TSDZ2 OSF for all displays, VLCD5-VLCD6-XH18, LCD3, 860C-850C-SW102.

[/quote]

I also think that it was interpreted that way.
When I made the first rides on my Rocky Mountain, you clearly noticed a non-circular rotation.
if the response is deliberately delayed, the engine runs "smoother". but has the effect that everything is implemented with a delay.

MFG Michael
[/quote]

I would not say that the delay at the start of pedaling is a big problem. But the delay in stopping the engine can be really dangerous. My wife weighs 55 kg. The motor is powerful. And even a short spontaneous acceleration without pedaling can lead to a fall..
 
Lii said:
Peacepirate said:
mctubster said:
Lii said:
I've tried different modes. But none of the modes can provide a smooth start when you press the pedal lightly and at the same time high power when you press the pedal firmly. To achieve a smooth start, you have to limit the overall level of support. As a result, the maximum power is limited. I'm trying to find parameters with which I can change the non-linearity curve. Yesterday I experimented a lot with this but there is no result. An excessive change in the calibration of the torque sensor resulted in an "E02" error. Apparently I will have to study the code. I have some experience with C ++ programming with Arduino. :)
Could you explain a scenario when you need this behaviour?

I believe to understand very well what Lii desires and he explained it quite straightforward.

Imagine not having those two buttons for changing these - typically - 5 assist levels. When i am on assist level 1 and i push the pedals slightly the motor assists with light support(maybe 25w). Logical. Pedaling hard on assist level 1 results in more motor power output (150w for example) but the motor output could be (much) higher if i would change the assist level to 2 or 3 etc.

On the other side when pedaling slightly on assist level 5 the minimal motor output will be always higher than the 25w mentioned before (75w f. e.) on assist level 1.

I understand him in that way that he wishes a mode where there is only 1 assist level. He wants the whole band width of control with the low motor power support equal to assist mode 1 and high motor power support equal to assist lvl 5 - controlled by his legs only without buttons.
You have described exactly what I want to get! The bike will be controlled by a woman who does not need extra buttons, modes, etc toys). Just sit down and go!)

Thx, i know i did;) Obviously other users love to use their little fingers for their little buttons as a kind of „gear substitution“ and don‘t desire a button free solution where you can control the whole wide range of the motor output with your legs only...
 
Peacepirate said:
Lii said:
Peacepirate said:
mctubster said:
Could you explain a scenario when you need this behaviour?

I believe to understand very well what Lii desires and he explained it quite straightforward.

Imagine not having those two buttons for changing these - typically - 5 assist levels. When i am on assist level 1 and i push the pedals slightly the motor assists with light support(maybe 25w). Logical. Pedaling hard on assist level 1 results in more motor power output (150w for example) but the motor output could be (much) higher if i would change the assist level to 2 or 3 etc.

On the other side when pedaling slightly on assist level 5 the minimal motor output will be always higher than the 25w mentioned before (75w f. e.) on assist level 1.

I understand him in that way that he wishes a mode where there is only 1 assist level. He wants the whole band width of control with the low motor power support equal to assist mode 1 and high motor power support equal to assist lvl 5 - controlled by his legs only without buttons.
You have described exactly what I want to get! The bike will be controlled by a woman who does not need extra buttons, modes, etc toys). Just sit down and go!)

Thx, i know i did;) Obviously other users love to use their little fingers for their little buttons as a kind of „gear substitution“ and don‘t desire a button free solution where you can control the whole wide range of the motor output with your legs only...
I have a motorcycle and a car. There is also a bike with a full suspension and a Bosch CX perfomance motor on which I try to train different tricks. And then there is a wife .. I want my wife to be able to ride with me and at the same time not constantly press any buttons and select some modes .. The bicycle must remain a bicycle. He doesn't have to go by himself. Only when the pedals are pressed!)) And I also have money to buy a few blue gears and replace it when needed)) I am an opponent of large displays and anything that can break if dropped. The simpler the better..
 
Lii said:
I have a motorcycle and a car. There is also a bike with a full suspension and a Bosch CX perfomance motor on which I try to train different tricks. And then there is a wife .. I want my wife to be able to ride with me and at the same time not constantly press any buttons and select some modes .. The bicycle must remain a bicycle. He doesn't have to go by himself. Only when the pedals are pressed!)) And I also have money to buy a few blue gears and replace it when needed)) I am an opponent of large displays and anything that can break if dropped. The simpler the better..

