Author Topic: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!  (Read 27615 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline botchm

  • Posts: 10
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #200 on: Tue, 11 February 2020, 13:34:57 »
Join discord to look at this beauty.

Show Image



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Woooww, that looks amazing. You would be lucky to get your hands on something that sick looking, it oozes some dark alien vibes.. If there is a black variant, I will definitely sign up for the raffle
Any ideas on the price yet?

I know, imagine. He said very limited :( like super limited 25-45. But I told I have 1k set aside already haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Nivengoh

  • Posts: 10
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #201 on: Tue, 11 February 2020, 13:38:10 »
Seeing all these render has me really hype, its such a shame its only a limited run. I really don't have much confident in my luck to win raffle =(
KBD8x | E8-V1 | Xeno 75 | RAMA U80-A

Offline notabotscammer

  • Posts: 1
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #202 on: Tue, 11 February 2020, 19:36:58 »
very interested in the white case with the rose gold knob

Offline TonyPia

  • Posts: 35
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #203 on: Tue, 11 February 2020, 20:46:01 »
What's your discord?

Offline d00deitsnik

  • Posts: 197
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Grails: SA Olivia, 1800 w/ only Latriualum keycaps
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #204 on: Tue, 11 February 2020, 21:54:52 »
What's your discord?

First post has a link to the discord sir.

Offline kalayna

  • Posts: 1
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #205 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 08:13:24 »
Design nerd here, I have to ask - what software did you use to design this?

Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #206 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 08:22:28 »
Design nerd here, I have to ask - what software did you use to design this?

The keyboard was designed in Fusion 360. I swapped to Fusion after 7 years in solidworks prior to starting this project. Haven't looked back for a moment.

Offline willyG

  • Posts: 11
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #207 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 10:16:35 »
Can you make the bottom piece in in color / anodize it? I think white top ruby red bottom would look super trill :)) Sexy keeb either way  :eek:

Offline hineybush

  • * Maker
  • Posts: 1238
  • Location: Dayton, OH, USA
  • too many ideas, not enough money
    • hineybush keyboards
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #208 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 14:58:48 »
idk about that plate lol

may as well just make it PCB mount with a half plate

Offline Remsky

  • Posts: 284
  • Location: Portland, OR
  • Lubed switch count > Puddsy post count
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #209 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 15:35:37 »
Its integrated plate, one side of the switch will always be stiffer when we are talking about a switch near the edge like left control or caps. The alphas look uniform enough but why not just make a half plate with just the bottom row and top row having the integrated plate so that the pcb still has something to be mounted onto with switches. Your simulations are doing one keystroke at a time rather than multiple subsequent (sometimes concurrent) strokes within a short time period of each other. People also dont always hit the center of the keycap/switch directly at a perfect 90 degrees. Some people type heavily and others light. The simulations work only in a theoretical setting and arent really practical. A partial plate will provide as much consistency in typing feel without having to worry about whether or not those switch cutouts will break or bend.

Overall I think the plate is over engineered and you could've taken a much simpler, cost effective approach if you wanted to achieve uniformity.

Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #210 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 16:35:53 »
Its integrated plate, one side of the switch will always be stiffer when we are talking about a switch near the edge like left control or caps. The alphas look uniform enough but why not just make a half plate with just the bottom row and top row having the integrated plate so that the pcb still has something to be mounted onto with switches. Your simulations are doing one keystroke at a time rather than multiple subsequent (sometimes concurrent) strokes within a short time period of each other. People also dont always hit the center of the keycap/switch directly at a perfect 90 degrees. Some people type heavily and others light. The simulations work only in a theoretical setting and arent really practical. A partial plate will provide as much consistency in typing feel without having to worry about whether or not those switch cutouts will break or bend.

Overall I think the plate is over engineered and you could've taken a much simpler, cost effective approach if you wanted to achieve uniformity.

Let's go through this bit by bit. Much like with Iron165, all engineering was done for the worst-case scenario of 2N or 200g force if you want to compare it to spring weights. From speaking with those who have typed on a 165 FE, this worst-case engineering process works for creating a more consistent typing experience, even if it doesn't represent the average user. Next, in terms of forces being not normal to the plate, I invite you to try and type off-angle right now. Likely, your finger just slipped over the key as switches are constrained to follow a normal path to the plate. If any sideways forces exist, they are due to friction between your skin and the keycap, a force so minimal it isn't worth time approximating. Finally, to address the one keycap at a time simulations: the fastest typists on here are at 200 wpm or so? With an average word length of 5 letters, that's 1000 letters a minute or 16.6 letters a second. If we generously round up, that means you depress a key every 1/20th of a second. Under a 2N load, the spring rate of aluminum is considerably faster than that.

Offline Remsky

  • Posts: 284
  • Location: Portland, OR
  • Lubed switch count > Puddsy post count
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #211 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 17:33:19 »
Its integrated plate, one side of the switch will always be stiffer when we are talking about a switch near the edge like left control or caps. The alphas look uniform enough but why not just make a half plate with just the bottom row and top row having the integrated plate so that the pcb still has something to be mounted onto with switches. Your simulations are doing one keystroke at a time rather than multiple subsequent (sometimes concurrent) strokes within a short time period of each other. People also dont always hit the center of the keycap/switch directly at a perfect 90 degrees. Some people type heavily and others light. The simulations work only in a theoretical setting and arent really practical. A partial plate will provide as much consistency in typing feel without having to worry about whether or not those switch cutouts will break or bend.

Overall I think the plate is over engineered and you could've taken a much simpler, cost effective approach if you wanted to achieve uniformity.
Let's go through this bit by bit. Much like with Iron165, all engineering was done for the worst-case scenario of 2N or 200g force if you want to compare it to spring weights. From speaking with those who have typed on a 165 FE, this worst-case engineering process works for creating a more consistent typing experience, even if it doesn't represent the average user. Next, in terms of forces being not normal to the plate, I invite you to try and type off-angle right now. Likely, your finger just slipped over the key as switches are constrained to follow a normal path to the plate. If any sideways forces exist, they are due to friction between your skin and the keycap, a force so minimal it isn't worth time approximating. Finally, to address the one keycap at a time simulations: the fastest typists on here are at 200 wpm or so? With an average word length of 5 letters, that's 1000 letters a minute or 16.6 letters a second. If we generously round up, that means you depress a key every 1/20th of a second. Under a 2N load, the spring rate of aluminum is considerably faster than that.
- go observe your fingers resting on keycaps in typing form. It is not a perfect 90 deg. My argument is that its not a single point like your simulations use but rather an entire area that may or may not exert its force evenly. You can't assume a perfect force and say it transitions to a practical scenario.

- 200g is way more than what is necessary to actuate a switch. Just look at the most popular spring weights which usually fall in the lower to mid 60g weighting. Lets take the point above and assume that your 90 deg theoretical typing pressure completely applies to practical typing. You can make the plate consistent for 200g, but 200g is not anywhere close to how much force is applied per keystroke. Most people bottom out their switches whether harshly or lightly. Even with people who harshly bottom out, they might increase the spring weight to the upper 70s at most. Some outliers love weights above the 70s. Those are still obscure cases since the 70-89g range is still uncommon in most custom boards relative to 50-69g range. So you are basically adjusting the feel of the board for the .001% of people who might actually constantly type with 200g of force at a reasonable WPM. Consistency != flex. Your plate can be consistently stiff and still be consistent.

- Your simulations don't even account for a pcb. This means that even if we assume your hypothetical force simulation to be a 1-1 replica of real typing, it would still be inaccurate. You aren't accounting for the fr4 pcb that will go beneath the aluminum plate and whatever thickness that you choose for it.

Sometimes consistency shouldnt always the goal, and its seriously become a fad nowadays. Perfect consistency in keyboards is extremely hard to achieve and sometimes impossible with a given mount: Your F row, arrow cluster and nav cluster won't be consistent feel wise with your alphas or mods, its just a facet of many mounting styles and how you implement flex cuts. What matters is if the board provide a comfortable typing experience on the alphas and mods where typing is most frequent. I think you are going a bit overboard with the science and not looking into the practicality of things.
« Last Edit: Wed, 12 February 2020, 17:37:10 by Remsky »

Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #212 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 17:57:38 »
Its integrated plate, one side of the switch will always be stiffer when we are talking about a switch near the edge like left control or caps. The alphas look uniform enough but why not just make a half plate with just the bottom row and top row having the integrated plate so that the pcb still has something to be mounted onto with switches. Your simulations are doing one keystroke at a time rather than multiple subsequent (sometimes concurrent) strokes within a short time period of each other. People also dont always hit the center of the keycap/switch directly at a perfect 90 degrees. Some people type heavily and others light. The simulations work only in a theoretical setting and arent really practical. A partial plate will provide as much consistency in typing feel without having to worry about whether or not those switch cutouts will break or bend.

