New Plate Idea?

[CPTBadAss]

Melvang, welds would survive a waterjet right? I never actually thought about that. Like if you welded first them water jet the holes out? You definitely can laser it but it's not easy.

[Melvang]

Melvang, welds would survive a waterjet right? I never actually thought about that. Like if you welded first them water jet the holes out? You definitely can laser it but it's not easy.

Yeah you would almost have to have a sensor to tell the head how far it was from the plate.  Though it would just have to detect excess warpage from welding (shouldn't be a problem with carbon steel).  Welds would def be cut by waterjet.  I was looking at water jet stuff the other night and one site was claiming they can cut 20" thick stainless or 15" thick ti.  But we wouldn't be cutting anywhere close to welds.  Cutting the far rows we wouldn't be in any danger of cutting the opposite sides.

[jacobolus]

For what it's worth I also know DSA caps are a tighter fit between caps but I don't have numbers for those.  DCS caps single unit caps are .715"x.715" according to SP.  Though I don't know how far from the plate the bottom of the skirt is.

All standard keycaps are pretty much the same width at the bottom edge. The heights above the plate do vary though.

[Melvang]

For what it's worth I also know DSA caps are a tighter fit between caps but I don't have numbers for those.  DCS caps single unit caps are .715"x.715" according to SP.  Though I don't know how far from the plate the bottom of the skirt is.

All standard keycaps are pretty much the same width at the bottom edge. The heights above the plate do vary though.

DSA is wider.  My filco puller doesn't like to fit between caps but fits just fine between DCS.  It is a tight fit on M caps as well with the top cap still on as well.

[jacobolus]

http://www.keycapsdirect.com/pdfs/DSAFamily.pdf

DSA are .725 by .725 inches, according to that. If I put them back to back, I can see that 1x1 Cherry doubleshots are exactly the same size. DCS are apparently a bit smaller, you’re right.

[mkawa]

clamping down curved sheet metal is not fun or anything people want to do. they'd rather mill or wj the thing about of a piece of billet stock. my wj has a five axis, but time on that is like gold. i can't remember whether ams has a 4th or 5th axis on their haas, but time on that if it does have the extra axes is not cheap

also the setup costs are going to be huge. he's going to want to run a large number of copies.

[CPTBadAss]

Yup, it's definitely possible but it's not going to be easy or cheap.

[mkawa]

ams only has 3-axis machines, but he says he can do a lot of curved designs by being awesome.

he's interested in seeing the design. i would say keep the curve down so that it can be machined out of the slimmest plate possible. with the mill, you'll be able to put the holes anywhere you want.

[Techno Trousers]

This is a great idea and I hope you guys can pull it off. One of the things I love most about the F-122 is the curve of the typing surface. It really makes for a more comfortable typing experience than the varying height caps "pseudo curve" of other layouts.

The most problematic part of the variable height caps to me is the space bar not aligning well with the rest of the rows, and I know that's why some people like to flip their space bars over so they aren't constantly hitting the front edge with their thumbs.

[mkawa]

ams doesn't think this is a problem, but they need a drawing.

[Melvang]

I don't think I have the CAD skills to pull something like this off but for the record the switch hole dimensions need to be in the straight line and not around the curve.  For the detail oriented mind that I am the walls of the hole should be parallel, not perpendicular to the plate.  the front to back walls won't be the issue.  It will be side to side walls on the front and back of the switch.

Edit:  CBA is sending me a plate from an M that I am going to play with cutting up a QFR plate to attach to the M plate.  If this goes well I think a prototype with cutting switch holes directly into the M plate might be in order.

[Oobly]

Anyway... I am not convinced that curved backplanes are better than flat from an ergonomic standpoint. With a curved backplane, the further a row of keys is from the wrist, the more the key-pressing motion would be pressing away rather than down/towards you.

I agree.

