Fanatec Announcements: CSW V2 Reviews Out

[OdeFinn]

@K_Soze you've lost engine, those wheels engines main axles are carrying way too much load what it has designed. Mabuchi company says at those engines life will reduce if motors axle itself is used to carry load or tension against it.

Fixable problem, but needs a bit engineering skils.
Can explain it when on cpu, now on phone.

 

[LogiForce]

I also send a mail to Fanatec to talk with them about belts and some other bits like new sets of shifter mechanisms in my beta rims. This was send Friday between 4 and 5 pm. No answer yet either unfortunately. I did include a video via youtube though, as it was too big in filesize to send via the mail system on their site (which states 100MB).

Not really according to their 'Response within 24' hour Premium Service.

@K_Soze you've lost engine, those wheels engines main axles are carrying way too much load what it has designed. Mabuchi company says at those engines life will reduce if motors axle itself is used to carry load or tension against it.

Fixable problem, but needs a bit engineering skils.
Can explain it when on cpu, now on phone.

Nice to know Mabuchi says it too. Makes me wonder why Fanatec still would choose these motors in the design of a CSR E and CSW, let alone older wheels. When you start to tension the belts you easily will notice and realize that these motors can't take load, thus should not be used in a belt drive situation as these always need to be tightened. V-belts like in the CSR E and CSW need even more load then a toothed belt. They should thus only be used in gear drive situations which require little load.
Also this might explain the issues of the Porsche wheels shutting down with endurance races. The motors were probably under a higher load then their specifications say they can take, increasing drag and heat. That with the enclosure heating up around it over time of use, the cooling performance goes down more.

Hmmm, does anyone know what motors could be used as replacement?
I'll search myself too out of curiosity.

 

[K_Soze]

Thank you for the replies. I have already contacted Fanatec but they sent me the test description and I did not understand that I should go farther than the soft limit while doing the video.

It is sad that belt directly bend motor shafts. It is so simple to separate the motor function from the tension function...

 

[bermudakid]

Hmmm, does anyone know what motors could be used as replacement?
I'll search myself too out of curiosity.

Do I hear brushless conversion ? 💡

 

[mrbasher]

If the drive pulley is held on by a setscrew (sorry I can't remember) then you could probably replace them with any 540 or 550 size (brushed) motor that has a very high "turn" count. The highest I have seen in most RC motors is around 85 turns.

That said... I wouldn't run out and do it without some equipment to test with as you will run the risk of burning up the board in the wheel.

 

[mrbasher]

Brushless is also possible but low speed/high torque brushless motors that could be used in an application like this are not cheap. There is also the question of properly driving the brushless motor as they work completely different than a normal DC motor.

 

[RacerXX]

I plan on getting an Elite from the next batch in a few weeks. Running that with my adjustable DC supply which displays current consumed and volts live I'll be able to compare the stock dual shaft motors with various 500 series motors I now have laying around. Motor swaps for the Elite/CSW are easier than for the earlier wheels since those use a position sensor on the rear shaft. The Elite/CSW wheel motors appear to be identical. Since the Elite/CSW wheels sense position on the steering shaft and not at the motor, the rear motor shaft is not a vital requirement. On the Elite/CSW the rear shaft is like an appendix in humans, a relic from our past. There are many motor options that will fit, you want a motor wound for torque in the 24 volt range, five poles (the most I have seen for 500 series DC motors) etc. The nice thing there is that they can be run hard without care as they are quite cheap and available. And as pointed out there is the option for a different type of motor, such as a brushless version. Those require a different controller however one could be made that would plug into the present driver for instance.

 

[mrbasher]

One option MIGHT be one of the Novak Ballistic Crawler motors. They have a sensor system which makes driving it a little easier. Here's a whole breakdown of their motors: http://www.teamnovak.com/products/brushless/motor_spec_chart.htm

Kinda overkill for the topic, but I suppose the RC types out there might be interested.

The Novak Ballistic Crawler 21.5T is an 85 watt 1,350Kv motor. Two would almost certainly be overkill lol. As well, 1350Kv @ 24v is a little over 32,500 rpm... The motors that come in the wheel are like, 4500 rpm @ 12v I believe.

