Software Microsoft Sidewinder Force Feedback Wheel: Tips and Tricks to Improve Your Performance

From technology acquired from EXOS, Inc,[12] Microsoft then released a force feedback product called the Force Feedback Pro. Built on the design of the Precision Pro, the Force Feedback Pro differed only in the inclusion of motors for the force feedback effects, and the lack of USB compatibility. (A DIY converter project exists.) Due to the inclusion of the motors, the Force Feedback Pro was significantly larger and heavier than the Precision Pro, making it easy to differentiate between the two.

As the PC joystick port is input-only, the only way for data to be sent to the joystick (to trigger force feedback events) is to use the MIDI capabilities of the port.[13] This extension to the original gameport, first popularised by Creative Labs in their early sound cards, was intended to allow MIDI instruments to be connected to the joystick port but is used here to provide bidirectional communication with the joystick instead. Force feedback events are triggered by messages on MIDI channel 6, with effect data uploaded via SysEx messages. This means that force feedback would be unavailable on the earliest of PCs, where the gameports lack MIDI functionality.

Software microsoft sidewinder force feedback wheel

DOWNLOAD

The Microsoft SideWinder Force Feedback Wheel is a steering wheel controller for sim racing. It was the first wheel controller to contain force feedback.[citation needed] The USB version of the wheel is compatible with one PlayStation 2 game, Tokyo Xtreme Racer Zero.

Hi,is someone able to explain how to set up PPJoy and GlovePie with the sidewinder FF wheel in detail?Sorry, im a total noob with using PPJoy and GlovePie and the wheel is too good to throw away just because we are using Win7 64bit.

The only thing I had to do was customise the controller profile in the game a bit to change the barking-mad preset keyboard keys for the quick-menu (1=up,2=right,3=down,4=left just defies logic!!!!!) I have remapped it to the cursor keys instead. All the predefined wheel button functions, gear change paddles,etc work absolutely fine. I also increased the steering dead zone a little to prevent any force-feedback-induced wobbling on the straights.

-7/en-us/Details.aspx?type=Hardware&p=Microsoft%20SideWinder%20Force%20Feedback%20Wheel%20Game%20Controller&v=Microsoft&uid=A16-00041&pf=0&pi=8&s=Avb%20Top%20shot%20force%20feedback%20joystick&os=32-bit

I have also been surprised to find the wheel and pedals working fine in Win 7 with F1 2010! I remember packing my wheel away in disgust when driver support vanished after upgrading from XP. I had just discovered my wheel in storage and was going to throw it in the trash or try and sell it and thought I'd test it. Everything worked fine even identified by name in the game controller settings. Callibration page confirmed everything was working and the pedals do function correctly in game which was the issue I remember. I do not own any more recent driving games and have not used the pedals in any flight sim. I will pack the wheel away again and keep it for a spare should anything fail on my Thrustmaster version. These devices are expensive and my game time no longer warrants any further investment in these controllers. I now have 2 working force feedback wheels and a Saitek R220 non force feedback fully supported in Win 7! That should see me through? The resale value would be so small when compared to the purchase price that they will be worth keeping just for fun and nostalgia! HOWEVER MICROSOFT MUST CONTINUE TO UPDATE DRIVERS FOR THEIR OWN HARDWARE. I purchased what was really an unnecessary item to carry on driving with the Saitek, and then again when I upgraded to force feedback with the Thrustmaster. All because the Sidewinder no longer functioned correctly!

The original project was the 3DP-Vert: The Descent BB - USB Converter for MS Sidewinder 3DPro, PP, and FFPThe second project to add force feedback effects and wheel support: The Descent BB - Reverse Engineering the Force Feedback ProGoogle code that holds the support files and source for the project: Google Code - sw3dprousbGoogle code that holds the support files and source for the project: Google Code - adapt-ffb-joyGitHub repository that holds support files and source for the project: adapt-ffb-joySome few FFB-Joystick looks like to have a hardware problem over the long time storing resulting in a jitter of axis. Github #23Therefore a user made 2 alternative firmwares you can try (Also in the package above). See source at GithubA "Cleanup" Firmware with some fixes is available form another User. See source at Github

UniTherapy applied none or varying levels of force-feedback to physical therapeutic interfaces, depending on the settings and the task; these were derived from a series of force effects such as spring, damper, constant and so on in DirectX. Both sampling of position data and the input of force were at 33 Hz.

For assessment measures associated with the continuous tracking tasks, for the continuous circle tracking task, we found that certain measures can differentiate between control/high functional group and low functional stroke group: performance of able-bodied/high functional stroke subjects in the trajectory tracking tasks were significantly more accurate (Percentage Time in Target (PTT), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)), stable (PTT), with less path deviation (deviation) and better speed consistency (Speed_Mean (SM), Speed_StdDev (SS)) than subjects with low functional stroke. This was true even for the relatively small size of the sample population, as reflected in the levels of statistical significance between groups. One possible reason for this performance difference was that subjects with moderate to severe stroke may take more time for movement planning and for correction based on their visual feedback. In comparing between control and high functional stroke group, there is also a significant difference on SS metric as well as a trend of difference observed on PTT and SM metrics: able-bodied subjects can perform more accuracy (PTT), more steadily (PTT) and with better speed consistency (SM, SS) than subjects with high functional stroke. The capability to differentiate between able-bodied subjects and subjects with high functional stroke as well as between high and low functional stroke subjects by using SS metric and potentially the PTT and SM metrics suggests that these metrics could be sensitive to the impairment level of human subjects across assistance, no force and perturbation force settings with the trajectory tracking task. The result on the RMSE metric was consistent with other published data that RMSE were found to be sensitive the impairment level of human subjects [20,21,10]. However, as is reflected in the paragraphs that follow, overall this most convenient metric was not found to be one of the more robust metrics in terms of sensitivity.

When we tested three different force setting (e.g. white-noise perturbation, no force, spring-assistance) across subjects in a continuous circle tracking task, significant differences were shown by the PTT and SS metrics between spring-assistance, no force and white noise perturbation settings, thus supporting hypothesis 2. This suggests that spring-assistance can significantly improve the performance on accuracy (PTT), steadiness (PTT) and speed consistency (SS) in the trajectory tracking across subjects with different impairment level, while perturbation significantly worsens these aspects of movement performance. These results also confirm that perturbations significantly worsen the capability of keeping consistent (SM) with the target speed in the trajectory tracking tasks across subjects. Also, these results suggest that PTT emerges as a potentially sensitive assessment metric for trajectory tracking tasks across various task settings, since PTT has the capability to characterize different phases in the trajectory tracking task, including motor planning, motor execution, and movement correction based on the visual feedback [10]. While showing that perturbation force is challenging across subjects during the continuous tracking tasks, it has been suggested by other studies that persons with stroke-induced impairments may likely benefit from this type of "error augmentation" training of the paretic limb in unpredictable mechanical environments, and potentially that improvement can be transferred to ADLs [24,25]. 2ff7e9595c