I'm convinced curved plates are better than flat for one simple reason.[...] For the curved plate, the plane of the key surface is perpendicular to the travel of the key.  You press in the direction the key is moving.

For the straight plate, the plane of the surface is angled off the perpendicular.  You press in a way that's not in line with the key travel.

This seems incorrect to me. When you move your finger to find the new key, you’re extending your two distal joints outward/upward, but when you actually press the key down, the main motion is still to flex the whole finger at the first knuckle (metacarpal-phalangeal joint), and the direction of force is fairly close to straight down, not outward. (At least, that’s what it seems to me from observing my own hands’ movement.)

This is one of the things I find to be problematic on the Kinesis Advantage: many of the keys travel in an axis that is not the same as the axis of finger pressing, and as a result they are less uncomfortable to press than they would be if rotated to be more straight up and down. The Maltron has an easier time getting this closer to right, because it uses hand wiring instead of a curved PCB.

I do agree though that there might be an advantage in raising the further-back keys up higher than current keycap profiles permit. So perhaps making "steps" of sheet metal (Or CNC'd metal/wood/plastic) could be nicer to type on than current flat designs. Also, the proximal keys (bottom row or two, nearest the body) could probably be angled a little bit, as I think they tend to get pressed a bit toward the body as well as down.

In general, my expectation is that you get a much bigger ergonomic advantage from splitting the two hands apart, tenting them, and putting thumb keys in a comfortable spot, than you get from curving the plate the finger keys sit on. If you feel a pressing need for height differences in the finger section, I’d recommend switching to a column-staggered layout and adjusting the height between columns pressed by different fingers, e.g. raising the pinky keys up a bit. (But don’t try to accomplish this with a curved plate/pcb, or you’ll get the same problem again, where the pinky/index finger keys are pressed by unnaturally pushing sideways.)

Absolutely great post!

Lots of information backed up by empirical testing and suggestions for improvements.

[ideus]

So, we need a plate set like this. Then you can spot weld the plates together. This is for a TKL, so no vertical key issues.

Show Image

Great idea! These long plates can be side mounted on two lateral supports with the proper cut. For that the strips will need some room at their edges to accommodate the support under them.

[dorkvader]

curved PCBs are _really_ expensive. you have to lay down the fiberglass mat in a curved mold and then shoot the resin binder to make curved FR4. it's a huge tooling investment just to make pcbs. jd's solution is _much_ better

I don't think we should ax the curved PCB idea just yet. You can get a flex PCB for "not that expensive" and even a thin "normal" PCB can handle a bend radius that wide without issues.

Of course actually making the plate becomes hard, but, I have high hopes for welded PCB strips.

[Melvang]

I may have an idea for this that should work. 

The question on when I have the time and money for the prototype remains to be seen.

[damorgue]

You could also try different types of bend reliefs such as the one below:

I made a picture to illustrate how a slot cut along the bend can decrease the stress on the hole during the bend. Not only does the bend get more exact if you have a line of slots and small tabs to guide it, but the holes does not get deformed and these slots are commonly used to prevent deformations at holes by using protecting reliefs. Just take a look in your average PC case and you are likely to find a few. If laser/water cut, the slot can be made relatively thin.

An additional note; The switch holes will be spaced further apart vertically than 19.05mm on the plate since the height of the switches and their caps will be angled towards each other.

[Melvang]

You could also try different types of bend reliefs such as the one below:

Show Image

I made a picture to illustrate how a slot cut along the bend can decrease the stress on the hole during the bend. Not only does the bend get more exact if you have a line of slots and small tabs to guide it, but the holes does not get deformed and these slots are commonly used to prevent deformations at holes by using protecting reliefs. Just take a look in your average PC case and you are likely to find a few. If laser/water cut, the slot can be made relatively thin.

An additional note; The switch holes will be spaced further apart vertically than 19.05mm on the plate since the height of the switches and their caps will be angled towards each other.

All very good points damorgue.  I think I have a way to get the same result without having to pay for extra slots or semi precision bending.