Even so, the motor probably it's going to work right if it can't turn... (someone holding the wheel) A special controller would need to be made to deal with it not turning. Otherwise it will keep trying to "kick" to get started. Not to mention the motors are $95 a pop!

I don't plan on working on such a thing anytime soon. Not unless someone has a spare CSR Elite laying around that I can play with... And $180 to spare for the motors... lol

Regardless, I hate to repeat myself but... Maybe Fanatec just needs to address the issue themselves?

 

[Cote Dazur]

Since we already know that the motors used now are only a fews dollar.
It seems to me that it would be a good deal if someone would come up with a an ugrade kit for a 100$ that would make our CSR-E or CSW wheel better and give us peace of mind. Where do I sign?LOL.

Edit, got some answers from post above.

 

[mrbasher]

Since we already know that the motors used now are only a fews dollar, when we say brushless are expensive, what are we talking about? 10$? more?
It seems to me that it would be a good deal if someone would come up with a an ugrade kit for a 100$ that would make our CSR-E or CSW wheel better and give us peace of mind. Where do I sign?LOL.

A single motor design could be used in the Elite which would keep the cost down. You'd need a different belt as well. But the brushless motor is probably going to be $100 alone. That's if an RC motor would work and it may not.

 

[Dumpy]

Hmm that's odd...

These are the instructions Fanatec gives for testing this:

1. set the wheel to 90°
2. stay in windows (they mean to say have the wheel bound to the PC)
3. turn the wheel past 90°
4. show on the video if you can feel any "steps" when you turn it

It should not be rebooting unless that is a new firmware "safety feature." Maybe they added that to keep wheels from killing themselves when left connected to the xbox unattended.

If your wheel works fine otherwise, I wouldn't worry about it. The notchy/cogging feeling is quite apparent when it happens.

I have in somewhat rare occasions of this reboot happening during races. Games that require a complete restart in order to retain ffb are race killers. I dial down the ffb in order to try and combat this disconnect.

It does seem like some sort of safe kill feature on high ffb output. I also wonder if it could be power supply related.

Other than the really infrequent disconnects, I'm happy with the CSRE for sure.

 

[LogiForce]

100 dollars would be expansive. The CSW and CSR E can easily be converted to single motor solutions though.
Like Basher said though. It's the electronics that drive the motor(s) that will pose the problem, and I doubt we can easily attach new motor driver electronics. The only way possible would be to redesign and replace the entire electronics board. Using the same microcontrollers as on the current board so that it's compatible with the Fanatec firmware.

 

[mrbasher]

100 dollars would be expansive. The CSW and CSR E can easily be converted to single motor solutions though.
Like Basher said though. It's the electronics that drive the motor(s) that will pose the problem, and I doubt we can easily attach new motor driver electronics. The only way possible would be to redesign and replace the entire electronics board. Using the same microcontrollers as on the current board so that it's compatible with the Fanatec firmware.

It would not be impossible to simply read what's currently going to the motors that are in there and "doing something with it" on a new controller. The problem, (and the reason I asked a few pages back if someone had experience with microcontrollers, etc.) is that the output to the motors is being controlled via a PWM signal, not just "FORCE NEEDED, ON IN DIRECTION 1.. NO FORCE NEEDED, OFF"

Instead it's a lot of ON and OFF really fast to generate different levels of force. More on time = more force, less on time = less force. So that has to be interpreted as well. It can be done, "We Can Rebuild Him, We Have The Technology." - Six Million Dollar Man

Like logiforce said, plug and play... Not really an option.

 

[LogiForce]

It would not be impossible to simply read what's currently going to the motors that are in there and "doing something with it" on a new controller. The problem, (and the reason I asked a few pages back if someone had experience with microcontrollers, etc.) is that the output to the motors is being controlled via a PWM signal, not just "FORCE NEEDED, ON IN DIRECTION 1.. NO FORCE NEEDED, OFF"

Instead it's a lot of ON and OFF really fast to generate different levels of force. More on time = more force, less on time = less force. So that has to be interpreted as well. It can be done, "We Can Rebuild Him, We Have The Technology." - Six Million Dollar Man

Like logiforce said, plug and play... Not really an option.

Maybe we could take this over to Project C.A.R.E. as an initial learning experience for our own wheel? Just a thought.

 

[mrbasher]

I think that is an excellent idea!

