RC time constant for hardware debouncing can be arbitrarily set by the person designing the keyboard, the limiting factor here is how long a single bounce of the keyswitch takes, If the longest possible bounce is 40 microseconds(depends on the switch), then you can get a reliable digital read (both open and closed) from a different set of switches every ~50 microseconds. Third, I have some real concerns about the answer you got about question 3: Second, Cherry is going to have to really do their homework with switch wear and contaminants to get reliability. First off, the 20ms claim for competing keyboards only applies to poorly engineered trash. I wish I saw this earlier, and TBH, it smells pretty fishy. There are some limits to what they will tell me, but they were pretty open about their stuff. Let me know if there is something you guys want me to take a picture of or ask the Cherry guys about. This year, everybody and their mom are selling re-branded monoprice-esque Cherry MX boards, or the AULA-Razer Blackwidow 2014 Khail boards (I even found some topre style capacitive boards). Last year, when I saw a Shenzhen manufacturer promoting their fancy gaming keyboards, I would tap the esc key and sigh. To preface a little bit, in one year, the mechanical keyboard scene seems to have changed completely. Here's album I made of the mechanical keyboards I have spotted so far. Over the next couple days I will ask them more questions which are non confidential. I had more questions, but they started getting a specific (in regards to their electronics) and/or are irrelevant to the new technology. It operates pretty much like a "little oscilloscope." The new RK controller can debounce a switch matrix just-as or more effectively than you could in hardware without the input lag. Any time you even out the switch bouncing in hardware, there must be an in line capacitor which inherently adds lag to the signal (due to charge time). Question: Would solving switch debouncing using hardware alone be more efficient than probing the matrix and analyzing with a controller?Īnswer: No. Question: If that is the case, then would there be an added benefit to using the 200hz PS2 bus (or similarly, an overclocked USB at 1khz)?Īnswer: The benefit would not be exacerbated, because the lag from the connection interface is additive, not multiplicative. Also, despite advertising 1ms response time, it is more likely you will experience less than that. Question: When the input lag is reduced to 1ms, does the 125hz unified serial bus become the bottle neck?Īnswer: Yes, this is because the internal lag is reduced to the very minimum. This is different from the current method, where all pins on the controller are generally probed with the same current, which is then directed by diodes. A unique voltage is used to probe each pin, and the controller uses the final cumuilative voltage of the X and Y axis to determine the actuated switches.All of the columns and all of the rows are wired together and connected to the controller without diodes (similarly to how a hand wired matrix looks, except the X and Y axis would be wired identically).The engineer I spoke with explicitly told me that some of the things we discussed are a little confidential, so for the sake of that cool dude's job, I am going to omit some of the details about their LED circuitry and controllers.Īlso, it should be noted that everything written here is paraphrased, and unless I record and transcribe our conversations with permission, I am not directly quoting any representative from Cherry Corp.įirst of all, here is what the new Cherry "RealKey" technology promotes:Īn input lag reduction from 20ms to 1ms over the standard matrix scanning method.Ī more inexpensive method for achieving N-Key rollover (without the need for diodes)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |