Page 28 of 40

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 1:40am
by amberwolf
Raisedeyebrows wrote:
Feb 19 2018 12:00am
Although I've read most of this fascinating thread over time can you refresh us on what type of rim you're using on the back? That way I can keep an eye peeled for any useable ones at the bike co-op when I pass through there.
I don't know the brand/model, but they were the rims used on some of the first Zero electric motorcycles, when they were more like "just" high-powered super-ebikes than what they are now. I got them from Ypedal, so maybe he knows more details: ... 31&t=51494

They're something like 45mm wide, double-wall, with staggered nipple holes that have eyelets in them.

Tough enough for the loads I carry, but (like anything else I've ever used) not tough enough for several-inch-deep sharp-edged potholes. :(

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 2:06am
by amberwolf
RTIII wrote:
Feb 19 2018 1:15am
_If_ it was only bent, then the heat wouldn't likely weaken it because you're not heating it beyond a critical temperature, but if it has cracks already, it's a lost cause except possibly for welding. Even then, with your equipment - a wire feed mig, I'm guessing? - I wouldn't expect it to work out. You really need to tig it, and it really matters that any filler is exactly the right alloy as aluminum alloys aren't as forgiving as ferrous based alloys. (Of course, you could always get lucky.) Given what you have said that I'm quoting here, I think you're right; leave it alone and replace it when you can. It's unlikely to work out and you can save your time and resources (torch fuel) for something more promising.
That's about what I thought. ;)

...That said, if you do want to try it, you'll need to heat the whole thing to something like 250F, then, with the bent area already straightened, you can then do a weld. The reason you heat the whole thing is because if you don't you can end up with the boundaries of where you've heated it for welding being more brittle. The welding will also proceed more easily and flow better. But you need either a big oven or a glass-mat or something that you can keep the heat in with.
Since it's just a 20" wheel, the entire thing would easily fit in my regular oven, including the hubmotor. (but I'm not sure 250F is good for the halls and stuff in there, so I'd want to take the stator out. might not be good for hte magnets eitehr, so would likely have to unlace it entirely).

But I don't have the stuff necessary to weld it with anyway, and as you point out I'd need the same alloy, and I have no idea which one they're made from.

It also seems dubious a simple rim like that is valuable enough to go to all that trouble. But maybe you have more time and access to the tools and it's worth saving the cash.
If I already had the stuff to do it with and wasn't using it for something else, then it would be worth it because I don't have money to spend on new rims, so repairing old ones lets me "reuse" money already spent or not spend it at all.

Otherwise, no, it's not worth doing. :)

Once upon a time (even just a few years ago or less) I would have wnated to repair and reuse everything, but these days I have so little energy / time that if i also had money I'd spend it on new things to replace old ones when needed.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 6:00pm
by amberwolf
Some other trips today, no problems with the wheel yet.

However, while I was parked at the last destination (fry's), someone loosened the nuts on all four front brake pads. Didn't appear to be trying to take them off, just to sabotage them. Nothing else on the trike appears to have been touched, so more like an attempt to cause me to crash (probably not knowing I have the electric braking in the rear motors).

Everything was working perfectly fine before I parked there, so whatever happened was while parked. WHen I unlocked the bike and backed out, I could feel and hear a rubbing, but couldnt' see what it was from the seat. When I squeezed the brake lever it made a horrendous squalling squealing thunking sound, as the pads moved and some were sideways against the tire and rim, some were still on the rim surface but loose and canted, etc.

Easy to fix in just a couple minutes, but if I didn't use the brakes routinely for lttle stuff like that, but only needed them on the road or in an emergency stop, they either wouldn't work or they'd break (or break other things), like if they ended up down in the spokes), and could get me or someone else killed.

First time in almost a decade that anyone was stupid to my stuff like that. Last time was a coworker (suspect which one but don't know for sure) that removed the nuts from my drive sprocket on the old CrazyBike2's first (or second) generation powerchair drivetrain (while the bike was parked inside the store in the warehouse).

If it weren't all four of them, I could imagine somehow something loosening if I had not tightened down a pad fully last time I worked on them (though AFAICR this has never happened even when I did leave a pad a little looser than it should be). But all four, with nuts just barely on there at all--that's deliberate. :(

Makes me wish I had a camera setup on the trike constantly recording. :/

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 7:37pm
by Raisedeyebrows
WTH? Loosened your brake pads, that's dirty pool, the equivalent of cutting your brake lines on gas burner. Probably one of those little dipwads with their pants down around their ankles that aspire to be urban marksmen always cruising around causing trouble. Bad karma coming their way.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 9:58pm
by amberwolf
Some pics of stuff as I went thru the repair process, mostly of the rim damage, and a spoke nipple that was internally stripped. Plus a pic of the trike loaded up with the coolers for the grocery run used to test load-bearing ability (about 80lbs or so once filled, IIRC). Last pic shows CrazyBike2's hand-shields transferred over to SBC for now (while it's cold and rainy season).