Overall I think the plate is over engineered and you could've taken a much simpler, cost effective approach if you wanted to achieve uniformity.
Let's go through this bit by bit. Much like with Iron165, all engineering was done for the worst-case scenario of 2N or 200g force if you want to compare it to spring weights. From speaking with those who have typed on a 165 FE, this worst-case engineering process works for creating a more consistent typing experience, even if it doesn't represent the average user. Next, in terms of forces being not normal to the plate, I invite you to try and type off-angle right now. Likely, your finger just slipped over the key as switches are constrained to follow a normal path to the plate. If any sideways forces exist, they are due to friction between your skin and the keycap, a force so minimal it isn't worth time approximating. Finally, to address the one keycap at a time simulations: the fastest typists on here are at 200 wpm or so? With an average word length of 5 letters, that's 1000 letters a minute or 16.6 letters a second. If we generously round up, that means you depress a key every 1/20th of a second. Under a 2N load, the spring rate of aluminum is considerably faster than that.
- go observe your fingers resting on keycaps in typing form. It is not a perfect 90 deg. My argument is that its not a single point like your simulations use but rather an entire area that may or may not exert its force evenly. You can't assume a perfect force and say it transitions to a practical scenario.

- 200g is way more than what is necessary to actuate a switch. Just look at the most popular spring weights which usually fall in the lower to mid 60g weighting. Lets take the point above and assume that your 90 deg theoretical typing pressure completely applies to practical typing. You can make the plate consistent for 200g, but 200g is not anywhere close to how much force is applied per keystroke. Most people bottom out their switches whether harshly or lightly. Even with people who harshly bottom out, they might increase the spring weight to the upper 70s at most. Some outliers love weights above the 70s. Those are still obscure cases since the 70-89g range is still uncommon in most custom boards relative to 50-69g range. So you are basically adjusting the feel of the board for the .001% of people who might actually constantly type with 200g of force at a reasonable WPM. Consistency != flex. Your plate can be consistently stiff and still be consistent.

- Your simulations don't even account for a pcb. This means that even if we assume your hypothetical force simulation to be a 1-1 replica of real typing, it would still be inaccurate. You aren't accounting for the fr4 pcb that will go beneath the aluminum plate and whatever thickness that you choose for it.

Sometimes consistency shouldnt always the goal, and its seriously become a fad nowadays. Perfect consistency in keyboards is extremely hard to achieve and sometimes impossible with a given mount: Your F row, arrow cluster and nav cluster won't be consistent feel wise with your alphas or mods, its just a facet of many mounting styles and how you implement flex cuts. What matters is if the board provide a comfortable typing experience on the alphas and mods where typing is most frequent. I think you are going a bit overboard with the science and not looking into the practicality of things.

Okay, let's do this one more time.

- My simulations aren't a single point, they're force over area, with that area being the switch contact surface on the plate. With the way keycaps are designed and the way the switch physically works, the difference between pushing on the left side of the cap vs the right side of the cap is negligible when it comes to the force distribution over that area.

- 2N was an experimentally determined upper-boundary during the iron165 IC. The great thing about working with non-elastic materials (like metals) is that if flex is consistent at 2N, it's also consistent at all loads less than that.

- They do account for a PCB. You're just wrong there.

- I've never pretended I want the F-row, columns, and arrows to flex as much as the alphas flex. In fact, I'm doing exactly what you're suggesting: which is prioritizing the feel of the alphas and mods. That's the reason why there are no crazy cutouts in that section of the plate. I'm going overboard with the science to show that not only is this analysis possible in keyboards but that it has practical benefits to an end-user.
« Last Edit: Wed, 12 February 2020, 17:59:28 by NathanAlphaMan »

Offline lbaron

  • Posts: 39
  • Location: Boulder, CO
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #213 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 18:31:48 »
Its integrated plate, one side of the switch will always be stiffer when we are talking about a switch near the edge like left control or caps. The alphas look uniform enough but why not just make a half plate with just the bottom row and top row having the integrated plate so that the pcb still has something to be mounted onto with switches. Your simulations are doing one keystroke at a time rather than multiple subsequent (sometimes concurrent) strokes within a short time period of each other. People also dont always hit the center of the keycap/switch directly at a perfect 90 degrees. Some people type heavily and others light. The simulations work only in a theoretical setting and arent really practical. A partial plate will provide as much consistency in typing feel without having to worry about whether or not those switch cutouts will break or bend.

