Aussie 200 Watt Limit Thread

[adrian_sm]

3.7amps

Remember that is just the power in to the motor not out. So you can bump it up a bit to take account if efficiency losses.

Has anybody here actually measured what power the "200w" bikes are actually drawing? I would love to see the data if people have measured it.

[Diamondback]

:lol: 3.7amps

Remember that is just the power in to the motor not out.

maybe so, but the CA displays current draw from the battery, not what the motor is actually producing ?
if that's correct the CA has to display no more than 200W or Mr POPO can plainly see im making more than 200W !

Jason

[Hyena]

The other side of the arguement is the 200w we're all measuring with our watt meters and CAs is the power coming out of the battery not the power the motor is putting out.
Most hub motors are 80% efficient at best and when accelerating off the line from a stop the efficiency is often 50% or less.
So a truely legit 200w motor on a dyno would very likely peak at 500w or so on your CA under hard acceleration off the line or on a steep hill and then settle down once cruising.

The previously mentioned rumors about the laws being changed to 200 (or 250w) continuous would make alot more sense and be more fair and reasonable for ebikers.
That would enable you to have to legally have something that performs in a useful manner up hills without having people riding around unlicensed on what are essentially electric motor bikes.
As Kurt said, pretty much every commercially available ebike currently sold here is illegal by the current definitions. Sure cruising along the flat at 36v they're going to draw around 200w but simple maths dictates that they're going to far exceed that with a 12-17 amp controller and a 36v - which most I've seen use.

edit: ack, 6 posts since I started typing

[gtadmin]

Adrian, a standard Aprilia can pull 30A @ ~24V so 700ish watts x 70% eff => 490 at the road Edit: Hi Jay

[Kurt]

:lol: 3.7amps

Remember that is just the power in to the motor not out. So you can bump it up a bit to take account if efficiency losses.

Has anybody here actually measured what power the "200w" bikes are actually drawing? I would love to see the data if people have measured it.

Years ago in 2007 my wife and I got two ebikes from Kmart. Little brushed motors driving a chain to the rear hub. They were 24v sla and they had 25A controllers so 570w they both had 200w stickers on the motor and the bike frame. They were fed 3x the legal limit on a fully charged battery

Yes i know thats not exactly what the output of the motor was due to inefficiency but it was at least double 200w. And like others have said input power or a ca showing 570w is what would get the attention .

Kurt

[gtadmin]

Know anybody selling power meters that only show 200W no matter what the actual power is?

[Kurt]

I have been regularly riding overpowered 1000-3000w e bikes from 2007 until now in both Melb and Brisbane. both On road, bike paths and around the cbd. Not once have I ever been questioned, stopped or even looked at funny by the boys in blue. It just boils down to a few things . Don't make an ass of your self so the public puts in a complaint and don't give the cop doing the rounds a reason to question you. I have always built torque bikes with great hill climbing and fast acceleration but kept the top end modest as in under 50kph.

My rc trike now on 15s is capable of 65kph but I am starting to think 12s could have been a better choice for 90% of my riding .Also the rc trike makes some noise so things could change and I am less inclined to take it on footpaths in the cbd . My old bike with 5304 and 50A controller I would take anywhere and fit in like a normal peddle biker.

kurt

[Diamondback]

i agree 100% that your attitude and riding style greatly effects your "visability" to the police.

i ride just like i would on a normal unpowered bicycle. i don't go racing around everywhere at 40kmh.
my little geared ezee motor is practically hidden by the brake disc, and almost completely hidden when i have the front panniers on.

i generally obey all the road rules im supposed to (red lights and stop signs included).
most of my rides are on cycle-ways (my local council has over 450km of them).
i have lights (light up like a mobile christmas tree at night) and i always wear my helmet.

i think i have minimal chances of ever being questioned, but there's always the chance.

does anyone here know where we could send emails and letters to about having the law changed ?
i think it would make way more sense if the law was not a power limit, but a speed limit.
or maybe inline with the USA ? i think most states there are 750W and 20mph ?

if enough people write letters and emails, maybe we might get he laws changed.
slim chances i know, but it's gotta be better that sitting on our hands complaining about it ?