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 10:58pm
by wturber
amberwolf wrote:
Feb 19 2018 9:58pm
Last pic shows CrazyBike2's hand-shields transferred over to SBC for now (while it's cold and rainy season).
He he... we are such wimps about "cold" weather here in the southwest. ;^)

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 19 2018 11:25pm
by amberwolf
Yeah; I've gotten "old and cranky" about the cold compared to my farm-country days in north Texas where we sometimes got snow as high as the eaves. :lol:

But when it's 65F or less out there in the daytime (or 70F at night) I have to put on at least some thin knit gloves to keep my hands functional and keep the joints from being all stiff and hurty, because of windchill at 15-20MPH.

Having wind-shields for my hands means I don't need the gloves until it gets down to 50F out there (though ti's more comfortable with them, tehy're not yet necessary).

And if it's rainy and cold, I have to keep my hands dry or even on a short 2.5 mile commute I won't be able to feel to operate the switches or throttles or levers. Since all I have that fit my hands well and aren't fat and fluffy (making it hard to grip and operate things) are some thin knit gloves, they don't have any kind of water resistance and in fact do a great job of soaking it right up.

So teh wind-shields do a great job of helping keep rain off my hands, unless it's really drenching out there.

(And drenching rain isn't usually an issue, as I try not to ride in that if I can wait a few minutes just because traffic is generally stupid and the risk of collision is high, due to drivers that have no idea how to control a vehicle in rain, and drive *faster* when they can't see instead of slowing down).

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 20 2018 2:30pm
by wturber
After a few years in the southwest, most of us become wimps in the cold. I use ski gloves. :^)

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 20 2018 3:21pm
by Raisedeyebrows
I got a pair of Uvex over-the glasses safety Goggles recently, really like them, keeps the wind off my eyes in the cold and do the same thing in any temps. A lot cheaper at the safety supply stores than at Motorcycle shops.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 20 2018 3:27pm
by amberwolf
I wear regular glasses (bifocals) which do an ok job of keeping crap out of my eyes, though not perfect. I have a set of goggles (3M UV-filtering) my brother gave me that I use for grinding/etc at home, but they aren't ventilated well so they dont' work well for riding; face gets sweaty under them and sweat gets in my eyes. :/ They do keep the flying bits out of my eyes while working on stuff, though. :)

I've not found any of the affordable (really really cheap) over-glasses types that actually fit my face over teh glasses that also do any better job at keeping stuff out of my eyes, except for stuff like the above goggles that arent' ventilated well enough.

Several years back, when I was riding a "normal" bicycle, this was my riding gear, partly for visibility and partly for crash protection
but these days on the trike I just wear normal clothes, including a jacket / gloves if I'm cold. I think I still have the snowboarding/ski gloves in my "race gear kit bag", but the liners have vanished, and the gloves are not water resistant, and get in the way of feeling/operating controls since they dont' closely fit my fingers. They do an ok job of keeping the wind from chilling my hands, but the handlebar wind-shields do that better and don't interfere with operating controls.

If it's raining I wear a motorcycle-rain-gear set of jacket and pants that go over my other stuff, and army boots with the rain pants over teh tops to keep water off my feet. (and carry the regular shoes in the seatbox for my destination if it's work or somewhere I'll walk a lot, cuz the boots ain't all that comfy to clomp around in, and they're heavy).

One thing I don't like about this getup is it's all black, so in these conditions I'm much less visible, personally, but beign on the big red trike with all it's lighting I'm not really worried about being seen. ;) On the "normal" bicycles I'm at least half of what's there to be seen, so it's much more important to wear high-vis stuff like my DayGlo Avenger outfit pictured above. (though these days I'd be wearing the FF MC helmet instead of the bike one, probably without the removable chinguard and with the face shield retracted (though maybe with the sunvisor down depending on the day)).

No helmet needed to keep rain off me most of the time as I've got the canopy for that (and sunshading me), unless it's driving rain in high winds (that I try not to have to ride in cuz traffic is stupid under those conditions).

If it's cold enough that a knit cap doesn't cut it with the windchill, or I'm on a much longer trip that eventually cuts thru it anyway, I'll wear my FF MC helmet to keep my head warm.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 20 2018 4:20pm
by Raisedeyebrows
IMG_2350.JPG (87.69 KiB) Viewed 1356 times
He he, that Dayglo gear is some real deal urban assault bike stuff there, no lie that setup is not unrealistic for riding the streets in the least, it's a freaking jungle out there with distracted drivers coming out of every driveway and parking lot. This was the pair of goggles I picked up, very comfortable and fit over my glasses nicely, clear lenses (which I wanted) no fogging problems so far, they have some vent slots on the frame and.......called the "Flex Seal" model, pretty comfy. I got them for $10.00 at my local safety supply but I see they are about the same on Amazon if anybody wants to try a pair. I guess a person can get prescription lenses made for them, which I'll consider at some point.