Edit:  I don't think the slots would work well in this application.  Main reason being there really isn't any switches that line up good enough between two rows.  So where you have a small tab, there will still probably be hole deformation.

[Melvang]

I have a legitimate necro bump here.



I designed this with using "C" channel sized 3/4" across the face with 3/4" legs (can be cut shorter very easy) with 1/16" thick for perfect use with MX switches.  I took some measurements from an M plate and I did some number crunching and using the top face of the switch hole as a tangent from the bottom face of the M plate I get 11.46° difference between faces or 168.54° depending on which direction you are coming from.  While I have no idea if caps will crash with the channels pushed in tight, that would be easily fixable once side plates are added into the equation.

As far as wiring, this would either need to be done with individual PCB (enabler), hand wire, or enabler style for the whole rows.  I realize that there isn't any stab holes in the space bar but I didn't feel like digging up those numbers.

What do you guys think.

[JPG]

Why not just do it the right way and buy a model F?

[Melvang]

Why not just do it the right way and buy a model F?

Lack of options for custom layouts, caps, spring weights, options for tactility, lighting, replacement parts, and to be the really odd ball.

Edit:  I believe the original purpose of this idea was to have the sculpted key tops (think M, F, DCS, Cherry, OEM) but in flat profile keys such as DSA or GB's with all row 3 SA.

[JPG]

Why not just do it the right way and buy a model F?

Lack of options for custom layouts, caps, spring weights, options for tactility, lighting, replacement parts, and to be the really odd ball.

Edit:  I believe the original purpose of this idea was to have the sculpted key tops (think M, F, DCS, Cherry, OEM) but in flat profile keys such as DSA or GB's with all row 3 SA.

I understand the goal, I was just joking about it. Yet, the desire for custom spring/keycaps/tactility comes from the fact that you aim to use cherry switches. Model F switches don't need those since they are already perfect. For keycaps there's unicomp, and for backlighting there's just no real need for it.


Then, the real issue is layout. Well with the new controller for the model F and the custom pcb that was made the only thing we need to work on is custom plate/case!


While I am still kidding about this (in part), I am curious about how many people tried the model F. Because I see many people spending hundreds of $ on cherry keyboards, trying to make them feel better, but most people that manage to put their hands on a model F and start using it are just so amazed about how nice it feels that all these other things they wanted just go poof. For sure most drools when they see some amazing kishsaver, but still are super happy with their AT model F or F122.

[Melvang]

Its all good man.  For me the noise keeps me from getting an F or an M for daily use.  My office is essentially a walk in closet off our kids bedroom.  They are 6 and almost 2, as well as the wife thought that browns on the Das were to loud.  Hence I have switched to lubed blacks with clear springs and I love these switches.

One other plus, if you want to try a different layout for just one row, you just need to get that one row instead of an entire plate and save a lot of soldering.

[jacobolus]

Instead of tilting all the rows, I recommend tilting the row or two closer than the home row (possibly more than the buckling spring keyboards do), and then simply raising (without tilting) the rows further than the home row: first, every bit you tilt those further away rows, they get less natural to press (because the switch axis gets further out of alignment with the direction of finger motion); and second, tilting doesn’t actually get you as much height step as you ideally want for the further away rows.

The Model F is an answer to the question, “how do we make something that feels sorta like a beam spring (or selectric), cheaper”. The way IBM answered that question is by dramatically reducing the number of modular per-switch parts, to just barrels, flippies, and keycaps, so that most of the keyboard can be constructed/assembled by robots. Since they wanted to re-use parts, they needed to figure out some way of getting the customary height stagger and slight tilt from row to row, so they angled the keycaps a bit and curved the plate.

But this design only makes sense if you have a single big piece of metal that is easy to bend uniformly. If you have fully separate strips, you can do anything with them, and there’s no reason to copy suboptimal design elements.

[jdcarpe]

Instead of tilting all the rows, I recommend tilting the row or two closer than the home row (possibly more than the buckling spring keyboards do), and then simply raising (without tilting) the rows further than the home row: first, every bit you tilt those further away rows, they get less natural to press (because the switch axis gets further out of alignment with the direction of finger motion); and second, tilting doesn’t actually get you as much height step as you ideally want for the further away rows.

The Model F is an answer to the question, “how do we make something that feels sorta like a beam spring (or selectric), cheaper”. The way IBM answered that question is by dramatically reducing the number of modular per-switch parts, to just barrels, flippies, and keycaps, so that most of the keyboard can be constructed/assembled by robots. Since they wanted to re-use parts, they needed to figure out some way of getting the customary height stagger and slight tilt from row to row, so they angled the keycaps a bit and curved the plate.

But this design only makes sense if you have a single big piece of metal that is easy to bend uniformly. If you have fully separate strips, you can do anything with them, and there’s no reason to copy suboptimal design elements.

I'm very interested in what you are saying here. What would be your thoughts on how we would support the rows of PCBs inside a case, some type of standoffs?

[Melvang]

I was thinking just soldered right to the switches and call it a day.

[0100010]

I have a legitimate necro bump here.

(Attachment Link)

I designed this with using "C" channel sized 3/4" across the face with 3/4" legs (can be cut shorter very easy) with 1/16" thick for perfect use with MX switches.  I took some measurements from an M plate and I did some number crunching and using the top face of the switch hole as a tangent from the bottom face of the M plate I get 11.46° difference between faces or 168.54° depending on which direction you are coming from.  While I have no idea if caps will crash with the channels pushed in tight, that would be easily fixable once side plates are added into the equation.

As far as wiring, this would either need to be done with individual PCB (enabler), hand wire, or enabler style for the whole rows.  I realize that there isn't any stab holes in the space bar but I didn't feel like digging up those numbers.

What do you guys think.

Wow!  Now there is something that looks like it would work.  Would have to figure out how to cut the switch holes into the C channel (I don't know enough about laser or water cutters to know if you program in a height standoff).

Add some 'enabler' rows customized for each C channel row, wire the columns, add a controller - done!

[Melvang]

I have a legitimate necro bump here.

(Attachment Link)

I designed this with using "C" channel sized 3/4" across the face with 3/4" legs (can be cut shorter very easy) with 1/16" thick for perfect use with MX switches.  I took some measurements from an M plate and I did some number crunching and using the top face of the switch hole as a tangent from the bottom face of the M plate I get 11.46° difference between faces or 168.54° depending on which direction you are coming from.  While I have no idea if caps will crash with the channels pushed in tight, that would be easily fixable once side plates are added into the equation.

As far as wiring, this would either need to be done with individual PCB (enabler), hand wire, or enabler style for the whole rows.  I realize that there isn't any stab holes in the space bar but I didn't feel like digging up those numbers.

What do you guys think.

Wow!  Now there is something that looks like it would work.  Would have to figure out how to cut the switch holes into the C channel (I don't know enough about laser or water cutters to know if you program in a height standoff).

Add some 'enabler' rows customized for each C channel row, wire the columns, add a controller - done!

If they can cut anything over 3/4" that won't be anything to worry about.  My idea for the rest of the case would involve a tab out the end of each channel and then bolt that down to the edge of a piece of aluminum plate, along with a piece at the front and back screwed to the legs on the very front and back channel.  This would end up having the exposed plate look similar to GON keyboards but there will most likely end up being a small gap between the pieces though it shouldn't be big, guessing no more than .025"

[dorkvader]

wow I love it!

You can easily play with jacobolus' idea of tilting some rows and raising others, all with a simple to make endcap. You can even do this on the cheap with some bolts and through holes, but it would be best to just get it lasered.

[Melvang]

If anyone wants files, I would provide them for free.  I do also have some enablers left over that I would be willing to sell