might be limited stereo separation between left and right Buttkickers.

So far, the vibration I am getting through the seat is good. But for all the plates and bolts, my seat is still reliant upon the seat brackets and bolts at the side to transfer the vibration into the fibreglass seat.

 

[Balroque]

yes 10mm alu plate for pedals plate

I agree with limited stereo separation, but I can't see any other way around, unless to split the base for pedals in two with some mid rubber connection and made one butt kicker connected to clutch and break and other to throttle.

 

[Ceolmor]

@Balroque did you consider attaching the plates holding the Buttkickers directly to your existing HE pedal baseplate?

It seems to me that if we move the supporting brackets to the inner positions underneath the baseplate, this would free up the outermost slots on the baseplate to which to attach plates underneath the outside edges. The bolts for the Buttkicker plates could be shared with the bolts for the outside edge of the throttle and clutch above.

This would potentially have the added benefit of the throttle and clutch pedals being directly bolted to the plates holding the Buttkickers which might increase the vibration through them, and add to the stereo effect.

 

[Balroque]

@Ceomar thats a good idea, it is worth to try. Im not sure the buttkickers would fit upside down into main frame, when to mount them on to the edge of HE plate.
Are you going to try?

 

[Ceolmor]

Yes, I am going to see if this works, although not until next week, and report back. I will have the Buttkickers sitting upright, not upside down.

 

[Mr Latte]

Nice to see this thread and in such detail, excellent.....
Congratulate you advancing to multichannel, sad to see @signman come away from all this and him spend so much time towards a build, then it never get fully implemented and in what may of been a short 6 months seems he has then sold it off with lots of his highend hardware. I think this hobby can have 2 tiers of people, those that seek high-end hardware buy the best and want to quickly have it all put together as a working solution. Then those that seek more to progress or modify a build as part of the hobby/challenge and expand it with sometimes excellent thought, discussion, interaction and craft.


So with a cuppa in hand lets look at things and where you are with this, what you've implemented and what may be considered. Noticed you isolated the bolts as well, nice......

In different threads, quite a bit of discussion has been happening regards the noise/vibration suppression. Some chat and examples for different materials, potential solutions for isolation etc.

I have highlighted the ability to use apps on 2 phones or tablet combos to have one showing vibration on the frame/section and another beneath after the "isolation/dampening" of (options/layers being applied). This is not scientifically accurate but is an example of tools that may help to determine (via a visual representation) how well an isolation solution is working. We can spend into the thousands to have access to proper professional/industrial vibration measuring equipment. I had even looked at some options on ebay but still I didnt want to chance £100 - £200 or more on something that may not really bring much additional benefits.

Isolation Waste Of Time Money?
To me, this is an area 8020 users should be concentrating on to help determine what materials or combos work well and if we find different levels of solutions needed with the more powerful tactile. If we use a typical small isolator what % or level of effect is this bringing?

This may depend on the installation and the tactile used. It may be sufficient with smaller tactile but what happens if we greatly increase the level of tactile energy and in particular not just wattage but the energy within the low-frequency range, how sufficient then is the same solution?

This has been raised before, people can mount directly to the 8020 and still get plenty of vibration. Mr Latte (thats me lol) is not suggesting isolation must always be used.

Pedal Example:
We have to take into account how/where the tactile travels from the point of installation to the point of detection for the desired body region. If we have a plate with the unit attached but then only small contact points to another material/platform then surely the delivery of the tactile flowing into that is reduced as it is channeled by the size or method the two materials/sections are connected.



What I see in this is a good plate being wasted, as the connection points to the pedal deck greatly limit the energy and path the tactile is funneled. Yet the bottom of the plate (even with basic isolators) is likely going to have much more energy go below than above. Any horizontal 8020 cross-section between the left/right units is then going to create an active bridge or circuit for the left/right channels to potentially mix.


