VR Motion Cancellation - Time to test!

Yes and no. The only way a tracker/controller would be used is for initial calibration to calculate and map positional data to motion output from xSim or the game.

You would mount the tracker where your head would be in the seat.

From there you would click “calibrate” in openInput or similar plugin.

The chair would then move according to the motion data.

Motion data would then be mapped to a “virtual tracker” (software only) and include the offsets.

You would then remove the tracker, and only put it back when you need to recalibrate. That way you would be able to reliably use the motion data to determine the expected position using only software during gameplay.

If it were done that way, there would be no worry of moving the tracker while in a sim and support transducers without any vibration interference.

Hope that clears things up.

Not sure what you mean. The goal is to use output data from SimTools to tell OpenInput-VR how to subtract the motion of the rig from the view position.

I understand how motion cancellation works, and am aware that SimTools currently has no interface with SteamVR whatsoever. Motion cancellation is just one feature of OpenVR-InputEmulator. Another is emulating controllers. What I am proposing is using SimTools output data to create an emulated Tracker that exists only in SteamVR, and not the real world.

This solution would work very much how motion cancellation works today, but would not be dependent on a physical tracker. SteamVR would think that a physical tracker exists – when in reality the virtual tracker is generated by OpenVR-InputEmulator, and its position set based off of SimTools output data.

Hope this clears things up.

It's worth noting that this is something I'm actively pursuing with the VR dev community. I have mentioned it here before as well: https://www.xsimulator.net/community/threads/trackerless-motion-cancellation.12965/#post-170860

There's an assumption here that the SimTools values correspond readily/easily to the physical rig position, which is not necessarily the case. For example my commercial rig takes 6DOF from SimTools and then uses a proprietary piece of software to mix and derive its 4DOF movements from that. It also has a physical button box which communicates with its software for tuning/scaling its algorithms on the fly.

Granted, you could probably get pretty close by running the SimTools values in various combinations during calibration and then interpolating a virtual tracker from that. Even if it's not dead-on it might still be better than no compensation -- and a way to work around issues with tracking losses from excessive rig vibration.

Oh my.. I'm finally building a full motion rig and have a Pimax waiting for glorious simracing and I'm just now reading Pimax doesn't work with the only motion compensation software in existence.... Ugh... Heartbroken

Hmm.. a few thoughts..

Try an older version of pitools
Pimax has been constantly updating pitools with more and more manipulation such as smoothing. The accounts I've read suggest that only certain axis movement causes issues with openvr emulator. I'm guessing that an older, cruder, version of pitools may not manipulate the image as much. Worth a shot.

Mount a single lighthouse to the rig
I'm aware of the fragility of the moving motors in the lighthouse and it's susceptibility to possibly failing with high frequency vibration. Why not encase the lighthouse in a material that absorbs the high frequency vibrations but still allows for compensation of larger movement? Any history of someone trying something like this?

EDIT: Just read about the potential issue with the IMU in the HMD not agreeing with the lighthouse data. Guessing this is why a "soft" mount will not work.

Either way I sure hope there is a solution found.

THIS is why it isn't possible
https://steamcommunity.com/app/358720/discussions/0/355043117522595221/

The link I supplied with comments from Valve's developers agrees with you !

https://steamcommunity.com/app/358720/discussions/0/355043117522595221/

Still no software solution for motion cancel in oculus? Black borders everywhere

most perhaps all motion simulator move based on time (not speed or distance). I mean they dont move like 3d printer, i.e. the accuracy of distance achieved and speed it move at particular vector is irrelevant, the previous vector will be overridden by a new vector regardless if the previous one reach the point where it is suppose to or not. The reason is of course the responsiveness is the most important thing (simulating G-force at precise timing). Calibration cannot solve that simply because every movement is dynamically related to inertia (which changes based on body position) and torque/speed capability of the simulator.

Support Request sent to Pimax to see if they can get it to work withy trheir HMDs.
I will update once I get a reply, they are looking into it....

sean huang commented:
Thanks for your advice, I have transferred to our engineer who is studying, any update I will feedback you

I’m the only one that doesn’t have problems with motion and oculus rift?

Yes I’m new in motion and I have the sensors mounted on my rig and I can race without any problem.
You can see the sensore mounted over the steering wheel .

I'm too wondering about a Pimax solution. I'm not sure if I need one but it would be good to know there is one available. I used to run with the Rift sensor on and off the rig. Neither posed much issue from what I can remember. The only thing that gets me is the bounce from heave. It can be a little distracting if the track is super bumpy but I think I can tune the bumps down to compensate.

Anyone know if motion compensation would help very small fast movements like small bumps in track being covered at high speed? That's the one that I really notice.

I guess helmets and heads bounce around a lot in a real cockpit too, don't they?