975 replies to this topic

[LynnInDenver]

I'm having trouble finding what would actually qualify as a reference, given that searches tend to be digging up forum threads (and the aforementioned opinions).

 

https://startingelec...urcing-sinking/

 

Computer PSUs are not going to be designed to "sink" current on a supply rail.... which is what the 7v mod is attempting to do. They're meant for output, so to speak, not input. Certain workbench power supplies are going to be designed to handle such dual modes, they're usually meant for things like battery reconditioning and diagnostics.

 

I used a watt/amp/volt calculator. My current PC psu, the 5V rail is rated for .5-25A... 2-125 Watts. 12v rail is rated for 4-46A... 48-552 Watts. That's a significant enough difference between the rails that I would consider it beyond unreasonable to expect the smaller rail to sink that effectively. Note that my psu is 600 Watts, and those are the rated minimums and maximums, results will vary.

 

If a computer psu is capable of sinking even the 12v minimum on the 5v rail without complaint, I'd be wondering about the resultant lifespan.

 

Ah, here we go, this explains WHY the trick works for some supplies, it's because they build a 12v rail using a 5v and 7v rail, and is actually another reason to not do it since I don't think they publish that as part of the spec of any power supply: https://electronics....s-e-g-12v-to-5v

 

Also, another consideration is how much amperage is being used under load. I would NOT want all the 12v amperage (and it's almost an exponent when converted to wattage) being sunk into the 5v current rail like that, even if it only puts out the minimum.

[mjr]

I'm having trouble finding what would actually qualify as a reference, given that searches tend to be digging up forum threads (and the aforementioned opinions).

 

Heh, that's the Internet for you.  It's mostly a gigantic copying machine/echo chamber where people post things on forums that they read on other forums, or more likely vaguely remember thinking they might have read on other forums. 

 

Anyway, I was curious enough look at some ATX power supply schematics and puzzle out the circuits, and what I can figure out does lend some support to the "don't do it" school.  The notion that you're going to sink current into the lower-voltage rail isn't quite right, but the current does have to go somewhere.  The reason it's not going into the lower-voltage rail is that each output (in the typical design, anyway) connects back to the main transformer through a big rectifier diode (actually a pair of them, but same thing), so that's going to block any current flowing backwards there.  Instead, those diodes are going to force the current down the other paths to 0V.  One path is any load you have on the lower-voltage output; the other is the resistor network that senses the voltage levels on the outputs as a reference for the regulator on the primary side.  I'm pretty sure you really, really don't want the current to go through the resistor network, because the manufacturer isn't going to put in giant load-bearing resistors there.  And even if they can tolerate the heat from extra current, anything substantial is probably going to push the reference voltages out of the envelope where the regulator can compensate.  I think this is what some of these guys are getting at when they warn you about maintaining a minimum load on the lower-voltage output; you need that to provide a safe(-er) path to ground for the bridged load on the higher-voltage output.  So my read of it is that you can get away with the 7V hack for loads that are an order of magnitude (or two) smaller than your 5V load, but anything beyond that is a bad idea.  I imagine that's why 99% of the uses cases for this are just small case fans in gaming rigs - probably safe enough if you've got a big video card on the 5V.  But maybe it's less of a good idea with a pin cab secondary PSU, where you don't necessarily have a constant large load on the 5V.

[Brer Frog]

I'm having trouble finding what would actually qualify as a reference, given that searches tend to be digging up forum threads (and the aforementioned opinions).

 

https://startingelec...urcing-sinking/

 

Computer PSUs are not going to be designed to "sink" current on a supply rail.... which is what the 7v mod is attempting to do. They're meant for output, so to speak, not input. Certain workbench power supplies are going to be designed to handle such dual modes, they're usually meant for things like battery reconditioning and diagnostics.

 

I used a watt/amp/volt calculator. My current PC psu, the 5V rail is rated for .5-25A... 2-125 Watts. 12v rail is rated for 4-46A... 48-552 Watts. That's a significant enough difference between the rails that I would consider it beyond unreasonable to expect the smaller rail to sink that effectively. Note that my psu is 600 Watts, and those are the rated minimums and maximums, results will vary.

 

If a computer psu is capable of sinking even the 12v minimum on the 5v rail without complaint, I'd be wondering about the resultant lifespan.

 

Ah, here we go, this explains WHY the trick works for some supplies, it's because they build a 12v rail using a 5v and 7v rail, and is actually another reason to not do it since I don't think they publish that as part of the spec of any power supply: https://electronics....s-e-g-12v-to-5v

 

Also, another consideration is how much amperage is being used under load. I would NOT want all the 12v amperage (and it's almost an exponent when converted to wattage) being sunk into the 5v current rail like that, even if it only puts out the minimum.