Edit: that was a different pair, these are the ones I got, the other ones were slightly different: ... zqEALw_wcB

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 22 2018 3:55am
by amberwolf
Those don't look tall enough to fit my glasses inside them, but I'd have to test fit them to find out. Mostly I don'thave to worry about it (dust storms, heavy/windy rainstorms, both very infrequent), so I don't know if I'll ever get around to that. :) Lots more important things most of the time to deal with.

SO anyway...Cvin is selling off the CeMoto bike from here: ... =3&t=81629
and I'm trading her work on fixing some things for the CAv3 and TDCM torque-sensing BB that's on it, and converting it back to the regular ebike it used to be. Then the CA and BB will go on SB Cruiser, which is going to likely be a rather technical process to get what I want out of it. So it's got it's own thread over here: ... =2&t=92973
to work all that out. The eventual resolution to it I'll post here in this thread too, once it's installed and working as desired (might have occastional progress posts here too, once it gets going).

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 24 2018 3:08am
by amberwolf
If things work out, I've got a fatbike non-suspension fork coming to test swapping out for the Suntour XCV suspension fork. This means the entire trike won't have any suspension, but it'll stiffen the front end up for braking (fair bit of wiggle right now that costs me control when near the limit of traction).

Since it's a fatbike fork, it's 135mm dropout width, which will let me fit a rear Ezee geared hubmotor I happen to have here (that is more powerful than any of the front hubs I have). Still have to lace it up in a rim, which means finding some of the spokes I ahve in another wheel that are the right length to do that with, so it's all just a side-project.

The main reasons for adding a front geared hub:

--a tiny bit of extra power for startups to decrease time from 0-20mph. Could also do this by increasing current at the existing rear motors.

--a low-power "limp home" motor should something be wrong with the others,

--or if the battery is low enough SOC that I dont' want to push it hard with the high-current systems. Could also do this by having a decreasable current limit on the others.

I'm also simply curious if a single geared hub of this general class can move the trike around without overheating or overstressing it, and what kind of acceleration it'll get out of it.

I'm already using a similar hub (by Fusin) on the right rear of the Raine Trike, but that is a MUCH lighter trike than SB Cruiser, probably less than 2/3, possibly even half the weight. It's not sufficent acceleration for my purposes, in traffic, but it's probably good enough for most people, including my brother.

For my purposes with SB Cruiser, it's more weight to move around and accelerate, for little advantage I can't get some other way, so it's not likely to remain part of it permanently, but it's an experiment I've been curious about for some time. Most likely once the experiment is done, it'll go into a different trike.

However...if I can get the right kind and width of rim and tire, it'd be interesting to see what that would be like as suspension on the front instead of the suspensio fork. Fat tire stuff is generally too thin and expensive to handle the crap on the roads around here. I'm using a 2.something inch tire (CST City) with a fairly thick tread, and inside that an old thick tube with it's valve cut off and slit along the innner circumference, and inside that slime strips puncture-reistant liners, and inisde that a thick tube. No flats since I started doing that, except for a valvestem failure on CrazyBike2 once (none on SB Cruiser).

The closest thing to that I have seen so far are moped or light motorcycle tires/tubes, which do come in "fatter" sizes that will give more suspension. (that's what I'm using on the rear, though a much smaller diameter).

Anyhow, just some thoughts.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 27 2018 2:00am
by amberwolf
Rain and probably a thunderstorm is predicted for tomorrow / evening, so a few days ago I sprayed on some "waterproofing" silicone/rubber sealing stuff onto a number of spots in the wiring harnesses under the trike, especially around the controllers and the reversing relay, where I had problems in the last storm with significant road-rivers.

I had meant to get fender tops installed on the rear wheels, to keep the splatter from going up and forward, but haven't had the time because I didn't get a weekend this week yet, been working continuously since the start of last week (couple of coworkers had to do stuff today and yesterday, so we swapped shifts and I'll get my days off Wed/Thu instead). Gonna go out after I'm done with dinner and see about installing *something* over them.

Last year this time I started the whole "woodification" process, but never got the fender tops installed, or a number of other bits (rack top, sides of cargo deck, etc.).

