On Tuesday 30 March 2010 10:27:33 am Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> Don't know how obvious this is to bu0836 users: if you don't need all
> analog inputs, but could use some more digital ones, then you could
> think about abusing an axis for switches:
> 
>                                             v analog in
>                 100k           /   0        |
> 
>       |--------######---------/   ----------|
>       |         200k           /   1        |
>       |--------######---------/   ----------|   pull down as necessary
> 
>  +----|         400k           /   2        |-------#######--------|
> 
>       |--------######---------/   ----------|
>       |         800k           /   3        |
>       |--------######---------/   ----------|
> 
> Of course, you should use resistors with low tolerance and high
> temperature stability (MO), and you have to decode the resulting value
> in the driver. Easy to do in fgfs. If the value corresponds to 1M, then
> you know that switches 1 and 3 are closed. Of course, there's a limit
> for how many bits you can reliably pack into an "analog value.
> 
> There are also rotary encoders with binary output, which can be used
> in the same way.
> 
> m.
> 
> 
> 
> Disclaimer: I've never tried this.  :-


Most users trying to use these to implement a full set of controls are likely 
to need more than one unit to have enough analog axis to do the job.  So I 
don't think switch counts will be the issue.  A quick list of needed axis:

rudder
elevator
aileron
rudder trim
aileron trim
elevator trim
left brake
right brake
throttle
mixture
prop RPM

This is 11 axis so two controllers would be required for a fairly simple GA 
aircraft or a WWII fighter.   Even a single engine GA aircraft with a fixed 
pitch prop needs 10 axis. This leaves 64 switches which should take most 
cockpits at least for simpler aircraft a long ways.  Of course a multi engine 
cockpit would need even more axis.

Hal

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-users

Reply via email to