do you have any personal feelings towards the asetek motors, do you think they have taken the QR in a positive direction. i suppose its difficult to heap any praise on competitors but i guess the question im asking is do competitors like asetek offer any inspiration for the future, perhaps you can strike a deal for some of their IP? 
A friend of mine ordered the Asetek wheelbase and is in the process of sending it back. It seems that Asetek is recalling some or all of the wheelbases. No idea what the cause is.
Edit:Apparently still a little too early to draw conclusions.
apparently the spring within the QR is a little weak so if you try really hard you can make the wheel pop off the QR and they want to ensure an updated spring is used. they have paused sending wheelbases out until that spring is changed apparently and i guess the ones that are already out in the wild would be eligible for that fix aswell.
1 Like
Now that you mention it, thatās right.
Thatās what my colleague told me last week, that problems were detected here.
i do have my worries i really do, the asetek gear has risk written all over it but from what i can see they are trying to overcome the problems really quickly, and honestly i would have had ZERO interest in them if it wasnt for the fact they had some granite IPā¦ with that i knew they had an incredible starting point and have watched keenly ever since.
Mmm, i think it is a matter of tolerances between wheel side and base side. If no play between them there wouldnāt be any problem with the spring.
In every video i saw of Asetek wheelbase, the space between this parts are larger than SC2 QR
Watched some videos from the latest SimExpo and Asetek wheels (not wheelbases) were quite underwhelming, cheap plastic, sharp edges, not the best comfort. Pretty much everyone commented on that. So interesting QR but Iād wait for partners like Ascher shipping with that option.
Part of the text:
Unless artificially limited in firmware, one might expect slew rate to be directly related to max Nm. And indeed this is roughly true, e.g. how long does each take to reach maximum torque from a standstill?
Sport: 17/4.8=3.5ms
Pro: 25/8=3.1ms
Ultimate: 32/9.5=3.4ms
So all three can theoretically reach their maximum torque in about 3.3 ms. A rapid maximum-force tank-slapper (+max to āmax torque in a few ms) would likely be very difficult to control.
In any event, the actual achievable torque slew rate is dependent on the limits of the motor itself, the wheel-baseās firmware limits, any in the OS, any particular gameās feedback limits, and the weight and diameter of the wheel and button box, whose moment of inertia opposes acceleration.
So another take-away is that, for maximum sensitivity in force-feedback, you should prefer a light-weight and small-diameter wheel.
The figure for the Sport is actually interesting as normally a smaller Lighter weight armature with less Torque delivery tends to be fasterā¦ but by the calculations you have the Pro is actually Faster than both the Sport and the Ultimate)ā¦
āSo another take-away is that, for maximum sensitivity in force-feedback, you should prefer a light-weight and small-diameter wheel.ā
This is probably the best wording for this as it is Not really Fidelity or Detail that you are changing with slew but is more the sensitivity to the changes in the signal and how quickly the unit reacts to those changes.
high slew rate tends to make most game ffb feel too sharp and unrealistic anyway, no steering wheel irl has such sharp and mechanical feelings to them, that is why a lot of ppl suggest slew rates down below 1, so itās a bit of a mute point these youtubers are making which is obviously a point asetek told them to make as they have all said about it
well i dont know if i would agree with that, most steering wheels in real life are basically dead to the touch with no āāforce feedbackāā at all, we all know the reason FFB is exaggerated in games and that is because of the sensations we cant get that we do in real life in order to feel what the cars are doing, We like DDās because they increase minor details lower end wheelbases cant translate even if thats not very realistic its quite desirable. If it was just to be as realistic as possible it could be argued a thrustmaster t300 probably feels closer to your average road car but who wants to hear that.
2 Likes
Slew rate explains/informs about the maximum change possible per a time period. Itās more about dynamic paired with precision. Together with correct settings itās part of the quality.
Not really. It just doesnāt feel right. May be if quality of the signal is bad it can serve as some band aid, but I cannot comment first hand on that as donāt use all sims under the sun.
Itās just another tool and should be applied only where warranted.
I am not aware of such that smaller motors would be any faster. The comparison from Clayreggazioni is confusing / mileading. The time to achieve a certain setpoing of torque should be fixed to same target Nm to make a comparison between units and not use the highest torque that a servo motor can produce.
However, I must say that having a servo motor being able to produce forexample 8 Nm/ms means that the torque output can change with a rate of 8000 Newton meters per second. It is a lot. Whether having higher slew rate than that equeates more realistic sim racing experience, to that I have my reserved opinion that likely not.
With that said, what in your opinion then makes the simucube 2 ultimate superior to the pro and sport? the slew rate being the biggest difference on paper besides outright torque.
How could it be that a different manufacturer comes to a different conclusion on the slew rate of your motors than yourselves? is it actually possible to test differently to come to different outcomes? apparently in asetek testing they came to the conclusion the simucube 2 pro outputs 6.3nm/ms.
Thanks for your input.
Time is linear, and I posted a link from RaceDepartment.
In your example of 8Nm/ms of slew rate change. If it takes a second, the change is still 8Nm, just per second, wrong?
Your multiplication with 1ā000, from a ms to a second, with the result 8ā000 wrong, because itās the rate, not the torque? It takes 3.5ms to reach the 17.7Nm for a Sport. Or a second, a minuteā¦17.8Nm is the maximum torque. And not 8ā000, not for and Ultimate, not for a Pro.
If you compare the slew rates 8Nm/ms with 8Nm/s, the only difference is the amount of time needed. 8Nm/ms is thousand times faster in acceleration.
And because of the extremely short time period of a ms, the amount of Nm isnāt a problem, because itās not a steady force, but a rate.
Albert Einstein would disagree.
3 Likes
Note that I didnāt do the tests and measurements of any motors.
Torque slew rate can be measured in many ways, with some ways giving different results than others. Magnetic fields do not form in infinitely fast time, and the sum of the magnetic fields produced in the stator and of the permanent magnets in the rotor gives the torque to the shaft. Now, when you measure your slew rate of going going to -10 Nm to 10 Nm, for example, can give you different result than going from 0 to 10 Nm. And then where are you measuring it from, do you measure the maximum rate or the average rate. And also when the motor is already rotating, the results can also be different.
1 Like
In regards to slew rate also? Letās be serious: if the maximum slew rate per Nm/time is the subject, isnāt it then:
a change per time?
When I translate the German words to English itās: raising rate of torque
If the maximum slew rate is Fe maximum 8Nm/ms, does it then change to 8 thousand at a second?
And Einstein wrote: time is relative, not ātime is not linearā
There are a beginning and an end. From the perspective of physical matter, with a definite shape and structure, time is linear.
Which means itās definitely not linear and changes depending on your speed and acceleration at any given moment.