Overall I think the plate is over engineered and you could've taken a much simpler, cost effective approach if you wanted to achieve uniformity.
Let's go through this bit by bit. Much like with Iron165, all engineering was done for the worst-case scenario of 2N or 200g force if you want to compare it to spring weights. From speaking with those who have typed on a 165 FE, this worst-case engineering process works for creating a more consistent typing experience, even if it doesn't represent the average user. Next, in terms of forces being not normal to the plate, I invite you to try and type off-angle right now. Likely, your finger just slipped over the key as switches are constrained to follow a normal path to the plate. If any sideways forces exist, they are due to friction between your skin and the keycap, a force so minimal it isn't worth time approximating. Finally, to address the one keycap at a time simulations: the fastest typists on here are at 200 wpm or so? With an average word length of 5 letters, that's 1000 letters a minute or 16.6 letters a second. If we generously round up, that means you depress a key every 1/20th of a second. Under a 2N load, the spring rate of aluminum is considerably faster than that.
- go observe your fingers resting on keycaps in typing form. It is not a perfect 90 deg. My argument is that its not a single point like your simulations use but rather an entire area that may or may not exert its force evenly. You can't assume a perfect force and say it transitions to a practical scenario.

- 200g is way more than what is necessary to actuate a switch. Just look at the most popular spring weights which usually fall in the lower to mid 60g weighting. Lets take the point above and assume that your 90 deg theoretical typing pressure completely applies to practical typing. You can make the plate consistent for 200g, but 200g is not anywhere close to how much force is applied per keystroke. Most people bottom out their switches whether harshly or lightly. Even with people who harshly bottom out, they might increase the spring weight to the upper 70s at most. Some outliers love weights above the 70s. Those are still obscure cases since the 70-89g range is still uncommon in most custom boards relative to 50-69g range. So you are basically adjusting the feel of the board for the .001% of people who might actually constantly type with 200g of force at a reasonable WPM. Consistency != flex. Your plate can be consistently stiff and still be consistent.

- Your simulations don't even account for a pcb. This means that even if we assume your hypothetical force simulation to be a 1-1 replica of real typing, it would still be inaccurate. You aren't accounting for the fr4 pcb that will go beneath the aluminum plate and whatever thickness that you choose for it.

Sometimes consistency shouldnt always the goal, and its seriously become a fad nowadays. Perfect consistency in keyboards is extremely hard to achieve and sometimes impossible with a given mount: Your F row, arrow cluster and nav cluster won't be consistent feel wise with your alphas or mods, its just a facet of many mounting styles and how you implement flex cuts. What matters is if the board provide a comfortable typing experience on the alphas and mods where typing is most frequent. I think you are going a bit overboard with the science and not looking into the practicality of things.

Has it really become a fad?  I feel like we were the first board to put engineering to it to try and make the typing on alphas feel more consistent. 

As for your 2N being crazy.  Look at this:

.

He is playing in that sloped line on the left called the youngs modulus.  As long as you don't exceed that area, metals will spring back to their original shape with no permanent deformation and behave as such.  So at 2N he might exhibit a 0.15mm displacement of keycap switch, but at 0.7N it may only be 0.09mm, either way the plate will behave the same uniformly.

Offline Remsky

  • Posts: 284
  • Location: Portland, OR
  • Lubed switch count > Puddsy post count
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #214 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 18:42:58 »

Okay, let's do this one more time.

- My simulations aren't a single point, they're force over area, with that area being the switch contact surface on the plate. With the way keycaps are designed and the way the switch physically works, the difference between pushing on the left side of the cap vs the right side of the cap is negligible when it comes to the force distribution over that area.

- 2N was an experimentally determined upper-boundary during the iron165 IC. The great thing about working with non-elastic materials (like metals) is that if flex is consistent at 2N, it's also consistent at all loads less than that.

- They do account for a PCB. You're just wrong there.

- I've never pretended I want the F-row, columns, and arrows to flex as much as the alphas flex. In fact, I'm doing exactly what you're suggesting: which is prioritizing the feel of the alphas and mods. That's the reason why there are no crazy cutouts in that section of the plate. I'm going overboard with the science to show that not only is this analysis possible in keyboards but that it has practical benefits to an end-user.
- Your force is still off for keys like mods and some alphas that don't have mounting/connections on all sides. Take for example the popular 3-sided space bar on OTD boards and now plenty modern boards. The flex while pressing down on the spacebar is relatively even on the top, left and right side of the spacebar switch. The bottom side of the spacebar has no mounting, it flexes considerably more than the rest. if you don't press down on the bottom side of the spacebar you wont really notice it as much. Take your left control or shift for example. They are connected via the bottom side of the switch to the plate structure/left control respectively. If I disproportionately place more force on the top side of that left shift, it will bend/flex more than if I put the same amount of force on the bottom side. Keycaps help distribute force on the switch, that doesn't mean that they perfectly spread out force. Your constraint when it comes to weighting is wrong.

- Consistency doesn't guarantee flexibility. As stated in my example above it could be guaranteed in your simulation but maybe not in a practical setting. Your QAZ column is also stiffer than the rest of the alphas because there are two connections between Q and the much stiffer numrow compared to how the rest of the switches in the qwerty row are.

- I assumed not because your simulations don't show a picture of the pcb nor do you mention that you did test with a pcb. When you say you made a visual representation of a test, then everything you tested should be present in that visualization. There is only a plate in those visualizations. You don't even make a mention of a pcb in the plate design section.

- Its great to go overboard with science when the approach is right. I disagree with your approach with this board.

Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #215 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 19:18:47 »

Okay, let's do this one more time.

- My simulations aren't a single point, they're force over area, with that area being the switch contact surface on the plate. With the way keycaps are designed and the way the switch physically works, the difference between pushing on the left side of the cap vs the right side of the cap is negligible when it comes to the force distribution over that area.

- 2N was an experimentally determined upper-boundary during the iron165 IC. The great thing about working with non-elastic materials (like metals) is that if flex is consistent at 2N, it's also consistent at all loads less than that.

- They do account for a PCB. You're just wrong there.

- I've never pretended I want the F-row, columns, and arrows to flex as much as the alphas flex. In fact, I'm doing exactly what you're suggesting: which is prioritizing the feel of the alphas and mods. That's the reason why there are no crazy cutouts in that section of the plate. I'm going overboard with the science to show that not only is this analysis possible in keyboards but that it has practical benefits to an end-user.
- Your force is still off for keys like mods and some alphas that don't have mounting/connections on all sides. Take for example the popular 3-sided space bar on OTD boards and now plenty modern boards. The flex while pressing down on the spacebar is relatively even on the top, left and right side of the spacebar switch. The bottom side of the spacebar has no mounting, it flexes considerably more than the rest. if you don't press down on the bottom side of the spacebar you wont really notice it as much. Take your left control or shift for example. They are connected via the bottom side of the switch to the plate structure/left control respectively. If I disproportionately place more force on the top side of that left shift, it will bend/flex more than if I put the same amount of force on the bottom side. Keycaps help distribute force on the switch, that doesn't mean that they perfectly spread out force. Your constraint when it comes to weighting is wrong.

- Consistency doesn't guarantee flexibility. As stated in my example above it could be guaranteed in your simulation but maybe not in a practical setting. Your QAZ column is also stiffer than the rest of the alphas because there are two connections between Q and the much stiffer numrow compared to how the rest of the switches in the qwerty row are.

- I assumed not because your simulations don't show a picture of the pcb nor do you mention that you did test with a pcb. When you say you made a visual representation of a test, then everything you tested should be present in that visualization. There is only a plate in those visualizations. You don't even make a mention of a pcb in the plate design section.

- Its great to go overboard with science when the approach is right. I disagree with your approach with this board.

Cool. You have your opinions and I have my months of research and data analysis. Yes there are some problem areas in the plate, namely the much higher compliance values on the QAZ column. But again, as I've mentioned in both the write-up and various replies throughout the thread, the plate is ever changing. Since the IC went live I've already incorporated a lot of the constructive crtisism I've received into the model to improve generation. The QAZ issue is nearly fixed and left shift no longer floats. I apologise for not talking about PCB analysis in the write-up, but it's also information that's readily available in the thread in the form of replies to questions about that exact topic.

