Why Hall sensors for sticks ?

[HagarTheHorrible]

I was wondering why you would use Hall sensors for a new build joystick ?

 

Pots always seem to be a weak point in stick design, why not use the same technology as laser mice etc and use an optical sensor in the base of the shaft instead ? The advantages would presumably be, no spiking or wear problems, DPI could be changed on the fly to suit different aircraft just for a start.

[Panzerlang]

I believe Hall sensors elimitate the problems associated with pots as they're potless.

[Sokol1]

Well they dont wear like pots, an are more cheap than a quality pot - that only CH use.

 

But joystick industry start use then only because they are cheap now.

Melexis 3D HALL sensor used in X,Y on Warthog and T1600M cost ~3$ in batch.

 

The mouse sensor probable cost more.

 

The Russian guys (VKB, SLAW) use a different solution than HALL, angle measure sensors.

 

Sokol1

[Matt]

I'm really wondering what an adjustable DPI would be good for in a stick.

 

I think the FFB2 uses an optical sensor and i never had any problem with it, but i don't think a hall sensor has any disadvantage compared to a optical sensor and is probably cheaper to produce and easier to implement in a joystick design.

[dburne]

Hall Sensors are awesome!

 

Before I got this Warthog last year, which of course has them, I had a TM Cougar which I had modded with the NXT gimbal mod and hall sensors. Had them both in the stick and the throttle. Also put halls in my TM Elite rudder pedals I had at that time as well. Ran that setup for about 10 years and never had so much as a thought of a spike on any of them.

[Sokol1]

I think the FFB2 uses an optical sensor

Microsof Force Feedback PRO (gameport) use optical sensor (that's reminder the worst joystick that I own, the MS 3D PRO with same kind o sensor, low course and oversensitive...).

 

But the Microsoft Force Feedback 2 USB use... potentiometers!

 

Which is very surprising face its durability.

 

Sokol1