Jason.

[sn0wchyld]

:idea: Know anybody selling power meters that only show 200W no matter what the actual power is?

this is pretty easy to do on the ca, just play with the settings like Vsense and shunt value, and presto! pulling 5000w magically looks like 200. the fact that your now going 60km/h and got there in under 4seconds is another issue you'll have to prove

'sorry officer, I guess these new motors are much more efficent than in the old days, 200w means allot more than it used to !'

[gtadmin]

...
'sorry officer, I guess these new motors are much more efficent than in the old days, 200w means allot more than it used to !'

or ... I guess my bike is so efficient due to it's aerodynamic shape the 200W motor performs like it's got 1500W

[Hyena]

:idea: Know anybody selling power meters that only show 200W no matter what the actual power is?

Yeah just fiddle with the shunt value, but that will throw off your AH reading too if you plan to ride around with it like that.
Maybe an opaque LCD screen protector sticker that has 198 watts printed on it is what you need for your CA

Oh, and it 'legal mode' (30% speed) my HT25 powered bike will draw around 250w cruising @ 25km/hr = a true 200w given the efficiency of the motor.
Nail it off the line and it draws 3kw but very quickly settles down as it zips straight to 25km/hr. Obviously at higher voltage and a gutsy controller happy to deliver 5kw this isn't your average off the shelf ride, but even something that spiked at 1000-1500w wouldn't be at all unreasonable to ride on the road IMO. And it's not like "omg, 5 times the legal 200w limit, throw the book at that criminal"
As I tell people all the time, the difference betwen a 36v "200w" shop bought ebike and a 48v 2000w kit is not a 10x performance increase, or like dropping a 6 litre v8 in a hatchback.

[gtadmin]

Hi guys, I was only joshing when I suggested the 200W watt meter, but it could be done by using a refaced voltmeter across the signal and negative wires of the throttle.

Anyhow, "ungoverned max of 200w" may mean when the throttle is wide open?? It wouldn't surprise me for the pollies to pass a law that could be "interpreted" by the police how they wanted to, leaving you to either just pay the "levy", or take it to court and prove their interpretation was incorrect (at your expense)

GT

[sn0wchyld]

Hi guys, I was only joshing when I suggested the 200W watt meter, but it could be done by using a refaced voltmeter across the signal and negative wires of the throttle.

Anyhow, "ungoverned max of 200w" may mean when the throttle is wide open?? It wouldn't surprise me for the pollies to pass a law that could be "interpreted" by the police how they wanted to, leaving you to either just pay the "levy", or take it to court and prove their interpretation was incorrect (at your expense)

GT

lol, just like speeding fines etc etc etc. I still remember the 'news' reports on ACA about the woman who was fined for speeding at like 130km/h, when her POS car couldn't manage more than about 95 wot. guilty until proven innocent. what a joke.

and like whats been stated before, if this law really is 'ungoverned', then ALL brushless motors are 100% legal. they need a controller to govern their operation. without it they do zip. Even if it is the case though, i doubt it'd hold up in court.

[Architectonic]

What we need to do is get some fat arsed politician to ride 5 ks around hilly terrain with a 200w ebike, then do the same again with a 500w and see which he prefers. They need to see the real world result and not just a figure on paper and that the difference between 200w and 500w isn't like doubling the speed limit in backstreets from 50 to 100km/hr

Well said. It seems so simple, yet why aren't they willing to do this?

[Miles]

You need to be making the same case as the one that appears to succeeding in the EU: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=34506

[Architectonic]

Hi guys, perhaps we need to start doing serious advocacy, starting with gathering evidence with a decent multi-community based survey, basically to get opinions on:

1. Would people more likely commute to work on a bicycle if they travelled at say 35km/h (500w) ala the Canadian laws vs 25km/h? (even with a 35km/h limit like in Alberta)

2. How many km per week would they be willing to substitute car travel with bike travel if this was the case, we can point out the amount of money they would save, the reduction in emissions and so forth.