I believe you are disregarding some of the unknown variables that make your request next to impossible.

Wind speed and direction
Gradient
Weight of bike and rider

All of these work together such that the level of assistance required at anyone time to be a guess at best. At low speeds rate of change of torque could be used but at steady state how much power should the motor be supplying at speed x? A big issue is the bike does not know if you are fighting a head wind or being lazy or just tired. It does not know if you are climbing a hill or on the flat. It does not know if you are trying to get exercise or just trying to get somewhere quickly. Hence different levels of “assist”

You are also ignoring the biomechanics of the human body, where at low rpm there is not a lot of power - hence why there are different versions of non linear assistance at low rpm.

I’d love to have a bike that has all of these sensors and it can just work it out!
 
mctubster said:
Lii said:
I have a motorcycle and a car. There is also a bike with a full suspension and a Bosch CX perfomance motor on which I try to train different tricks. And then there is a wife .. I want my wife to be able to ride with me and at the same time not constantly press any buttons and select some modes .. The bicycle must remain a bicycle. He doesn't have to go by himself. Only when the pedals are pressed!)) And I also have money to buy a few blue gears and replace it when needed)) I am an opponent of large displays and anything that can break if dropped. The simpler the better..

I believe you are disregarding some of the unknown variables that make your request next to impossible.

Wind speed and direction
Gradient
Weight of bike and rider

All of these work together such that the level of assistance required at anyone time to be a guess at best. At low speeds rate of change of torque could be used but at steady state how much power should the motor be supplying at speed x? A big issue is the bike does not know if you are fighting a head wind or being lazy or just tired. It does not know if you are climbing a hill or on the flat. It does not know if you are trying to get exercise or just trying to get somewhere quickly. Hence different levels of “assist”

You are also ignoring the biomechanics of the human body, where at low rpm there is not a lot of power - hence why there are different versions of non linear assistance at low rpm.

I’d love to have a bike that has all of these sensors and it can just work it out!

Excellent points Mctubster. Bosch actually did a respectable job of implementing this a few years ago by introducing eMTB mode on the CX motor. Previously it had assist levels of Eco, Tour, Sport, and Turbo. They essentially replaced Sport with eMTB which provides a wide range of assistance from low Tour to high Turbo. It doesn't reach all the way down to Eco. It takes into account speed and cadence so tires don't slip starting out on steep single-track grades and other cases but it is mostly based on pedal torque to range the motor power between 120% and 300% human effort. They get around the "unknown variables" you mention by settling in at speed and cadence to an assist level in-between Tour and Sport.

The eMTB implementation in v20.1C provides the full range of power based on pedal torque. I believe it also takes speed and cadence into account but I don't know how these factor into the algorithm. Perhaps someone familiar with the code can chime in. It does have nine different levels that have been explained as "sensitivity" levels. The sensitivity is how quickly it can reach full power. Perhaps these could be tweaked to account for your "unknown variables" and settle in on a particular desired level of assistance at speed. Being in eMTB mode would still provide the full range of power by lightening up or cranking hard on the pedals.

Bosch engineers took their best shot at it and mountain bikers love it. They are too busy staying alive to push buttons. :) Now with eMTB a part of this open-source project, it will be interesting to see if eMTB mode can have wider use, such as for people that want a more simple riding experience, want to lose the display entirely, or just don't want to push buttons.
 
Rydon said:
Bosch engineers took their best shot at it and mountain bikers love it. They are too busy staying alive to push buttons. :) Now with eMTB a part of this open-source project, it will be interesting to see if eMTB mode can have wider use, such as for people that want a more simple riding experience, want to lose the display entirely, or just don't want to push buttons.
I hope the motor firmware can be improved in such way that some users will then be happy up to not need the display or the buttons, then the TSDZ2 wireless is ready for that, is up to user to use or not display and/or buttons or mobile app -- being wireless means the user can attach and remove to the handle bar the display and/or buttons or mobile app, any time, like when for doing a MTB event: https://opensourceebike.github.io/
 
Agree with the Bosch eMTB mode on my Powerfly. I only ever ride the trek in eMTB mode. On the mtb trails it’s perfect, however for commuting on the long open road it does get very tiring. I hate using turbo because it really chews up the battery.