 

Regarding the +5V rail being smaller & not being able to "sink" the current from the larger capacity +12V rail. Don't electrons flow from negative to positive? I'm not suggesting deriving 7V this way is safe or not. But wouldn't the +5V rail be supplying the current flow because it's at a negative potential relative to the +12V rail?

[vihar]

vihar - It sounds like it's just a matter of finding the right range adjustment for the x360ce device, then. 

 

For reference, a VP plunger reports values like this:

 

  * "0" is the resting position 

 

  * positive values represent pulling the plunger back toward the player

 

  * negative values represent positions forward of the resting position (pressed in so that the barrel spring is compressed)

 

Hello mjr,

 

in the meantime I found out that the original XB360 stick works the same way, but nobody cared.

A user found a config file which I don't have and which contains deadzone settings:

 

Plunger = { ThresholdLow = 0.105 ThresholdHigh = 0.45

 

There is no way to change that via game, is there a way to adjust this from x360ce?

I tried adjusting anti deadzone but it felt odd a bit.

[LynnInDenver]

Regarding the +5V rail being smaller & not being able to "sink" the current from the larger capacity +12V rail. Don't electrons flow from negative to positive? I'm not suggesting deriving 7V this way is safe or not. But wouldn't the +5V rail be supplying the current flow because it's at a negative potential relative to the +12V rail?

No, it doesn't, otherwise the hack would only get 5V, and people wouldn't be using it for fans in overclocking and case mods, they'd just use the 5V straight as it's provided. They're getting 7v because the 12v rail is the positive potential in the relationship, so the 5v is forced into becoming a sink (dropping the 12v to 7v) instead of a source.

 

BTW, even something where I have a large enough load on the 5v to keep things relatively stable, I'd still prefer to use a real 7v supply instead of hacking something with the 12v and 5v rails, if only because if that load just happens to drop once, it's going to be potentially spark city because of the aforementioned issue that the power supply is not designed to be run in that manner.

[mjr]

Regarding the +5V rail being smaller & not being able to "sink" the current from the larger capacity +12V rail. Don't electrons flow from negative to positive? I'm not suggesting deriving 7V this way is safe or not. But wouldn't the +5V rail be supplying the current flow because it's at a negative potential relative to the +12V rail?

 

That's exactly what got me curious about this.  If you look at it as an idealized DC system, you're right.  Add to that the empirical fact that it manifestly works - lots of regular PC users apparently do this to power their case fans, and you see it mentioned around here once in a while as a way to supply #555 button lamps (which want 6.3V).  So it seems simple in principle, and it's known to work, so why do some people claim it's bad?  The answer seems to be in the practical engineering details of the ATX supplies.  Specifically that they're switched-mode supplies, which pretty much requires that they have rectifier diodes between the actual voltage source and the outputs.  That's the key element that screws with the idealized DC mechanics as far as I can see.  If you can read schematics, there are lots of "typical ATX PSU" schematics on the Internet you can look at; trace through one and you should see the issue.

Edited by mjr, 21 September 2018 - 05:43 PM.

[mjr]

in the meantime I found out that the original XB360 stick works the same way, but nobody cared.

 

Ah, well, that make sense.  At least it confirms that this isn't just something lost in translation in the x360ce layer.

 

 

A user found a config file which I don't have and which contains deadzone settings:

 

Plunger = { ThresholdLow = 0.105 ThresholdHigh = 0.45

 

There is no way to change that via game, is there a way to adjust this from x360ce?

I tried adjusting anti deadzone but it felt odd a bit.

 

That definitely looks like it would produce the behavior you described.  And you said both games (TPA and FX) are acting the same way, right?  So that makes it a good bet that this is the whole issue.  I'm assuming from the syntax here that this is the "live zone" - i.e., that that the dead zone is anything below ThresholdLow and anything above ThresholdHigh.  If that's the case, what you probably want instead is Plunger = { ThresholdLow = -1.0, ThresholdHigh = 1.0 }.

[Outhere]

Is this the type of plunder set-up you are talking about?

With x360ce for Fx2/Fx3

 

https://www.vpforums...e=2#entry413506

[vihar]

Is this the type of plunder set-up you are talking about?

With x360ce for Fx2/Fx3

 

https://www.vpforums...e=2#entry413506

 

Yes.