 

[paskowitz]

Maybe we could take this over to Project C.A.R.E. as an initial learning experience for our own wheel? Just a thought.

AWESOME! Playing Project C.A.R.S on this would be like crowd sourcing overload.

 

[LogiForce]

AWESOME! Playing Project C.A.R.S on this would be like crowd sourcing overload.

I hope so. I don't ask money though, but some time and effort from those who want to be involved. I'll try to direct/steer it all in a 'hopefully' good direction to get some nice products that everyone will be able to build themselves.

Don't expect something within a year though and maybe not even two. Though the more people with expertise/insight that proves valuable, the smoother and the ride hopefully.

Edit:
Feel free to register though, to add to the discussion.

Already made a topic: http://forum.projectcare.info/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=13

 

[RacerXX]

Motor swaps are certainly possible but it might take a few iterations to dial it in.

Easiest would be cheap readily available Mabuchis of similar spec…as noted the hard part is the rear shaft for the position sensor. There are some ways to get around that, for instance converting to an on steering shaft position sensing approach. Or finding dual shaft motors. Or Fanatec selling loose motors. Or using the common short stubby rear shaft that many similar motors offer. Other than the rear shaft, worthy candidate 550 torque-oriented motors can be found online in the 3-15 dollar range for order quantities of just one motor.

The easiest type of motor to swap in would be another brushed DC design as the motor drives simplify matters somewhat. You can make a motor drive for a big brushed DC motor that would be driven by the stock circuit board. A daughter board that would plug in basically.

Brushless motors would need a completely different controller since they don't commutate in the motor. Instead the commutation is done electronically and is why brushless motors have more than two input wires. For this application brushless is not necessarily all that. DC brushed motors have some advantages. Part of the attraction to brushless is the longer expected lifespan, better/rebuildable construction, higher efficiency, better cooling, ball bearings instead of sleeve bearings, etc. But some of that is available on brushed DC motors.

I'd not limit looking only toward RC motors. There are great computer drive and power tool motors out there too for instance.

 

[LogiForce]

Ehm... the CSW and CSR E don't have a position sensor on their motors. That was one of the sale points.

Also when you fix something, you should fix it so that it's better then that it was originally. This so that the same issues do not pop up again.
So that means that sleeve bearings are out. We want more power to get closer to 26Nm of torque (after all, the big complaint was that the BMW rim was too heavy). We need motors that can deal with lateral tension on their drive shafts. We need a better mounting and tensioning system for the pulleys. And so on...

Also because computer drive motors have different dimensions and can't take lateral loads well. Power tool motors have the right size, but have different torque figures and aren't able to handle lateral loads either. Hence the extra ball bearing in that post of yours with the fake dremel (which you pointed out yourself).
These motors with any kind of belt drive need to be able to take some lateral load from tensioning the belts around them. Else the belts will never have enough grip in the pulleys that are attached to these motors.

So picking the same kind of materials or looking at them is a waste of time and effort in my opinion. Though granted, as a quick replacement it would be the easiest way, but in a matter of days and maybe weeks you'd already notice the same issues again (if you tighten the belts properly).

Edit:
Here is a nice write up for how to pick a DC motor: http://www.electricmotors.machinedesign.com/guiEdits/Content/bdeee3/bdeee3_5.aspx

 

[RacerXX]

Ehm... the CSW and CSR E don't have a position sensor on their motors. That was one of the sale points.

Also when you fix something, you should fix it so that it's better then that it was originally. This so that the same issues do not pop up again.
So that means that sleeve bearings are out. We want more power to get closer to 26Nm of torque (after all, the big complaint was that the BMW rim was too heavy). We need motors that can deal with lateral tension on their drive shafts. We need a better mounting and tensioning system for the pulleys. And so on...

Also because computer drive motors have different dimensions and can't take lateral loads well. Power tool motors have the right size, but have different torque figures and aren't able to handle lateral loads either. Hence the extra ball bearing in that post of yours with the fake dremel (which you pointed out yourself).
These motors with any kind of belt drive need to be able to take some lateral load from tensioning the belts around them. Else the belts will never have enough grip in the pulleys that are attached to these motors.

So picking the same kind of materials or looking at them is a waste of time and effort in my opinion. Though granted, as a quick replacement it would be the easiest way, but in a matter of days and maybe weeks you'd already notice the same issues again.