I find the latest v20C power mode and boost is the best for commuting. I also fit some smooth rolling tyres on the Norco so it is more efficient and feels more comfortable (Super motoX 2.4 wide).I leave it in level 2 assist for most of my trip and use level 3 only on the last 2 steep hills. l don’t use the norco for mountain biking any more since I have the trek which is a much better bike, but I would imagine that eMTB mode on the tsdz would be very similar to the Bosch. I’m really happy with how the tsdz on the norco performs and find it more enjoyable on the road than the trek. In cases of very strong headwinds I can switch to cadence mode fairly quickly and that gives me an easy ride home. The only thing I really hate now is the constant whining of the motor, it is so annoying I wish we can do something about it one day.

For the users that are complaining about lag during startup and stop I hope that it can be improved in time however without you posting about it I would be very content and none the wiser. Big thanks to everyone that has contributed , well done :bigthumb:

Oh and regarding the wireless, I’m sure it may appeal to some users, always good to have options since everyone is different. For me the lcd3 is perfect for my commuter but I really like the Purion display on my Trek for being neat and functional, if I had to build another eMTB it would be nice to get something similar for the tsdz.
 
On the latest Moustache bikes, Bosch has introduced the "Magic Tour", a softer variation of the eMTB mode, meant to expand range while allowing to reach the full power of the motor :
 

Attachments

  • Bosch assistance modes.png
    Bosch assistance modes.png
    119.5 KB · Views: 907
To everyone complaining about the startup/restart delay, this is my experience with 1 year of tinkering and using various firmware versions:

1. You will always experience a small startup/restart delay when motor current is calculated in 'power' mode - the solution to this is to never use power mode

2. Casainho's 1.0.0-1.1.1 are the worst performers for startup/restart delay even when the motor current calculation is set to 'torque mode' - I don't know why it is the worst, but it is. I have posted settings many times in the other thread, these settings will help to get the best off the line performance.

3. r0mko's 'torque mode only' fork of version 0.80 works very well, but this is probably because of the 3x hard coded startup current ramp. I don't see a need to use this fork anymore now that we have v0.20C.

4. mbrusa's v0.20C has the best performance for me, but only when used in 'hybrid mode' - you always want to use torque mode when starting out because the tsdz2 cadence sensor has such poor low-cadence resolution. If you use it in 'power mode' you will still have poor starts unless you use startup boost.

5. AWOP (assistance without pedal rotation) I always recommend people use this, brake sensors or not - it gives assistance whenever there is pressure on the pedals, which is something that I figure everyone is expecting from and eBike.

6. eMTB mode can be considered a button-less torque mode - the assistance is torque calculated, with the assistance multiplier automatically increasing with pedal pressure - it is excellent offroad.

To summarise - I ride in eMTB when in technical offroad sections and in hybrid mode when commuting/travelling along hard pack offroad trails. I don't see why anyone would need to use anything else. Power mode on it's own is junk, torque mode is jerky at high cadence - they must be combined and I am very glad that they now are.
 
AZUR said:
HughF said:
devboy-greg said:
michih. said:
tried it today. the tsdz2 needs at least 180 ° until it reacts. you step 180 ° then stop, then the motor starts turning. although you don't do anything anymore. it is far too sluggish. my Rocky starts immediately and stops immediately.

MFG Michael

I concur with @waynemarlow about this latest v20.1c software, I need no rotation to get power with ‘power without rotation’ enabled.

On my bike with no brake sensors I can hold the bike with the back brake and apply a small amount of pressure (which is customisable in settings) to the pedal and the motor delivers power – lots!

I also like the slight motor overrun when I stop peddling.

This is my experience too - this firmware is very very responsive when AWOP is enabled

Are you using Power mode or Torque mode?

I am talking about Power mode.

But as michih says,

"from the stand, yes. but when rolling, starting and responding is delayed."

Are you saying "this firmware is very responsive when AWOP is enabled" from standing or when rolling?

What is AWOP ?

Azur
Read my latest post.... Power mode is your problem here - always has been, always will be.
 
HughF said:
AZUR said:
HughF said:
devboy-greg said:
I concur with @waynemarlow about this latest v20.1c software, I need no rotation to get power with ‘power without rotation’ enabled.

On my bike with no brake sensors I can hold the bike with the back brake and apply a small amount of pressure (which is customisable in settings) to the pedal and the motor delivers power – lots!

I also like the slight motor overrun when I stop peddling.

This is my experience too - this firmware is very very responsive when AWOP is enabled

Are you using Power mode or Torque mode?

I am talking about Power mode.