Without the usage of apps/phones/tablts. An easy test here is a glass of water placed on the left main beam of the cockpit chassis and do frequency tests on the "right hand side" BK Advance on the pedal section. Place another glass on the pedal plate and compare to possibly help determine how the vibration is traveling. If it were me I would seek to use some form of "visual" indicator to help test what you are implementing. My query is the level of "isolation" the used implementation is offering as I feel it is not sustaining enough of the energy and the current plate is not having proper contact with the pedal section


I am not an engineer, but in my view, the energy will flow more where it has less resistance or indeed can freely move than be funneled to travel through small points or areas isolation is used. If the connection surface of one area is much greater than another, how do we assume the majority of tactile energy will flow. If we then have a connecting section that has L/R tactile then surely this energy from more than one unit flows in a circuit of all the connected sections freely where it can? This will mix in some cases effects that are meant to be positioned for the left to the right and vice versa. Bumps are not the only case scenario here, they are in most cases a quick or repetitive sensation. However if looking at effects briefly then "Lateral G" is very much an L/R stereo operational based effect that can be operational for multiple seconds during a corner. In my view we should want to ensure such is properly sustained or maintained correctly in a rig to help highlight the directional energy it places with our steering input.

Direct Mounting
What we do not achieve in having this is to control the flow or determine the path and containment of the energy from the tactile. We also loose how L/R tactile may be kept separated as it is now blended with channel crosstalk (left effects felt on right & right effects felt on left). Some may not even mind, they don't really care they just go by how strong their tactile feels as to how good it may be. However for me this a real bugbear, I want the channel purity of stereo maintained, I want to increase the channel detail as much as possible and yes I also want plenty of power but not at the cost of channel separation or frequency detail. I have put a lot of effort into the effects creation I have with SSW. So I want to feel each effects own unique character, to maintain this detail and importantly have it maintained in the body region it is meant to be detected or channel it originates from.


I have ideas, some may be potential solutions. I have recommendations but these all come by a requirement of testing and placing faith that a good working solution is possible.

For pedals, forget the idea of a single platform for all 3 pedals. Consider please discussing how to divide up the pedals. You can have the clutch pedal mounted to a section that connects directly to the BKA left plate and then can use improved isolation beneath. Likewise have this applied for the throttle pedal on the right for the right tactile. The brake pedal can have its own mounting section but maintain good separation from the left/right frame structures. We can allow/control some degree of channel blending in the used top plate for the pedals but rely on a build configuration that helps reduce this issue with the main 8020 frame.

@Magiashkii partially did this with his pedals but I see room for improvement.
These are very early ideas shared in some cases with people in the past. We can determine with the 8020 structure to seperate the pedals but then control and enable some degree of channel blending. My own early attempts with this were successful in a few test builds (using my steel tubing). It can work to improve stereo separation and incorporate individual engine tactile to work over the pedal base. The pedals themselves can be installed on individual platforms and isolated seperately. Then via a foot/base surround plate enable some level of channel blending and incorporate the center channel for engine etc if it is desired to solely have it seperated from the stereo channels. In my case, I believe this is what I will do but I believe I can install 6 tactile to a pedal section (3x dual role sets) therefore guys we should be able to install 3 and bring controlled stereo seperation to individual L/R pedals stems but also usage of a central channel to operate over the whole pedal base. Usage of the pedal stems for toes and pedal base for heel is key.


Some old ideas, early thoughts on this....
More discussion is needed if interest in such is being considered.
From what I see, nobody is properly trying to get the most out of their pedal tactile regards the best implementation of the channels. Most are relying on a typical pedal plate for all units to be installed onto. We can improve on this, no question,

 

[Hiro Abe]

Question: Why would you want complete L/R separation? If you feel a bump, say, on the left - the concentration of the effect is on the left but you feel it to a lesser degree on your right as well. I guess I'm equating it to listening to music via headphones and the function of crossfeed. When you are listening to an orchestra both ears hear the music but you know the strings are to your left and the percussion is to your right. Crossfeed tries to mimic this by bleeding each channel into the other.

I'm still working on my build but I fully expect that when the left shaker is activated, I will feel the concentration of that effect on the left but also know that my entire heel platform is going to be affected and will also feel it to a lesser degree on my right. In my mind, that's a more realistic response, no?