Yes I'm well aware of the different sensing positions in the different F wheels, sorry if I was unclear. I'm considering motor options for ALL of their wheels and not just one style. They seem to use the same motor in each of the wheels, so swap options for one can help the other wheels, potentially. Swaps are harder for the CSR and Porsche wheels due to that position sensor. And easier for the later wheels (Elite/CSW) since they lack it.

Here are some CSR-Elite photos from the early days. I cropped and brightened them. You can see that the unsupported motor pulleys use set screws, apparently to the motor's D-shaft. And they are cantilevered pretty far out from the motors themselves. These motors use sleeve bearings at each end of the the steel can, and not actual ball bearings to support the motor shaft. So they can't take a great deal of side force in the event that belt tension increases seem desirable.

 

[LogiForce]

Yes I'm well aware of the different sensing positions in the different F wheels, sorry if I was unclear. I'm considering motor options for ALL of their wheels and not just one style. They seem to use the same motor in each of the wheels, so swap options for one can help the other wheels, potentially. Swaps are harder for the CSR and Porsche wheels due to that position sensor. And easier for the later wheels (Elite/CSW) since they lack it.

Here are some CSR-Elite photos from the early days. I cropped and brightened them. You can see that the unsupported motor pulleys use set screws, apparently to the motor's D-shaft. And they are cantilevered pretty far out from the motors themselves. These motors use sleeve bearings at each end of the the steel can, and not actual ball bearings to support the motor shaft. So they can't take a great deal of side force in the event that belt tension increases seem desirable.

I see, that's how you saw it. Yes, then it could possibly be a solution as well for the older wheels.

Also you can see that the CSW and CSR E have room behind the pulley on the left for (if must be with velcro) mounting a new motor driver PCB. While I think there is actually little to no room in the older wheels.

One thing that catches my eye is that the CSR E and CSW are identical except for the power button and the Microcontroller/ports area of the main PCB. The actual motor driver hardware appears to be identical in both (including that little heatsink).
Which leaves me wondering about how much more powerful the CSW is in regards to the CSR E.

On a seperate note, I just looked at some Maxon graphite brushed motors. They look nice and high quality, but the price of those are high it seems. Which is very unfortunate. Will look more tomorrow, as it's now time to sleep for me.

 

[mrbasher]

Pax7 over at racedepartment gives some belt tension tips here: http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/threads/maintenace-fanatec-csr-elite-wheel.45368/

 

[JogoAsobi]

.

 

[mrbasher]

.

NINJA'D!!!!!! haha

 

[LogiForce]

Pax7 over at racedepartment gives some belt tension tips here: http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/threads/maintenace-fanatec-csr-elite-wheel.45368/

Credit should always go to the right person. 👍

Interesting read, and also there the same thing is said about the belt tension and so on. With finding a balance between tension and slip. Which sucks, cause that means the belts will wear out in roughly a year time with at least 10 hours a week of use on average.

 

[RacerXX]

Credit should always go to the right person. 👍

Interesting read, and also there the same thing is said about the belt tension and so on. With finding a balance between tension and slip. Which sucks, cause that means the belts will wear out in roughly a year time with at least 10 hours a week of use on average.

Well the issues were as obvious then as now as far as potential and real issues go. Surprised noone has done much there. Are the issues being amplified by the nature of internet forums? Or do all of the early Elite/CSWs now need belts, motors, and a cup of warm chicken soup? ;-)

I'll try to track down the photo of a modded Elite wheel wherein an additional pulley was used. It sat more towards the center and pulled the belts more completely around the motor pulleys. So once the belt wrapped around the first motor pulley the normal amount, it would then wrap further and head towards the steering shaft where the new pulley lived. It would then wrap around that pulley (using the flat side) and then head back towards the other motor pulley. This required a longer belt but those are not hard to obtain. I'd guess that such a setup would increase belt grip to the point that less tension would be required yet slip resistance would be higher.

 

[LogiForce]

Well the issues were as obvious then as now as far as potential and real issues go. Surprised noone has done much there. Are the issues being amplified by the nature of internet forums? Or do all of the early Elite/CSWs now need belts, motors, and a cup of warm chicken soup? ;-)

I'll try to track down the photo of a modded Elite wheel wherein an additional pulley was used. It sat more towards the center and pulled the belts more completely around the motor pulleys. So once the belt wrapped around the first motor pulley the normal amount, it would then wrap further and head towards the steering shaft where the new pulley lived. It would then wrap around that pulley (using the flat side) and then head back towards the other motor pulley. This required a longer belt but those are not hard to obtain. I'd guess that such a setup would increase belt grip to the point that less tension would be required yet slip resistance would be higher.

Mine is not an 'early' final production wheel. Those started on "05/05/2012" as per http://911wheel.de/?q=node/8393 and mine was send to me in "03/29/2012" and has beta wheel number 007 (no, that's not a Bond joke). So go do the math I'd say.

Of course the CSR Elites have been in production since 11/09/2011 as per http://911wheel.de/?q=node/7173

So I don't know if someone still has his or her Christmas CSR Elite, but if so then I wonder if they have experienced any issues in this direction yet. Or at least Elites that are manufactured up till March of 2012 (corrosponding to my manufacturing date).

An extra pulley is also what I thought. Which would help relieve a lot of stress from tension on the motors indeed. Though it's not a complete solution, it might be the easiest (partial) fix to just bolt an extra pully on the assembly.

 

[RacerXX]

An extra pulley is also what I thought. Which would help relieve a lot of stress from tension on the motors indeed. Though it's not a complete solution, it might be the easiest (partial) fix to just bolt an extra pully on the assembly.

Right this would be simple and you could use a widely stocked bearing as the pulley. Just use one a bit wider than the belt. The OD of a sealed bearing would be the surface the belt touched. If it lays out well it would involve a longer belt (cheap), bearing (cheap), drilling a hole, (cheap), and using some nuts/bolts/spacer. Salt and Pepper to taste.

The unused shafts on the back of the motors are unemployed on the Elite/CSW. They could be used to tie the two motor together with a cogged or smooth belt, a synchronization belt. Since due to belt tension being on just one side means that one motor at a time would tend to slip first this could help a bit. Positraction lol. There could be other benefits to doing this too.

Or the shafts could even be used to drive another torque delivery belt which would go along the back side of the base and then feed another large pulley that would connect via axle to the present pulley on the non-motor side. Spread out the loads.

 

[OdeFinn]

RacerXX describes that main problem precisely, motors drive shaft is not supported by any other bearings than it's own internal bearings, and that is stupid way to install any electrical engine.
Making small supporting piece on each end of drive shaft with own bearings will make product last "forever", even making one supporting bed on end where belt drive is coming will make it lasting much longer.

G27 has really easy way solution for this kind of problem, that problem was kinda similar on G25 witch didn't have supported drive shafts on engines, but there wasn't a belt tension on to that engine, but still they put a support for it on next gen model G27.

http://www.mabuchi-motor.co.jp/en_US/technic/t_0401.html
And section 7. from it:
"In using any transmission system such as a belt drive system for an output shaft, with which radial load is applied to the motor, sufficiently note that the life of the motor might be shortened due to the radial load applied to the bearing."

 

[Mayaman]

Mine is not an 'early' final production wheel. Those started on "05/05/2012" as per http://911wheel.de/?q=node/8393 and mine was send to me in "03/29/2012" and has beta wheel number 007 (no, that's not a Bond joke). So go do the math I'd say.

Of course the CSR Elites have been in production since 11/09/2011 as per http://911wheel.de/?q=node/7173

So I don't know if someone still has his or her Christmas CSR Elite, but if so then I wonder if they have experienced any issues in this direction yet. Or at least Elites that are manufactured up till March of 2012 (corrosponding to my manufacturing date).

An extra pulley is also what I thought. Which would help relieve a lot of stress from tension on the motors indeed. Though it's not a complete solution, it might be the easiest (partial) fix to just bolt an extra pully on the assembly.

My launch CSR Elite makes a horrible "screeching" or "moaning" noise under hard turning either right or left. Only under hard turning though. haven't sim raced in months because everything is packed up. But will get the wheel sent out to Fanatec when I get settled. It worked fine, just the noise sucks. I haven't been paying attention for a few months, is the consensus that all CSR and CSW wheels will fail 100%? I have a beta CSW and haven't used it because its in a box for the move.