But as michih says,

"from the stand, yes. but when rolling, starting and responding is delayed."

Are you saying "this firmware is very responsive when AWOP is enabled" from standing or when rolling?

What is AWOP ?

Azur
Read my latest post.... Power mode is your problem here - always has been, always will be.

I felt it. that's why i use the torque mode.

mfg michael
 
Lii said:
I've tried different modes. But none of the modes can provide a smooth start when you press the pedal lightly and at the same time high power when you press the pedal firmly. To achieve a smooth start, you have to limit the overall level of support. As a result, the maximum power is limited. I'm trying to find parameters with which I can change the non-linearity curve. Yesterday I experimented a lot with this but there is no result. An excessive change in the calibration of the torque sensor resulted in an "E02" error. Apparently I will have to study the code. I have some experience with C ++ programming with Arduino. :)
I reread your posts, it will be the translation but I didn't understand what you want to get.
If the bike is for road use, the EMTB mode is the least suitable. It is fine up to a sensitivity of 6/8, then it reaches the maximum power too quickly.
If you want linearity or graduality, focus on the power mode, it is the one that allows the best adjustment between the power to the pedals and the power of the motor, but if you plan to use only one level to get to the maximum power, uphill will also need a lot of it in the legs!
Also you will have to use more ratios with the gearbox, sometimes it is easier to change levels.

Write: "This gives an unpleasant and dangerous feeling when you have already stopped pedaling but the bike continues to accelerate." and "And even a short spontaneous acceleration without pedaling can lead to a fall .."
I have never encountered or had any reports of a similar problem, I would never have released the firmware!
If it really is as you describe it, you have a problem with the motor, a problem that probably makes it incompatible with this firmware.
You have an torque sensor with a very limited range (280 - 220 = 60) this does not help, it will be difficult to have a good sensitivity at the start and despite the calibration, it will be difficult to have a wide range of assistance.
I consider a range of 160 to be good and I have seen a sensor reach a range of 200!
 
Rydon said:
...
The eMTB implementation in v20.1C provides the full range of power based on pedal torque. I believe it also takes speed and cadence into account but I don't know how these factor into the algorithm. Perhaps someone familiar with the code can chime in. It does have nine different levels that have been explained as "sensitivity" levels. The sensitivity is how quickly it can reach full power. Perhaps these could be tweaked to account for your "unknown variables" and settle in on a particular desired level of assistance at speed. Being in eMTB mode would still provide the full range of power by lightening up or cranking hard on the pedals.
...
The eMTB mode of the v20 only takes into account the torque applied to the pedals progressively.
I have never used it, I do not consider it suitable for road use.
I used marcoq v19 eMTB for almost a year, it was based on both torque and cadence, it was difficult to set up but the response for me was better than the v20 eMTB and more suitable for road use.
It supplied the entire range with only one level but with a little high consumption with minimal assistance.
I had solved it by putting two levels, one saving battery that did not reach the maximum power and another to reach the maximum power.
To use only one level on the road, in addition to torque and cadence, speed should also be taken into account.
 
mbrusa said:
JohnAnanda said:
Hi,

Thank you so much mbrusa for your work !

I read earlier in this thread about the support for SW102 display with 20.1C firmware.
Will this eventually happen or should I get a VLCD6 or XH18 if I want a minimalist display ?
With SW102 there is still some small problem with the configuration menu.
If you want to try, I sent you the test version in PM.

Hi mbrusa, I am also interested to try the sw102 version, if you share. Does the display will be update by Bluetooth?
Thanks You
 
HughF said:
To everyone complaining about the startup/restart delay, this is my experience with 1 year of tinkering and using various firmware versions:

1. You will always experience a small startup/restart delay when motor current is calculated in 'power' mode - the solution to this is to never use power mode

2. Casainho's 1.0.0-1.1.1 are the worst performers for startup/restart delay even when the motor current calculation is set to 'torque mode' - I don't know why it is the worst, but it is. I have posted settings many times in the other thread, these settings will help to get the best off the line performance.

3. r0mko's 'torque mode only' fork of version 0.80 works very well, but this is probably because of the 3x hard coded startup current ramp. I don't see a need to use this fork anymore now that we have v0.20C.

4. mbrusa's v0.20C has the best performance for me, but only when used in 'hybrid mode' - you always want to use torque mode when starting out because the tsdz2 cadence sensor has such poor low-cadence resolution. If you use it in 'power mode' you will still have poor starts unless you use startup boost.