Fender tops are "easy", in that they are just a couple of boards to glue together and bolt to the fender rails, so maybe I can do them now. If not, I'll just ziptie some coroplast bits on top to minimize the splatter/spray.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 27 2018 5:26am
by amberwolf
I'll get pics in daylight, but I got the fender tops made.

I went ahead and did them with the wood strips just like the seatbox and side / tail panels are made from, as originally planned, so there's one long strip from front to back along the top of the cargobed siderail on each side, and then a second shorter strip from front edge to the back edge of the fender frame top. First I glued and clamped them together at their side edges, then I drilled pilot holes thru them and the frame, then made countersink holes with the philips screwdriver tip, tehn used drywall screws to tightly secure the wood to the frame.

There's only one screw at each end of each board right now, I'll add a center screw on each if it looks like it's needed later on.

At least this will eliminate splatter and splash on my back and arms, seatback and seatbox.

The one thing it does that I don't like (but have a fix for) is block the ability to hook or tie straps to the fender frame tops; I use that a lot.

However, I have a bag of drawer pulls that will bolt to the bottom of the deck frame at the outboard edges, that the straps can hook to even better than the frame itself. Not tonight though.

Now I just wish I could get the "hamster wheels" in my head to stop squeaking and let me sleep.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 28 2018 2:11am
by amberwolf
Forgot the pics I meant to take today, while getting the rest of me ready for work and the rain expected for my ride home.

Had also expected to ride to work in the rain, but it was sunny and warm all day long right up until late afternoon, and by early evening it was drizzling pretty much continously (still is) lighter and heavier by turns. More than 1/4" so far.

No flooded river streets or lakes to ride thru, but enough water to demonstrate the fender tops work. :)

Also to show the waterproofing spray over selected wiring/connectors worked, too--no reversing relay or controller issues this time.

The wheel fix is still holding up fine, spkes stayed tight.

Oh, and coupld days ago on the way to work I went to go get a pic of the pothole that destroyed that rim, and they'd filled it in. So if I'd missed the pothole for just a few more days, it wouldnt' have happened and I'd still have an intact rim. :/

Next couple days off work, bajillion things to do as usual, so we'll see if I get any trike stuff done.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 28 2018 10:56pm
by amberwolf
Shortened the phase wires by quite a bit today, and swapped the controller mounting points so they're back on the same side as the wheel they're controlling.

Looked like this before:
dsc07195.jpg (88.96 KiB) Viewed 1706 times
and this now:
dsc07212.jpg (74.87 KiB) Viewed 1706 times

I took nearly three feet off each side, and it makes a definitely noticeable difference to acceleration from a stop, but not enough to drop me quite to 0-20mph in 3 seconds.
dsc07213.jpg (94.83 KiB) Viewed 1706 times

It also *reduced* battery current at peak, from 120-130A to 100-110A, on startups from a stop. I rechecked this quite a few times in trips around the neighborhood, using all three of the "three speed switch" settings on the generic controller tahts' on the MXUS (the really power-hungry wheel with teh modded shunt on the controller). Power doesn't change much between them, mostly just the top speed. The Grinfineon doesn't have a switch on it.

The wires don't get nearly as warm as before shortening them.

On the generic, it had thinner wires than the motor (MXUS4503/4 (forgot which, have one of each), so I opened it up and removed it's wires entirely, and ran the motor wires directly to the board, no splices. IIRC the motor has 13 or 14g, and the controller had 15g? Not a lot of difference in conductor size, but some. Had a bit of trouble getting the motor wires thru the PCB holes, took extra cleaning out of hte solder in the holes, and even with that had to heat the holes and wire to push it thru. The old wire would've "rattled around" inside the holes with the solder removed. No hall wires to deal with on this one as the controller doesn't bother using them even though it came with hall wires soldered to the board.

On the Grinfineon, it has thicker wires than the motor (HSR3548) by quite a bit (maybe 12g vs 15g?), so I spliced them together as close as I could get to the motor housing and still leave some wire for oopsies later, around 5". Left around a foot of wire from the controller to that point. Same for the hall wires, since this one's not a sensorless controller.

The reversing relay is also moved, down to near the Grinfineon (the one it's mainly wired to).