 

[Mr Latte]

Question: Why would you want complete L/R separation? If you feel a bump, say, on the left - the concentration of the effect is on the left but you feel it to a lesser degree on your right as well. I guess I'm equating it to listening to music via headphones and the function of crossfeed. When you are listening to an orchestra both ears hear the music but you know the strings are to your left and the percussion is to your right. Crossfeed tries to mimic this by bleeding each channel into the other.

I'm still working on my build but I fully expect that when the left shaker is activated, I will feel the concentration of that effect on the left but also know that my entire heel platform is going to be affected and will also feel it to a lesser degree on my right. In my mind, that's a more realistic response, no?

This is what I am saying in trying to control the crosstalk between the channels.
Having no control applied then encourages oversaturation of both defeating the channel positioning.

Channel positioning combines with what we see happening within the sim, what we hear from the audio effects and what our steering inputs are. Its all relative in our perception/brain to heightening the stereo perception or placement of an event (kerb/bumps) or load sensation on the main axis. In tactile if we do this then we are increasing the positional immersion of moving the user by vibration and not physical motion. So the effects that are "G" related are important here perhaps even more than just suspension related to individual wheels.

Stereo in music and how the brain perceives its positioning is not the same as two channels with mixed L/R into dual mono on both ears. A motion rig that has the telemetry data values conerted into motion, moves the rig in a specific way or direction. Forward/aft and left and right. We can convert this into strong tactile for acceleration at specific channels or sections. So the rear, dipping under acceleration, ot at the front under brake loads, and lateral G for the steering, cornering. Why do you think my own testing has lead me to use multiple body regions to apply and increase the detection of the stereo placement, but both for left-right and front-back having huge energy potential with low frequencies. For me thus far it increases the immersion and involvement with what the car's handling is doing.

SSW has an issue with bump placement to some extents. This may be improved in the way Andre is using the telemetry data or the data that he does use. He seeks more accurate representation of individual wheels. Maybe only for specific effects he can do this. Simvibe also can have too much sensitivity applied and encourage channel crosstalk/leakage. I visually monitored this first hand in the past.

 

[Hiro Abe]

Thanks, Rod. Makes sense. Hmmm... might need to reconfigure my heel deck a bit.

 

[Mr Latte]

Thanks, Rod. Makes sense. Hmmm... might need to reconfigure my heel deck a bit.

My own seat section is in works, first before my pedals so I am not going to be able to show yet what I will do on my own build. It will to some extents mimic what I do in the seat as I combine stereo with a central channel.

This seat section I have is proving to be expensive, while components for it have been gathering and some purchased long ago. Im looking at about £700 for the seat support/frame/isolation etc. The isolation in particular for the seat uses doubled up T-300 ($60 each) so 8 of these are supporting the seat and will bring some level of movement that I believe helps the vibrational energy rather than perhaps a fully tightened down section with perhaps no mechanical leverage as it is a solid mass.
I am willing to expect the tactile to still easily travel through all this as in my case with the units used and the number of them. Yet it is the best solution I have come up with for the primary isolation.

Have showed a sample of this with additional pads top/bottom on the T-300 dual isolators.
My rigs main/lower frame will be supported by 5x Mason springs (another £300) seen below as the secondary isolation to do my best in reducing noise traveling into below rooms. I can tighten these to control/limit the movement of the main rig. Indeed my own tactile is extreme but I see this requiring also an extreme solution for the isolation and control of the vibrations.

I am not expecting others to go to such levels but I do think experimentation and testing is needed to determine what level of isolation is adequate for say a BK Advance. I just do not think a single T100 or cheapo rubber grommet from ebay or similar rubber solution is enough. Layers or multiple things can be applied and I think these pads I have shown, discussed in other threads are a good combo to consider with dynamat or other vibration materials and usind in conjunction with specific rubber isolators.