5. AWOP (assistance without pedal rotation) I always recommend people use this, brake sensors or not - it gives assistance whenever there is pressure on the pedals, which is something that I figure everyone is expecting from and eBike.

6. eMTB mode can be considered a button-less torque mode - the assistance is torque calculated, with the assistance multiplier automatically increasing with pedal pressure - it is excellent offroad.

To summarise - I ride in eMTB when in technical offroad sections and in hybrid mode when commuting/travelling along hard pack offroad trails. I don't see why anyone would need to use anything else. Power mode on it's own is junk, torque mode is jerky at high cadence - they must be combined and I am very glad that they now are.

Thank you Hugh. Very useful and informative
 
jeff.page.rides said:
Hi All,
I want to share my personal saga of working with key people on this forum to get the TSDZ2 firmware to where version 20.1C is now. I am so happy and satisfied with version 20.1C that I have decided to share my Hand-Cycle story to express how much I appreciate what everyone has contributed to getting us where we are today.
First, I will tell you the abridged version of my biking life and where I am now. I started mountain biking in 1986, and fell in love instantly, rode my mountain bikes and road bikes year-round three times each week, and enjoyed every minute of it.
Then while on a mountain biking vacation in Steamboat Springs, Colorado, in 2015, I rode off a 6-foot drop that I didn't see and was going way too slow to make the landing. I broke my neck, and I am a C6-7 quadriplegic. I'm paralyzed from the middle of my arms down and from my chest down. Nothing works. No muscles and no feeling. The very worst part is my hands don't work at all.
So, as you can imagine, I was devastated, and while I was in the hospital for three months, I searched for what type of outdoor activities I could do even as a quadriplegic. As I searched, I found that the two activities that I wanted to do were skiing and biking, and every post or video I saw was all about paraplegics and amputees. They both have working hands and some core strength, depending on where the break-in their back is. To make it simple, if someone breaks their neck and doesn't have working hands, they have quadriplegia, and if someone breaks their back and has working hands, they have paraplegia.
Before my injury, I was in great shape and more robust than an average person. But that all ended quickly, and I had to retrain what muscles did still work, how to work again. Before my injury, I worked with my body all day long every day, plus I rode bikes, skied, and snowboarded. After my injury, I have about 60% of the bicep’s strength of an average out-of-shape person and 30% of an average out-of-shape person's triceps strength. So, after nine months of no biking or skiing, I found https://www.utrails.us/ They had hand-cycles that I could try at a park 15 miles from my home, and they offered instructors to ride along with you if something went wrong during the ride, which it often did. So, I went there and gave it a try. On that first ride, it took me two hours to make two loops around that park. But it was something I could do outside. I kept at it, and a very kind Lady, I wish I could remember her name, gave me a used Top End XLT hand-cycle. After some time, I also found https://wasatchadaptivesports.org/; they also offered hand-cycles to ride if you didn't have one. The most significant difference was they were very close to my home. I didn't have to drive Uptown and ride at the same park time after time. I could ride even from home and meet them along the trail. Then shortly after this, I discovered https://discovernac.org/. They offered the same thing and the ability to ride on dirt and not just pavement. Riding off-road was exciting because it was more like mountain biking which I enjoyed so much before my injury. But here, I found out that I needed a power assist that had more low-end torque and was a lot safer than required on the pavement.
I needed Power-Assist to work for a hand-cycle with a coaster brake and someone with very week arms. I also needed a way to shift gears because my hands were strapped to the pedals. I started searching for something that would work for me. I called the major companies that sell power assists, and they all told me that it did not exist. I was on the Internet continually trying to find things, and there was nothing out there. Then after a year of searching, I found Mark at https://www.electrifybike.com; he had just started his business and was working in a small garage at his home only a few miles from my house. He told me he had the power assist I needed a TSDZ2 that would work with a coaster brake. So, we installed it on my bike, and I was off and riding, NOT! It did not give me enough boost because my arms were too weak to get the torque sensor to apply power. After months of trying, I figured out that if I pulled on the cranks against the brake when I booted up the system, it would assist me with the power I needed. That was a game-changer.
I was also was able to find XShifter and work with the owner and inventor Paul Gallagher. With his help, we were able to use his current electric bike shifting the XShifter so that I could either shift with my voice and then eventually with my chin so that I could be in the right gear at the right time. Before XShifter I had to remove my hand that was strapped to a pedal from the cranks reached down make a shift put my hand back into the cranks and pedal again then repeat for each shift. It was very difficult and frustrating because I would lose all my momentum in the process of shifting. But with the ability to shift with my voice or chin I could shift very quickly without removing my hands from the cranks what a big difference that made. I am now the distributor for XShifter it's an awesome product that can help anybody shift simpler, easier and faster. https://www.electrifybike.com/store/p155/Xshifter.html#/