There was some other important point to note about the results of the change, but I can't remember what it was. :(

After swapping controller positions, I also neatened up / tied down the whole harness down there better than last time (it was left hanging a few inches below the deck stuff, could've caught on things but I was lucky for months that it didn't). So now it's all tied level with teh controllers under the deck.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 28 2018 11:17pm
by amberwolf
While I was preparing to do the above stuff, I also looked at the potential layouts for stacks of EIG cells to fit under the trike rather than in the cargo seatbox. They'd go in modules of four cells, 2s2p, to keep them "slim" and not take up much vertial room, if I did them in a single tray under the trike's deck, like this.
dsc07190.jpg (64.26 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
Or, make individual modules/boxes and fit them in various parts of teh frame:

The two triangular areas at the front left/right corners of the seatbox under frame are *just* too narrow to fit two modules, about half an inch. :( I could probably notch the triangulation tube so they'd fit, if I had to, but I'd rather just put the others under the deck itself. The charger is presently occupying the space one module would go in.
dsc07191.jpg (57.34 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07193.jpg (71.72 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07194.jpg (72.54 KiB) Viewed 1705 times

There's also room for a module between the two areas, along the main "keel" tube under the seatbox.
dsc07199.jpg (81.62 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
The forward underdeck area can hold at least two modules, possibly four if there's enough room to stack them between the deck and the rest of that triangulation tube that meets the cross-tube transfer axle just behind that space. Depends on how thick the modules end up, which depends on how I make them.
dsc07195.jpg (88.96 KiB) Viewed 1705 times

The area the controllers take up will hold two more modules (four if they're stacked; nothing to worry about clearance-wise).
dsc07196.jpg (71.87 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07198.jpg (79.18 KiB) Viewed 1705 times

I have to be able to fit 28 cells, for a 14s2p pack. That's 7 modules of 4 cells. So if I can fit four modules on the underdeck just behind the seatbox, and four (three) where the controllers are, I wont' need any area under the box. That leaves space for the lighting pack (4s1p) to go there instead. Or use two 4-cell modules for a 4s2p lighting pack, one in the center under-seatbox area, and one in the left area. (the charger is in the right area). Probably rather leave the center area clear, so that I can eventually move the chainline under the seatbox. rather than thru it as it is now.

I was going to move the lighting pack to the front triangle, but there's about 1/2" too little space to do that, no matter which way I orient the cells. :( I'd have to mount them outside the triangle cover panels to clear the frame.
dsc07200.jpg (79.29 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
There *is* room for one module in the space between the IGH and the cranks, between the keel and the "toptube", but that area isn't enclosed yet, so either I'd have to seal up the area or the cells. It's much easier to deal with chain issues should any arise if there's nothing in the way there, though.
dsc07204.jpg (60.12 KiB) Viewed 1705 times

The controllers presently mount flat to the underdeck with a lot of space between them. If I mount htem edge-upwards, FET-side down (in the airflow), they'll fit in the space left on either side of the modules in that area. Just have to make brackets to secure them with (presently they just screw directly to the underdeck via the end-tabs).

Moving the pack down there also potentially shortens the power cabling to the controllers, even more if I also move the breaker and cutoff switch there (not terribly practical). But it also adds some length *between* the modules, so it's really a wash on that part.

I orignally was thnking of a big battery tray under the whole deck area, but I think individual weather-sealed modules would be a better idea. Failure of one's containment either for ingress of water or egress of heat/smoke/fire in the worst-case event should leave other modules unaffected, or at least minimally so, meaning only four or eight cells at a time would be at a risk for loss.

So a possible plan is to make steel boxes that each hold 8 cells, to fit in the four places available under the deck itself. One box will only have four cells, but it'd also have the main breaker in it, reachable from the outside, plus the fuse. Could also fit the cutoff switch, but since I use that as a keyswitch, and it'd be under the trike, its not very convenient, so won't likely do that. Could add a contactor there later so the cutoff switch can still go there plus have a normal low-current keyswitch on the bars or wherever, but dont' presently havea contactor capable of 200A+ (gotta plan for the future ;) ).

Each box would have insulated-mount bolts for the cabling to the the next box, essentially making it into a standalone sealed battery, like some of the car modules.

Since they'll be sealed (with silicone at the joints most likely) then there'll be no good way to check cell voltages. I'll probably put a connector I can dustcap there, like a DB-9 or something I have a lot of from computer stuff, and then find or make dustcaps for that I can grease the edges of to keep water out.

With the modules down there close to the ground, I'll probably add whatever insulation will fit in them (rubber mats) to mitigate the road heat from baking them as much as otherwise direct heating thru the metal module casing would. That may also give them a bit of vibration-resistance.

Interconnecting the cells within hte modules has to be different than the way they're made within the big packs, but I may have enough of that type of interconnect not in use on my other two packs to cut some of them in half and use them on the ends of each module for the module bolts to go into. Will require some modification (bending, recessing a bolt head, etc) of the cut ends.

Then I'll need to make cables to interconnect the modules themselves, probably crimped-on ring terminals to go on the bolts. I ran across a four-point ratcheting crimper in the stuff my dad left behind 15 years ago; I thought most of this stuff had disappeared in the cleanup after the fire, but one box of it was in the stuff I moved earlier this month in my sorting operation. It's not huge, but it might be able to be used on the 8 or 10g wire I have. I'll have to find or make ring terminals for this purpose. (I have some for small wires like 12g, but I dont think I have any bigger ones).

If the crimps aren't good enough I'll have to solder them too (no budget for a new heavy-duty crimper, and don't know anyone local with one to borrow).

I considered Anderson SB50s "panel mount" filled with dielectric grease and a silicone "backing seal" around the wires at the entrance to the housing, but this will likely introduce more voltage sag than I want, given that when I removed a bunch of SB50s from the series connections of various things months ago, the performance of the trike jumped up.

So the ring terminals will probably be where I go with this.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Feb 28 2018 11:29pm
by amberwolf
Oh, also got pics of the new fender tops, ncluding a shot from underneat inside the fender well.
dsc07218.jpg (68.98 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07219.jpg (88.08 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07217.jpg (74.26 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07210.jpg (78.55 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07209.jpg (61.71 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07206.jpg (74.12 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07207.jpg (72.8 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
dsc07208.jpg (55.45 KiB) Viewed 1705 times

Was going to install the drawer pulls
dsc07214.jpg (60.29 KiB) Viewed 1705 times

as cargo strap hook points, but the screws on htem are just 1" long, and the tubes they have to go thru are also 1" wide, so that won't work. Turns out I have NO screws of any length that are the same thread pitch and diameter.
dsc07215.jpg (55.92 KiB) Viewed 1705 times
Since the pulls are probably not strong metal, drilling all the way thru and then flattening the ends by grinding would probably weaken them too much to be useful as strap tie down points. I don't think the metal is a weldable steel either, or I'd just do that.

I have a tap/die set somewhere for SAE threads, and a bunch of SAE hex head bolts, so if I find the taps I can see what the closest next-largest size is to what the existing holes are, that matches the bolts I have, then drill and tap the holes for those.

When I used these on CrazyBike2's cargo pods, they're metal plate not tube so I actually just shortened the existing screws, and it worked fine. Not presently an option on the trike, though I could weld on some tabs to teh tubes and drill the tabs to mount these the same way.

All options are more complicated than I wanted it to be. :/

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Mar 02 2018 1:52am
by amberwolf
I dug into the wiring today to prepare for installing this:
dsc07250.jpg (110.05 KiB) Viewed 1685 times
after having restored Cvin's Cemoto back to it's original pre-CA state, so she can sell it.

and fixed a few issues I'd created last time I did some repairs, mostly in the front triangle covered area, and a bit of stuff on teh front turn signals and headlight wiring still needs redoing after the changeover to the new permanent headlight mount.

Then around midmorning I started on pulling off the old CA 2.23, (I keep thinking its a 2.3 or 2.4 but it's older htan that), and also pulled off the righthand wheel (the bent-up one) to work on changing out some stripped nipples (failed when I was retruing for roundness yesterday).

Right after I'd pretty well made teh trike inoperable, work called to ask if I could come in on my day off (someone else called out sick), but even though I need the hours there was no way to get it back together in the old or new ways in time to do that. :(

So I plodded ahead, doing the best I could with the bent-up wheel first. It's now pretty round, within a couple mm at the outside of the tire, but it's really messed up side-to-side; it's just not possible to fix both as bad as it is, and I need the roundness more.

Then it was on to installing the TDCM torque sensing BB (I'd already pulled the cranks off and taken the regular one out in the morning). This was a PITA, because of welding slag that had gotten stuck on the BB shel threads deeper inside the shell, big enough to prevent the caps from threading in deep enough, but small enough that I couldn't see or feel any of the bits, and had to just keep running pointy picks and wire brushes along the threads to get them off--took something like two hours to get the whole thing done and installed, and then had to adjust it's position to get the sensor in the right place relative to the chainline.

Since I don't have the right splined tools for the caps, I made do with assorted other tools that worked out, but took quite a bit longer than if I had the right ones. Not worth buying them as I don't do enough work like this to justify it.

Running the wire out was easy, no need to drill a hole, since the whole BB was cut from another frame and has the whole "downtube" hole (and the rest of them) open and empty. At least *one* thing was easy about it. ;)
dsc07252.jpg (97.2 KiB) Viewed 1685 times

Mounting the CAv3 was easy, about 10 minutes including running it's wires thru my existing bundle. I left the stem-cap mount on it rather than using the clamping mount, and just slid the cap mount ring over my tiller tube, and then used an old clamp (probably for a seatpost, but I don't know) to push that ring against my bar stem face, and clamp tight on the tiller tube. It's more secure than a starnut and cap would be, and doesnt' weigh that much more (relative to the trike, it's irrelevant).
dsc07253.jpg (97.33 KiB) Viewed 1685 times
dsc07254.jpg (75.66 KiB) Viewed 1685 times

Wiring in the CAv3...that took some doing. The CAv2.23 was hardwired into the system, and I could've done that with the v3, but I wanted to be able to quickly switch back to the old one if I have to, and/or to bypass functions directly, etc. So that meant putting JSTs on the shunt cable (which runs all the way from back under the deck where the controllers are along the keel up into the triangle covered area) and on the righthand throttle (and the wire from there to the righthand controller). This probably took an hour and a half to two hours, partly because my hands don't always work right and partly cuz its' harder and harder to see the small stuff. :/

By this time, it looked like this, though I wasnt' nearly done with all the wiring fixes and whatnot:
dsc07255.jpg (106.43 KiB) Viewed 1685 times
As you can see above, Yogi was bored with the whole thing and had a long nap near me while I worked on the trike. Kirin doesn't sleep as hard as he does, so she woke when I took her pic:
dsc07256.jpg (99.84 KiB) Viewed 1685 times

There was already a JST for the throttle wire out of the "CA cable" to the shunt, on the CAv3, that I'd put there for Cvin's Cemoto to match up to it's existing wiring, to minimize rewiring of that bike when we put this on there originally. So I used that as the output to my own controller, just the righthand one, cutting my hardwired throttle and putting JSTs on each end of the cut.

Then my righthand throttle goes into the CAv3's throttle input JST, and can be either passed thru or processed by the CA. If I have problems I can disconnect the CA JSTs and plug the throttle directly to the controller like its always been.

The Aux input is presently hooked to the 3-position switch Cvin had gotten for switching presets on the Cemoto, and I'll use it for the same thing for now.

No temperature sensor yet, but there is one in the MXUS on the left side, so I could monitor that if I like. I'm probably going to put sensors on a few different things, if I have the right kind laying around here (have a few somewhere). and then a switch to choose which to monitor.

TDCM goes to teh PAS JST.

No ebrake connected to the CAv3 yet; it's presently connected only to the contrllers directly. Ran out of daylight and warmth to do that today, andhands hurt too much to continue in the warmer shed by the time I finished all the other critical stuff.

Now the system is setup like this:

Lefthand throttle directly controls the lefthand controller and MXUS motor; this is the more powerful one, with the highest torque.

Righthand throttle goes to CAv3.

TDCM torquePAS goes to CAv3.

CAv3 output goes to righthand controller and HSR3548 motor.

Ebrake goes directly to controllers.

The idea for now is to try out various throttle control and PAS modes and amounts, and see what works best on my work commutes.

For the moment, Preset1 is TorquePAS with PowerThrottle. Preset2 is TorquePAS with CurrentThrottle. Preset3 is No PAS with PassthruThrottle.

All presets limit speed to 20MPH, but that's only on the righthand motor. Lefthand doesn't go thru the CA yet, so I'd have to watch the speedo if using just that one (which is what I've always done anyway).

A basic ride around the block shows stuff seems to be working, though I couldn't test teh speed limiting as there were too many kids and dogs and cars / trucks in the neighborhood to get near that. Was too worn out to deal with traffic on the roads outside that, so real testing will happen tomorrow on my work commute.

Configuration is being done via the Serial/USB cable ... a-usb.html
with my laptop, using the Grin program, latest version from the website as of earlier today.
I started out by saving the configuration Cvin was using, in case she ever wants to do that kind of thing on another bike, and then updating the CAv3.01 firmware to 3.1 release and letting it reset everything (except protected settings) to defaults, so I'd know I was starting from scratch.

Then I went thru the latest Teklektik's UUG, which is for 3.0e version (couple years old now) ... 45#p571345 ... ?id=191118
and has some differences from what 3.1 is/does/looks like. I'm still investigating all of what's different/new, so I can be sure I'm setting it up correctly.

But it is close enough to get all the basic stuff setup fine, and start tweaking the PAS and throttle setup to get a start on a usable configuration. (final configuration is going to require a bit of wiring and electronics creation to do exactly what I want, most likely, because I want the independent throttles to override the CA's single throttle output).

There are a few things in both the setup program and the CAv3 itself I wish worked differently, but there may turn out to be ways to make them do what I want anyway, once I figure it all out. I'll write up a list of stuff and post it separately, once I get that far.

I *can* say that 3.1 is significantly better than the 3.0 I started with years back (which blew up from a short in the shunt wiring before I got around to setting up the THUN TorquePAS/etc on CrazyBike2; someday I'd like to repair that one).

On that note, I used the TDCM on SB Cruiser instead of the THUN because the new CA came to me with it, and I prefer one that will sense either side's torque, which the Thun does not. THUN only senses left-side, and my left knee is worse than the right, so harder on me to push off with--if Im trying to use a PAS to startup with, that alone makes the THUN not really work cuz I'd have to have a super low gear for the pedals (or not connect them to the rear wheel at all, just a dummy torque load), to be able to spin the cranks far enough to get PAS to start providing power to start me up.