[Outhere]

I wonder why FX3 isn't working for you.. The other day when I posted those x360ce FX2 files

I used the same x360ce files from Fx2 setup, coped them to my FX3 folder (It's almost as good as VP) See video

So for practice I started with a fresh x360ce file in FX3 To see if I can get it to work the same way and so far I have been unable to...

I don't know what's different about them files But That they work correctly on my Cabinet..

 

Video

https://youtu.be/mgly-UrDVqw

 

I have FX3 set to borderless window - Maybe that makes a difference

 

My Pinball FX3_x360ce files

https://www.dropbox....x360ce.zip?dl=0

Edited by Outhere, 22 September 2018 - 10:03 PM.

[Outhere]

UpDate post 710

[vihar]

UpDate post 710

 

Appreciated!

However I think you have the same issue as I: the plunger works of course but there is a huge deadzone and the physical and virtual plunger does not move 1:1.

Check in VP, you will see what I'm talking about.

[dannygey]

Hello guys,

Is it possible to connect more then one KL25Z board to have more pwm ports availible ?

[mjr]

Is it possible to connect more then one KL25Z board to have more pwm ports availible ?

 

Yes.  You just have to configure the two devices to use different LedWiz IDs and different Pincsape IDs, so that the PC can tell them apart.  DOF will happily support several of them.

 

If you want lots of PWM ports, you can always go with the expansion boards.  Those let you add essentially unlimited PWM outputs.  (Well, not truly unlimited, but close enough for practical purposes - the software has a limit of 128 ports overall.)

[Onevox]

hey, mjr. what is the current thinking on Pinscape and Windows 10? I updated from Win7 to Win10 after being lectured about security vulnerabilities with 7. Things I need to do? (I suddenly had changes to my screenres file, and PinVol control buttons assignments were magically changed.) . Then I remembered you saying something about Win7 being preferred with Pinscape about 1.5 years ago. Win 10 more acceptable now? Should I reinstall all software? Thanks. 

[mjr]

hey, mjr. what is the current thinking on Pinscape and Windows 10? I updated from Win7 to Win10 after being lectured about security vulnerabilities with 7. Things I need to do? (I suddenly had changes to my screenres file, and PinVol control buttons assignments were magically changed.) . Then I remembered you saying something about Win7 being preferred with Pinscape about 1.5 years ago. Win 10 more acceptable now? Should I reinstall all software? Thanks. 

 

I sure don't remember saying anything like that about Win 7 vs Win 10.  As far as I know, either one should work equally well.  I don't think there's any need to reinstall anything that you didn't already have to reinstall in the OS update process.

[STV]

Just get it settled on whatever you're running.   I'd call the pinscape OS agnostic between 7 and 10.  I'm running two cabs one on 7 one on 10 and pinscape is the least of the "issues".   Now if you upgraded 7 to 10... I'm sorry.  But just get everything settled and you'll be fine. 

[Onevox]

Thanks. Seems I exaggerated my concerns about 10 with old user posts about boot loader and button assignments/HID. Good to know it's agnostic. 

[mjr]

Thanks. Seems I exaggerated my concerns about 10 with old user posts about boot loader and button assignments/HID. Good to know it's agnostic. 

 

Oh, right, I didn't even think about that old boot loader issue!  Happily that's mostly gone now (unless you happen to buy a really old KL25Z on eBay that's been sitting in someone's basement or something).  Even when that was an issue, it was only a one-time setup thing; once you got past the boot loader update everything was perfectly happy on all Windows versions.

[dzorbas]

Hi Mike,

 

I updated the Pinscape software a few weeks ago and then rewired all my buttons to use the KL25Z rather than the cheap USB encoder board I used originally. Everything seems to be working fine except one small thing. I use sleep mode on the PC and a relay to control all my monitors. After the software update when I hit the button to power everything down a few seconds later everything comes back on. I figured out by turning off the "Reset on disconnect" option in the Pinscape setup I'm back to my normal behaviour.

 

Can I keep this turned off? With either setting, when I enable sleep mode, the KL25Z is flashing red quickly twice which seems to make sense. I had a quick look at power management in Windows and the box for allowing the device to bring the PC out of sleep mode is actually greyed out and unchecked. Maybe I'm not looking in the right place. I was just concerned with turning this setting off.

 

Also, I realize that it has been mentioned a few times in last couple hundred posts that I've read but I'm just confirming that the flashing green/yellow combination indicates everything is okay even though I have no plunger installed and "Plunger sensor setup" is set to none. The green/blue combination is much more pleasant to the eye!

 

Thanks,

 

DZ.