Shortly after that, Mark let me know about a guy called Casainho, the name he goes by on Endless-Sphere.com, an ebike technical forum for DIYers. He lives in Portugal, and he was working on Flexible Open-Source Firmware for the TSDZ2 with an LCD3 Display. We contacted him and let him know what we were trying to do. He informed us that there are many riders with weaker legs like his young son that could also benefit. He made a lot of improvement over time, but I still had to pull back on the cranks when booting up the system to get the power I needed. And if you pulled too much against the brake when the system boots up, it was difficult to stop rotation when you needed to brake.
Then Buba, an EndlessSphere.com engineer in Sweden, started adding to the TSDZ2 LCD3 OSF project. He reached out to us, and we started working together to make the safety and usability changes we needed. He made some changes that made it much safer to pull backward for the coaster brake. And give it much more power at a low rpm and from a stop. But you still needed to pull back as it boots up to get the amount of power required. At that point, we needed to stay with V20 because V19 was not safe for braking with a coaster brake.
We started converting hand-cycles for those programs listed above and individuals that had their own hand-cycle. And I could see that I was making a difference for others in the same situation as I was. It also made hand-cycling much better for paraplegics and amputees.
I stayed active on the forum, continually asking for help, then Covid 19 hit. Mbrusa, an Endless-Sphere engineer in Italy, offered to help as he was stuck at home and had some time to try and help make V20 for the LCD3 better, and he did. For the first time with his changes, you no longer needed to pull back against the brake as the system boots to get the required power. At about that same time, Casainho released V1.0.0 for the 850C. My new hand-cycle didn't need a coaster brake because I designed a new elbow brake. I wanted to try V1.0.0, but I was not too fond of the 850C display, So I kept asking Casainho to get version 1.0.0 to work on the 860C. Mark sent him an 860C display, and I think he acquired some 860C’s on his own. After he got it working with V1.0.0, I put an 860C with V1.0.0 on the new hand-cycle and left the older one with mbrusa’s version of 20.1 on the LCD3 he did for me on the older hand-cycle. Long story short, the 860C display was in every way the best display that I had tried. But for me, V1.0.0 had no low end and did not perform near as good as the older 20.1 on the LCD3. Even after a year and countless hours of trying different settings.
Then mbrusa stepped up and brought the best of both worlds together. He used the 860c display code and the incredible 20.1 motor firmware. I thought it was going to take another year to get this working. But he got it done very quickly, and it is so awesome to be able to use the 20.1 motor firmware on the 860C and blend it with the display firmware that Casainho had done so well on the 860C.
I am so thankful for everyone that has contributed to this OSF project. I mention the main three friends that I've worked with and the countless private messages that have gone back and forth to get to this point. Casainho, buba and for me most of all mbrusa. I can call the current state of this project close to perfection. It's taken four years to get here and at the point where it's very safe, very powerful at no or slow cadence, very usable, very friendly, very smooth, and on and on.
My main goal for all of this was if someone looks into hand-cycling, they will know that it is possible to ride a hand-cycle safely, and all they need is biceps. Knowing this would have made a massive difference in my life for that first year after I was injured. When I started, I had biceps and triceps, but my average speed was five mph, with my longest ride of 25 miles, which took 6.5 hours. At that slow speed, it is all work and not much fun. Also, without a headwind, it was easy to overheat. Now my average speed is 15mph, and I can ride 30 miles in less than 2.5 hours. My longest ride so far is 110 miles. In one day, I use three 17.5 Ah batteries to ride that far, and I have done that ride once in each of the last two years. Now that riding is much safer and much more fun for me and everyone else, they can take advantage of all the contributions that everyone has made to this OSF Project!
Some of you may know that last year I started to try to liquid cool the TSDZ2. The primary purpose of this was that because I'm 190 pounds, my bike, pack, and three batteries are 100 pounds. The TSDZ2 has to power 300 pounds up and down the trails. With watts turned up to 900 watts, it was super fun, but anything over 450 watts would kill the TSDZ2. After several coolant leaks and other problems, it was working great. I am still going to share this "how-to" with everyone. I chose to put it off because getting to this point with the firmware was more critical than keeping cool at high watts.
I have been riding my old hand-cycle with the 860C 20.1C for testing. And I have been riding my newer hand-cycle with a BBS02 because Mark wanted me to compare them. I have to say that a torque sensor is the only way to go now that we have 20.1C on the 860C! To compare the TSDZ2 at 450 Watts to the BBS02 at 1100 watts is not fair. But with the TSDZ2 turned up to 900 watts with liquid cooling, the only two things that the BBS02 does better is quiet sound and runs cooler without liquid cooling.
Many more people have worked coding, testing, and writing the TSDZ2 open-source firmware project. Thanks to you all. I am grateful to see this come together after three years of effort.
Thanks, Jeff