3. Do people believe it is less safe to travel 35km/h on an electric bicycle (standard type bike with electric hub motor), than on a road bike?

4. What are peoples concerns about commuting on bicycles? We can ask about the Amsterdam statistics that show bicycles in a bicycle friendly city are relatively safe even compared to walking and how this changes their perceptions.

5. Anything else that might be important

We need to push that it is a double standard to limit the speed of electric bicycles to far less than what many cyclists can do on their own. And secondly, the environmental and quality of life vs cost of living benefits of electric bicycles.

[adrian_sm]

The best hope we have is if the Europeans actually go through with some of the changes they have been discussing. Australia is very unlikely to be proactive in increasing ebike limits as it just does not have enough political interest for a politician to stick there neck out on it. Imagine arguing to allow high speed/power limits on electric bikes, only to have the lowest common denominator take advantage of it and crash in to some old man/lady/kid/dog on a bike path.

Much easier to say we are following similar legislation developed in Europe which have bike friendly cities/culture.

For me the biggest issue is that bikes are a privileged vehicle. Allowed on shared bike/pedestrian paths. This is where it is difficult to legislate laws that do not increase the danger while allowing higher power/speed ebikes. I agree a road bike can go much faster than the ebikes speed limits, but this does limit the percentage of the population doing it to relatively fit cyclists that have spent enough time in the saddle to hopefully understand the dangers a bit. But chuck a motor on a bike, and allow anyone to do the same speeds immediately, has got to increase the risk of harm.

Personally I don't have a problem with an ebike having an assist speed similar to a fit road cyclist when on the road. But I do worry about idiots on ebikes on shared bike paths not keeping their speeds reasonable. But I can't think of a simple law to cover this, unless shared bike paths had speed limits, which would suck, or speed limits for all bikes when in the vicinity of pedestrians on shared paths..... Urrgghh... too hard to manage/prove in court etc.

- Adrian

[Architectonic]

Well shared bike paths probably should have fixed speed limits...

[whatever]

does anyone know of an commercial ebike that actually is 200watt peak power limited? ( apart from avanti)

I know the avanti motor is under 200watt peak as I tested the max amps it was spot on the limit after accounting for efficiency.
When the first fatality on an ebike in australia occurs some retailer is going to be in big trouble, hopefully that wont happen.
For those who aren't aware there was a court case that went for about 2 years in nsw supreme court regarding legality of moped style ebikes from now out of business, eazyride bikes, the 200watt limit was the police case initially, they spent a huge amount of money on 'experts' to determine the power of eazyride bikes, in the end they concentrated on the issue of pedals being the main means of propulsion, and the 'look' of the bike ( if it looks like a moped its not a bike) it put all the unregistered electric mopeds off the road ( maybe a good thing but thousands were sold around oz).
The ebike laws in oz have been an issue for a very long time, unfortunately it hasn't changed at all, even with various interest groups involved.
It must now be obvious to the authorities that almost all ebikes on the road( or being sold for onroad use) are illegal, it could result in quite a bit of trouble for the retailers involved, which are indeed popping up all over the place. Also interesting the 36v postal service ebikes using bmc front motors are also illegal and over the 200watt limit,
now that was a daring move by the melbourne retailer who convinced auspost that they were legal.

Its an issue that has to be resolved someway, one way to get quick responses is to use the media, a show such as a current affair or similar, would likely do a story on this, and I think it would get some action from the authorities ( especially if auspost was highlighted as having illegal ebikes). What that action would be though I think most likely will be negative for the ebike industry though.
I could see one of their reporters going into ebikes stores and armed with a little info they could easily show ebikes being sold are over the limit.

[hjns]

A similar discussion probably happened decades ago, when cars were going faster than horses, and speed limits had to be put in place to protect other traffic participants and the speeders themselves.

On some parts of the German Highways, there is no speed limit. However, passing a 80km/h driving truck with 200km/h is not safe. Many people do it, traffic accidents are not common, but it is still not safe.

The same is valid for high-speed cyclists (E-bikes and lycra crowd alike). Passing a slow pedaling 20km/h cyclist at 50km/h on a shared bike lane 1m wide is not safe.

Unfortunately, when enough irresponsible high-speed cyclists don't use their common sense and slow down in these kind of situations, laws have to be put in place to prevent accidents.

To me personally, I find speeding much more important than the power of a certain bike, because I believe that the kinetic energy of a high-speed object will do the most damage, and not the potential power of the bike. Therefore, I would be a proponent of limiting speed where there are other traffic participants, such as narrow bike lanes, and keep the general speed limits where there is ample room.

In Switzerland, for e-bikes there is a staggered approach combining a speed limit of 25km/h to 30km/h either PAS only, or without pedalling, from 250W (lightest category) to 1.0kW (MoPed category). Anything over 30km/h (electric only) or over 1.0kW is considered a motorcycle, and needs to comply with the motorcycle regulations.

Just my 0.02

[Architectonic]

You are right. But even on the "200w" law, how the laws are written doesn't make much sense from an engineering standpoint. "Rated" without specifying how they are rated, without understanding that an electric motor controller necessarily 'governs' the power into the motor, etc. Is the law deliberately ambiguous?

The laws WILL change at some point because of this, it is up to us to make sure that they change in favour of slightly more power output to encourage increased electric bike usage.

It would be great to see a European precedent being set, but we still need to push the issue on our own.

I think one of the problems is that either lawmakers don't want to encourage electric bicycle commuting, or they don't care, or they think that 25km/h is sufficient for the market (it is not).

[whatever]

the laws not ambiguous, the supreme court case followed its 200w peak rating not continuous, one of the papers put out by the group looking into changing the law stated the law is 130watts continuous or 200watt peak, most countries seem to be using continous power rating ( correct me if I"m wrong), that means to compare to other countries we should be referring to the limit as 130watts.

[sn0wchyld]

the laws not ambiguous, the supreme court case followed its 200w peak rating not continuous, one of the papers put out by the group looking into changing the law stated the law is 130watts continuous or 200watt peak, most countries seem to be using continous power rating ( correct me if I"m wrong), that means to compare to other countries we should be referring to the limit as 130watts.

peak rating is pretty meaningless for electric motors. within reason a 20w motor could exceed 200w peak, if only for a few seconds (or less). it simply demonstrates a huge lack of understanding by the lawmakers. as far as I know no other countries use peak values. And you cant really state what the 'continuous' rating is from looking at the peak values. My HT for example, has had peak values of 5kw pumped into it, and is 'rated' at 2kw (a bit generous if you ask me) so if that ratio was used the Australian laws would be 200w peak and 80w cont... others have pushed more than 5kw through their motors so going on peak without stipulating any other parameters (ie peak for how long) is pretty meaningless. I know im talking input, not output, but you get the idea (people have had 7.5kw peak out of this motor, when its rated at ~1500w).

....
I think one of the problems is that either lawmakers don't want to encourage electric bicycle commuting, or they don't care, or they think that 25km/h is sufficient for the market (it is not).

personally I think its a combination of all three, to varying degrees. In particular its 'dont care'.

for me, it might sound a little defeatest but ive given up on trying to change this, almost before I began... I was looking into it about a year and a bit ago and found a number of forums, news articles, blogs etc all about trying to change this limit (raise it). Some of these were pretty extensive, well thought out and executed campaigns, dating back as far as the mid 90's, and all had gotten nowhere. As such I decided to not waste my time, buy a 150w rated 200w peak sticker and try and ride under the radar. so far its worked fine, and if I ever go to court I'll argue my case at the time. Perhaps Ill take in a movie of a small motor, say the size of my thumb, putting out over 200w peak (if only for a moment), and a 100% legal 49cc motor putting out 5kw for as long as you like, to point out the lack of understanding of the lawmakers in this case. Having ridden past numerous cops on foot, on bikes, on horseback and in cars, either they don't notice, or don't care that my bike is electric. hopefully that trend continues for many years to come...

[whatever]

I understand your point snowchyld, the relationship between continuous and peak power can be a grey area, that is in the advantage of the ebiker if continuous power rating is used, peak can be pretty much anything the motor can handle before it burns up.
But there are I think numerous definitions used to relate continous and peak power, the rta paper doesn't say how they worked out 130watt continous, but there will be some hard and fast relationship/definition they have used.
Similarly continous power rating will have some definition with various parameters involved. Its a very difficult area to get information on.
Even if the law is only changed to make it continuous power rather than peak will be a huge step forward ( someone posted this might have occurred already in victoria).
Heres a little information on what came out of the supreme court case in nsw:
The voltage used is the max voltage the battery charges up to, the amps is the max amps the controller allows.
They used the power limit of 200watts as the maximum power the wheel can produce on the road surface ( i.e the outer edge of the tyre).
They hired three different professional organisations to do the testing on the easyride moped ( which they took from the easyride retailer), I hate to think how much they spent on that testing, but thats one reason it took 2 years to go through the court.
That case is a precendent that would be referred to in any new cases. So as it stands at the moment ( assuming 'peak' power is still being used) you can easily calculate if your bike is legal or illegal.
example:
Using Power = volts * amps * effeciency of motor
( volts= max battery voltage after charging, amps= max amps of controller, effeciency = efficiency of motor from manufacturer data ( done with hub motor testing equipment)
to calculate max amps that controller should be below to keep legal use:
P=v*I*E rearranging for current in amps gives I = P/(v*E) ( where P = 200watts )
For brushless non-geared motors: ( assume 83% peak effeciency )

24v system using sealed lead acid batteries: I = 200 / ( 26 * 0.83 ) = 9.3amps ( v= each sla batt =13v fully charged, effeciency 83% =0.83)
36v system using sealed lead acid batteries I = 200 / (39 * 0.83 ) = 6.2amps
48v system using sealed lead acid batteries I = 200 / ( 52 * 0.83 ) = 4.6amps

24v system using iron phosphate lithium I = 200 / ( 28.8 * 0.83 ) = 8.4amps ( 8 cells @ 3.6v)
36v system using iron phosphate lithium I = 200 / ( 43.2 * 0.83 ) = 5.6 amps ( 12 cells @ 3.6v)
48v system using iron phosphate lithium I = 200 / ( 57.6 * 0.83 ) = 4.2 amps ( 16 cells @ 3.6v)

24v system using lithium cobalt or manganese oxides I = 200 / ( 28.7 * 0.83 ) = 8.4amps ( 7 cells in series max voltage each cell 4.1v)
36v sytem using lithium cobalt or manganese oxides I = 200 / ( 41 * 0.83 ) = 5.6amps ( 10 cells in series max voltage each cell 4.1v)
48v system using lithium cobalt or manganese oxides I = 200 / ( 57.4 * 0.83 ) = 4.2amps ( 14 cells in seris max voltage each cell 4.1v)

How to test max amps of controller: put ammeter on battery wires lift wheel off the ground, go full throttle, put weight on the wheel onto the ground until wheel stops rotating, you can read max amps of controller reaches a peak just before wheel stops rotating.
( there are some losses in controller and windings but not enough to bother with)

[sn0wchyld]

I understand your point snowchyld, the relationship between continuous and peak power can be a grey area, that is in the advantage of the ebiker if continuous power rating is used, peak can be pretty much anything the motor can handle before it burns up.
But there are I think numerous definitions used to relate continous and peak power, the rta paper doesn't say how they worked out 130watt continous, but there will be some hard and fast relationship/definition they have used...........................
example:
Using Power = volts * amps * effeciency of motor
( volts= max battery voltage after charging, amps= max amps of controller, effeciency = efficiency of motor from manufacturer data ( done with hub motor testing equipment)
to calculate max amps that controller should be below to keep legal use:
P=v*I*E rearranging for current in amps gives I = P/(v*E) ( where P = 200watts )
For brushless non-geared motors: ( assume 83% peak effeciency )

24v system using sealed lead acid batteries: I = 200 / ( 26 * 0.83 ) = 9.3amps ( v= each sla batt =13v fully charged, effeciency 83% =0.83)
36v system using sealed lead acid batteries I = 200 / (39 * 0.83 ) = 6.2amps
48v system using sealed lead acid batteries I = 200 / ( 52 * 0.83 ) = 4.6amps

24v system using iron phosphate lithium I = 200 / ( 28.8 * 0.83 ) = 8.4amps ( 8 cells @ 3.6v)
36v system using iron phosphate lithium I = 200 / ( 43.2 * 0.83 ) = 5.6 amps ( 12 cells @ 3.6v)
48v system using iron phosphate lithium I = 200 / ( 57.6 * 0.83 ) = 4.2 amps ( 16 cells @ 3.6v)

24v system using lithium cobalt or manganese oxides I = 200 / ( 28.7 * 0.83 ) = 8.4amps ( 7 cells in series max voltage each cell 4.1v)
36v sytem using lithium cobalt or manganese oxides I = 200 / ( 41 * 0.83 ) = 5.6amps ( 10 cells in series max voltage each cell 4.1v)
48v system using lithium cobalt or manganese oxides I = 200 / ( 57.4 * 0.83 ) = 4.2amps ( 14 cells in seris max voltage each cell 4.1v)

How to test max amps of controller: put ammeter on battery wires lift wheel off the ground, go full throttle, put weight on the wheel onto the ground until wheel stops rotating, you can read max amps of controller reaches a peak just before wheel stops rotating.
( there are some losses in controller and windings but not enough to bother with)

Testing the max amps of your controller and then multiplying this by your voltage and peak efficiency wont give you a good idea of the max output of your motor, because most motors wont pull the controller's max amps when running at peak efficiency. case in point, when I floor my HT from a standstill, it pulls 40a for a while, but as the rpms increase, so does the efficiency (from a 0%) starting point, and the amps start dropping off once the (i think i have this part right) back emf voltage starts equalling the input voltage? anyway, to take the stall amps and multiply it by your voltage and efficiency would actually yeild a output of 0%, since efficiency at that point is 0 x imput. just above this, it may be far less than 200w, since efficiency near stall is generally in single digit %'s. ie 100v * 40A * 2% = 80w. an extreme case I know but it again shows the lack of thought given to these laws. I may be doing an elec. engineering course, but we've done little at this point in regards to motors, much of my knowledge comes from personal research... none of which has been particularly taxing or time consuming.

Im not sure if you meant your example as an example of what was used in the aforementioned court case (edit, looks like it was ), but if it was, its a sad and slightly frightening problem. the lack of understanding borders on becoming a joke. a poorly tuned (or should I say setup?) controller could create a motor with <30% efficiency without much trouble. think incorrect phase/hall wiring. the motor may still turn, thus 'have output power' but it may use 5x the power to reach the same speed. a more subtle source of lower motor efficiency is poor timing, if each phase is 'switched on' 25% later than it should, then some of the power going into the motor will be actually slowing it down, lowering its efficiency and therefore output power as a % of input. alternatively the motor could be poorly made or a lemon, and only have a max eff. of 50%... really, looking at input power is largely misleading, if not totally irrelevant.

What I'd find funny if not for the fact that it'd never hold up in court is that they state 'ungoverned max' of 200w, ie not limited by the controller or any other means. Technically, the ungoverned max of ANY brush less motor is going to be 0w, since they cannot operate without a controller. by taking the law as written we can run whatever governed power we wish, since it's only the ungoverned power that the law is concerned with. brush less motors are another issue, since they basically spin with a voltage applied across their terminals.