Offline Jaxxstatic

  • Posts: 301
  • Haptic Recon
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #216 on: Wed, 12 February 2020, 20:12:44 »
Interested in how the prototype actually comes out though.

Offline asdds22

  • Posts: 8
  • Location: Japan/Tokyo
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #217 on: Thu, 13 February 2020, 09:47:14 »
Even though I questioned about the shear stress and Nathan replied, the discussion about orthogonal force simulation won't be over. This should be described in the first post.
The guy wants you to present in the conference-style I think. How surprised it is. I never saw a question like that in my conference experience. Or the first post should be described in a paper-style? with a proper reference?
As a mechanical engineering graduate, as a student in a master's program, the discussion made me sad. That guy didn't even know how the stress made deformation in a specific material.

Offline vewy_nice

  • Posts: 308
  • Location: NH, USA
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #218 on: Thu, 13 February 2020, 11:36:40 »
Even though I questioned about the shear stress and Nathan replied, the discussion about orthogonal force simulation won't be over. This should be described in the first post.
The guy wants you to present in the conference-style I think. How surprised it is. I never saw a question like that in my conference experience. Or the first post should be described in a paper-style? with a proper reference?
As a mechanical engineering graduate, as a student in a master's program, the discussion made me sad. That guy didn't even know how the stress made deformation in a specific material.
I do tech support for a company that makes instruments to measure fluid properties, mostly viscosity.
Sometimes I'll get a call and someone's like "My viscosity is reading very different between setup a and setup b! Why!?"
And then when I mention that setup a has a shear rate of 0.50 sec-1, and setup b has a shear rate of 65 sec-1, they're confused why that matters... And the response to me inquiring about rheological properties of their sample results in a "The what, now?"
And these are supposed to be industry professionals lol.

Anyway...

I'd type on a bed of soggy moss if it looked this sick, so... Carry on with the design!
« Last Edit: Thu, 13 February 2020, 11:38:20 by vewy_nice »

Offline dubious

  • 쏘쿨
  • Posts: 568
  • Location: shralpin the gnar
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #219 on: Thu, 13 February 2020, 12:17:16 »
Nice! I'd like to stand on that thing

Offline Butterbeer

  • Posts: 40
  • Location: California
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #220 on: Thu, 13 February 2020, 12:42:18 »
Itís nice to see keyboard design emphasize a scientific approach, otherwise itís just an exercise in aesthetic value, taste, and personal preference. Often the challenge Iíve observed is explaining the science in a straightforward way that everyday people can easily understand, digest, and appreciate.

Offline hottrout

  • Posts: 348
  • Location: Northern Ireland
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #221 on: Fri, 14 February 2020, 07:19:44 »
Interested in how the prototype actually comes out though.

Agreed.  A great design and looks, hopefully it can be actually made.  Good luck with this.
I started with a Sinclair human flesh keyboard in 1980 and it has never stopped.

Rig1 |i9-7940x@4.8ghz|32GB(3600)|RTX 2080Ti|Bespoke Water, 360m Rad|X299 Prime Deluxe|EK x299 Monoblock|Optane 900p|2x1TB 960 Pro|2x10TB Helium|Dell U3415W + Dell UP2116Q
Rig2 |i9-9900k@5GHz|16GB(3200)|STRIX1080Ti|EK Closed Water Loop|Z390-F|1TB 960 Pro|Dell AW3418DW
Rig3 |i5-7500|16GB(2400)|H110 Pro BTC+|8x1080Ti|2x1200Watt PSU

Offline L8T

  • Posts: 6
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #222 on: Fri, 14 February 2020, 11:41:12 »
Its a cool idea but idk why you are trying to get consistent feel when the plate displacement is less than 0.2mm. Im also worried about the left and right shifts pinging cuz its basically a cantilever, but i assume the plate material is stiff enough to prevent that :S Either way gl with your research!

Offline lush_bunny

  • Posts: 190
  • CLACK CLACK M**********R
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #223 on: Fri, 14 February 2020, 12:39:26 »
With the amount of interest this board is generating, I doubt Iíll get a slot. Apart from that, discussion in discord is implying big bucks. So I have to ask: will a round 2 be considered? Thanks!

Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #224 on: Fri, 14 February 2020, 12:52:16 »
Its a cool idea but idk why you are trying to get consistent feel when the plate displacement is less than 0.2mm. Im also worried about the left and right shifts pinging cuz its basically a cantilever, but i assume the plate material is stiff enough to prevent that :S Either way gl with your research!

I'm working on getting that number up, 10N/mm is the target for compliance.

With the amount of interest this board is generating, I doubt Iíll get a slot. Apart from that, discussion in discord is implying big bucks. So I have to ask: will a round 2 be considered? Thanks!

Let's get round 1 done first. ;D


Offline flysloth

  • Posts: 1
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #225 on: Fri, 14 February 2020, 20:46:06 »
Wonderful!
I like the rotary joystick.

Offline BlankeyGotCaps

  • Posts: 21
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #226 on: Mon, 17 February 2020, 09:43:57 »
Absolutely Stunning.

Offline Darthbaggins

  • Posts: 19
  • Location: Acworth, GA
  • DB_Custom_PCs
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #227 on: Tue, 18 February 2020, 21:40:30 »
Beautiful design, I'd love to get this board  :eek:
               
CM Quickfire TK/MX Browns & MX Blues variant too -    CM Pro S RGB/MX Browns  -  iKBC Poker II Type C/MX Browns  -  DK 9008 OCN Edition/ MX Black


Offline YoRHannya

  • Posts: 1
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #228 on: Wed, 19 February 2020, 02:21:23 »
Beautiful design. Would love a chance to have this board.

Offline Felt

  • Posts: 13
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #229 on: Thu, 20 February 2020, 23:42:51 »
Is this board going to be run via normal GB or is it going to be a raffle? thx

Offline BanksE

  • Posts: 1
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #230 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 00:10:02 »
Im excited to see where the bottom plate design can be carried over in the future. I love beam/truss structures in architecture and this has a very organic truss vibe that I like a lot.

Offline Void225

  • Posts: 3
  • Location: New York City
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #231 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 10:23:13 »
I want this keyboard but with hotswap on the keys. I can do and don't mind soldering but hotswap is just so much more convenient for dealing with broken switches and just "I feel like playing around". RGB would be nice too but not essential. Yes I know you poo-pooed both of these on the front page, but my opinion stands: I would buy this instantly with one or both features; without it's a bit less attractive and will depend on price and keycap availability. I don't understand why "high end" is somehow in avoiding these features. To me, high end means MORE features, not less.
« Last Edit: Fri, 21 February 2020, 10:36:54 by Void225 »

Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #232 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 12:08:21 »
Is this board going to be run via normal GB or is it going to be a raffle? thx

The board will be run via raffle. Quantity, Date, and Price are all still TBD.

Offline Crack85

  • Posts: 18
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #233 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 12:52:32 »
Raffle.... Well there goes my chance of getting one. Really cool board though.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Offline NathanAlphaMan

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 101
  • Location: Lake Tahoe
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #234 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 15:52:53 »
Raffle.... Well there goes my chance of getting one. Really cool board though.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

I'm still considering whether or not to have a limited amount of boards reserved for a Vickery auction after the raffle spots deliver. So not all hope is gone :p

Offline JayBeamz

  • Posts: 7
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #235 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 19:57:01 »
this is just gorgeous!.... perfection perfected.... really hope i can get my hands on one, knowing that now it will be via raffle  :confused: :eek:

Offline dom

  • Posts: 49
  • Location: EU
  • XOXO
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #236 on: Fri, 21 February 2020, 23:25:10 »
I'm still considering whether or not to have a limited amount of boards reserved for a Vickery auction after the raffle spots deliver. So not all hope is gone :p

Life is short. Please do unlimited GB  ;D

Offline triplec110h

  • Posts: 2
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #237 on: Sat, 22 February 2020, 13:29:01 »
Another 75% fanboy checking in. Looking forward to joining the raffle!

Offline Karni

  • Posts: 35
Re: [IC] Evolv - 75% Keyboard | Color Poll!
« Reply #238 on: Sat, 22 February 2020, 15:46:17 »
i dont even like big boards, but just shut up and take my money already, this is awesome