Jeff. Thank you for sharing. I admire what you have achieved. I also have a friend who has problems with his legs. He has MS, but still has strong arms. You got me thinking....
 
Jeff, thanks for taking the time to share your story.
 
fi7ippo said:
mbrusa said:
JohnAnanda said:
Hi,

Thank you so much mbrusa for your work !

I read earlier in this thread about the support for SW102 display with 20.1C firmware.
Will this eventually happen or should I get a VLCD6 or XH18 if I want a minimalist display ?
With SW102 there is still some small problem with the configuration menu.
If you want to try, I sent you the test version in PM.

Hi mbrusa, I am also interested to try the sw102 version, if you share. Does the display will be update by Bluetooth?
Thanks You
I had confirmation that it also works on SW102, thank you Nfer and HughF for the tests.
There was a problem in the Torque sensor menu, I split it in two.
Release link https://github.com/emmebrusa/TSDZ2-Smart-EBike-860C/releases/tag/v20.1C-860C

It is updated as expected in the wiki https://github.com/OpenSourceEBike/TSDZ2_wiki/wiki/Flash-the-firmware-on-SW102.
Wired the first time, after bluetooth.
 
Hi everybody!
Well I manage to flash the controller ( I am not a computer guy so that was a little challange :D ) but the motor it is more sluggish now than it was with orignal firmware... I have the VLCD6 display 36v motor and battery
I have change some of the settings like:
Motor acc. to 35 Did not help...
eMTB mode
Assist level 4 TURBO to 20 well that did the bike back to near stock firmware feel,

I must do something wrong or is something broken in my motor?

If anyone have some ideas I will be greatful

Kind regards
Jocke
 
StormTD5 said:
.... more sluggish now than it was with orignal firmware... VLCD6 display 36v motor and battery
I have change some of the settings....If anyone have some ideas ...
It could be that your torque sensor isn't sensitive enough and calibrating could help.
This software is for all display's and both tsdz2 motors.
So please, be more detailed about the settings you have done with the configurator.
Maybe you can share the screenshots of the configurator with your settings.
 
mbrusa said:
I reread your posts, it will be the translation but I didn't understand what you want to get.


Write: "This gives an unpleasant and dangerous feeling when you have already stopped pedaling but the bike continues to accelerate." and "And even a short spontaneous acceleration without pedaling can lead to a fall .."
I have never encountered or had any reports of a similar problem, I would never have released the firmware!
If it really is as you describe it, you have a problem with the motor, a problem that probably makes it incompatible with this firmware.
You have an torque sensor with a very limited range (280 - 220 = 60) this does not help, it will be difficult to have a good sensitivity at the start and despite the calibration, it will be difficult to have a wide range of assistance.
I consider a range of 160 to be good and I have seen a sensor reach a range of 200!

As far as I can imagine, the ADC values ​​of the torque sensor are converted to variable values ​​with a different range of numbers. The conversion factor is most likely given by the calibration and offset values ​​of the torque sensor. Further, these values ​​are processed and summed up with other variables and only after that they are converted into a PWM signal for the motor. Thus, the reduced numeric range of the ADC of torque sensor can't create any feedback delays. Did you write the code for the latest firmware yourself? Could you just show me the places in the code where the described delay can occur? Then I myself will conduct all the tests and report the results.
 
Lii said:
mbrusa said:
I reread your posts, it will be the translation but I didn't understand what you want to get.


Write: "This gives an unpleasant and dangerous feeling when you have already stopped pedaling but the bike continues to accelerate." and "And even a short spontaneous acceleration without pedaling can lead to a fall .."
I have never encountered or had any reports of a similar problem, I would never have released the firmware!
If it really is as you describe it, you have a problem with the motor, a problem that probably makes it incompatible with this firmware.
You have an torque sensor with a very limited range (280 - 220 = 60) this does not help, it will be difficult to have a good sensitivity at the start and despite the calibration, it will be difficult to have a wide range of assistance.
I consider a range of 160 to be good and I have seen a sensor reach a range of 200!

As far as I can imagine, the ADC values ​​of the torque sensor are converted to variable values ​​with a different range of numbers. The conversion factor is most likely given by the calibration and offset values ​​of the torque sensor. Further, these values ​​are processed and summed up with other variables and only after that they are converted into a PWM signal for the motor. Thus, the reduced numeric range of the ADC of torque sensor can't create any feedback delays. Did you write the code for the latest firmware yourself? Could you just show me the places in the code where the described delay can occur? Then I myself will conduct all the tests and report the results.

please also turn off the delayed start while driving.

MFG Michael
 
Lii said:
As far as I can imagine, the ADC values ​​of the torque sensor are converted to variable values ​​with a different range of numbers. The conversion factor is most likely given by the calibration and offset values ​​of the torque sensor. Further, these values ​​are processed and summed up with other variables and only after that they are converted into a PWM signal for the motor. Thus, the reduced numeric range of the ADC of torque sensor can't create any feedback delays. Did you write the code for the latest firmware yourself? Could you just show me the places in the code where the described delay can occur? Then I myself will conduct all the tests and report the results.
This discussion is best taken to the main thread for v1.1.1 where Casainho discusses the possible place in the code where the delay can occur. And also where the overrun can occur. I know it is 265+ pages, but it is all there if you search.
 
Lii said:
As far as I can imagine, the ADC values ​​of the torque sensor are converted to variable values ​​with a different range of numbers. The conversion factor is most likely given by the calibration and offset values ​​of the torque sensor. Further, these values ​​are processed and summed up with other variables and only after that they are converted into a PWM signal for the motor. Thus, the reduced numeric range of the ADC of torque sensor can't create any feedback delays. Did you write the code for the latest firmware yourself? Could you just show me the places in the code where the described delay can occur? Then I myself will conduct all the tests and report the results.
There is a delay caused by the software but it does not create problems, indeed it is necessary, a too abrupt stop is not good.
Look for threads related to overrun.
There are 3 reasons for the software delay:
1 - deceleration ramp, step from 0.5 ms up to 2.5 ms at maximum speed.
2 - cadence sensor control time for stationary pedals, max 210 ms, this delay decreases as cadence increases.
3 - ebike_app.c recall time every 25 ms.
These are functional times cannot be changed.

Regarding the torque sensor, it is true that with a limited range it is remapped, bringing it to optimal values ​​(calibration is for this), but the resolution is not the same. With intermediate values ​​it is not important, but at the beginning and at the end of the pedal stroke it is.
Then there is another aspect, a sensor with limited range is also "hard" as sensitivity at the start of pedaling and it is "slow" to return to zero when you stop pedaling.
I have an motor with a range of 160 and an 80, the difference is evident.
Consider a mechanical calibration, in your case I think it is the solution.
 
Elinx said:
StormTD5 said:
.... more sluggish now than it was with orignal firmware... VLCD6 display 36v motor and battery
I have change some of the settings....If anyone have some ideas ...
It could be that your torque sensor isn't sensitive enough and calibrating could help.
This software is for all display's and both tsdz2 motors.
So please, be more detailed about the settings you have done with the configurator.
Maybe you can share the screenshots of the configurator with your settings.

I have change in basic settings
Motor acceleration
Wheel size
Battery settings

Assistansen settings
Nothing at first but just for an experiment i raised Assist level eMTB mode and it did got a little better.

Advanced settings
No change

I cant figure out how to calibrating the torque sensor with the VLCD 6 display.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210316-100756_Photos.jpg
    Screenshot_20210316-100756_Photos.jpg
    407.7 KB · Views: 638
  • Screenshot_20210316-100750_Photos.jpg
    Screenshot_20210316-100750_Photos.jpg
    387.4 KB · Views: 638
  • Screenshot_20210316-100736_Photos.jpg
    Screenshot_20210316-100736_Photos.jpg
    303.4 KB · Views: 638
Back
Top