Went wih these aluminum box length sections for top/bottom of my isolation that are going to support my steel tubing and seat. These are on the left/right sides maintaining separation being 5" x 2"x and 4mm thick. I plan to have the BK Concert make contact primarily underneath the seat from the center and it extend to a contact point for lower spine. The stereo channel tactile will have contact points under the knees, go the full length of the seat underside frame, then extend to forearms and also contact points at the back of the seat to left/right shoulders. I haven't seen a build attempt anything like this before but its what my own experimentation has lead to.

I hope to share this soon but its still going to take time to purchase the last of the materials, the build I have it mainly worked out and done previous testing with unit positioning. I purchased the official BK steel plates for dual BK LFE and BK Concert. I do have concerns with reverb and the alu box sections but will use dampening and vibration control materials others have. What I hope is that I learn with the process and help to better understand and share this for others to use multiple layers of isolation materials/solutions and not just the typical rubber isolator expected to do miracles. We are talking high levels of vibration with these big units guys I think they require adequate solutions or ideas to be combined and trialed or tested.

Glasses of water at the ready...

 

[Hiro Abe]

@Mr Latte - I, for one, am immensely interested in your project. It looks/sounds like it will be epic and will make for an awesome thread!

 

[Mr Latte]

@Mr Latte - I, for one, am immensely interested in your project. It looks/sounds like it will be epic and will make for an awesome thread!

Thanks and yes perhaps, I am limited with what funds I have as my circumstances are not what they once were. I get frustrated with it taking so long and such extremity I place on the build.

Want to focus on what Rob can do to get good results from his newly acquired tactile. Went over, my own ideas to highlight how the isolation implemented has to match the tactile being used to make it work well.

I think you guys will enjoy the new effects immensely too.
Love these threads were guys get together to discuss or find solutions...
We all may still have different directions or ways we want to do things or apply them and thats fine.

For the record, my own opinions or ideas are not necessarily golden.

 

[Balroque]

Some old ideas, early thoughts on this....
More discussion is needed if interest in such is being considered.
From what I see, nobody is properly trying to get the most out of their pedal tactile regards the best implementation of the channels. Most are relying on a typical pedal plate for all units to be installed onto. We can improve on this, no question

This is what I was talking about I like this idea

 

[Balroque]

@Ceomar What's the diameter of rubber bobbins you use between 8020 and pedals plate? and what's the hardness

If we would split pedals plate in two pieces, both plates ideally will need four rubber bobbins

 

[Ceolmor]

@Ceomar What's the diameter of rubber bobbins you use between 8020 and pedals plate? and what's the hardness

If we would split pedals plate in two pieces, both plates ideally will need four rubber bobbins

The isolators are Buttkicker RI-4s

50mm diameter by 25mm high. Very spongy. For the reasons mentioned below, yes I think if you use these you would need 1 at each corner of each half plate. But I suspect there are better isolators for the job.

As mentioned in the OP above, I have already removed these from the pedal section for the time being because I suspect that how I had them installed was preventing a lot of vibration reaching the pedals. This, I think, is due to the cantilever arrangement of the plate perched on a spongy isolator, with a small baseplate bracket above. It allows for too much movement, which surely must be wasted energy not transferring to the pedal baseplate.

So for now the BK steel plate is bolted direct to 80/20 profiles below, which prevents so much up/down movement. It is better, but as I already indicated in the OP, I knew that I would need to totally rethink the pedal arrangement. Because everyones setups are unique, you have to experiment, learn and move on.

I agree with @Mr Latte that one of the weak points of my pedal section is the lack of contact area between the shaker and the plate holding the pedals.

Hence I like your idea of bolting the BK metal plates direct to the Heusinkveld Baseplate, whether the standard one or a custom version.

I like the theory of the complete isolation between the 3 pedals as suggested by @Mr Latte (we have talked about this before) but personally I don't intend to go down that route at the moment. I already have enough on my plate [geddit] having gone from 1 shaker to 2 and then 6 in the space of 8 months!

 

[Balroque]

@Ceomar
Draft for two plates Clutch and Break - Throttle for HE Ultimate