What I REALLY want is instant-start from torque only, meaning it begins providing power as soon as there is torque on the cranks (maybe require a certain minimum so just having my feet on there doesnt' do it), and not require any rotation first.

This is because if I have a heavy load, like a trailer full of stuff plus a loaded trike, there's going to be some spots where I have to start from a stop that I will be unable to push hard enough on the cranks even in the lowest gear to move the cranks far enough to get the CA to recognize it needs to start powering the motor.

Of course I can use the throttle to startup, but the point of having the TorquePAS is to be able to completely use the pedals to drive the bike when I am physically capable of it (I'm not always).

Sometimes I'm going to just use the throttles to control everything, but eitehr one should be able to work by itself.

I know why the CA looks for rotation plus torque: On a regular bike you could stand on the pedals and it'd see torque and takeoff. Can't really do that on SB Cruiser, so no worries about it here, so I wish I could disable the rotation requirement.

Maybe I can figure out how to fake that part via some external electronics. :/

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Mar 02 2018 2:20am
by amberwolf
This is the fatbike fork for the future 3WD / AWD experiment (traded Cvin work on her bikes and stuff for it and the CA above):
dsc07233.jpg (51.54 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
dsc07234.jpg (49.58 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
dsc07235.jpg (56.71 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
It only has disc mount for brakes, so I'll have to do the same thing I did on the suspension fork to add rim brakes--mount the whole U and bosses off some crappy suspension forks (or make some from scratch, more likely), as I dont have any bicycle disc brakes worth bothering with, and the motor I will probably use for the test doesnt' have rotor mounts anyway.
dsc07236.jpg (47.33 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
Steerer should be the same as the suspension fork's, though its' a bit shorter it should still fit and wont' need the long extension spacer I used on that.
dsc07237.jpg (36 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
dsc07238.jpg (37.62 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
dsc07239.jpg (38.76 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
dsc07240.jpg (37.19 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
dsc07241.jpg (104.75 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
By coincidence, the fork is the same length (to about 1/8" to 1/4") as the suspension fork I already have on there, so it won't change the basic ride height or weight distribution/etc of the trike (I think with me on there it comes out to the same height).
dsc07242.jpg (106.98 KiB) Viewed 1683 times
I have not yet been able to check if it's the same offset; if it is then the trail and handling ought to be the same, which is what I'm hoping for.

This is the Ezee v1 (I think) that will be the first experiment's motor. Gotta lace it inot a wheel, and make torque arms, etc. Lots of stuff to go before I ever get to the point of installing the fork and starting the experiment.
dsc07244.jpg (110.37 KiB) Viewed 1683 times

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Mar 03 2018 4:11am
by amberwolf
Well, the TorquePAS / etc sort of works, but there's a few issues.

The CA is still limiting the motor power, even with Power limit as high as it will go (1kw), and Current Limit as high as it will go (999.9A). Amps Feedback Gain is maxed out at 999, and I started with Power Feedback Gain at 150, moved it up in stages to 450, and it still won't let me get max power on that wheel, even in Pass Thru mode, using throttle maxed out. So acceleration is limited, and that's the one thing I need to be completely unlimited--I need all power possible up to the point I reach the 20MPH speed limit.

I've still got to go thru all the settings again to make sure I didn't miss something critical. I haven't gotten the PFG maxed out yet, so we'll see if that's necessary to make it do what I need.

I ended up disconnecting the CA's throttle output and plugging the actual throttle directly to the controller, so I could safely finish the trip to work and then the trip back home (because without the power to accelerate very quickly up to my max allowed speed (20mph), it takes long enough to get thru intersections from a stop that drivers behind me get really impatient and that can get dangerous. If I can accelerate in 3-4 seconds at most, I rarely have a problem).


The PAS won't ever reach 20MPH even if I spin the cranks as fast as I can. I get maybe 14-16MPH max. But if I use the throttle to get me up to 20MPH, then the PAS will *hold* me there, until the road level changes just that tiny bit and then it begins to drop in speed, even if the road is now going *downhill*, presumably because the speed limiting (set to 20MPH) is now kicking in. I couldn't see on the screen as there was too much traffic to pay attention to anything else but the road and traffic. (it's a LOT worse both in volume and bad drivers and stupid pedestrians (taht just step out into traffic) since walmart opened up at the south end of Metrocenter, and the problem increases every week as their business increases).

Note that my pedal system is presently geared for about 10MPH max, given around 60RPM at the cranks. I can only shift the 3-speed IGH while moving; the front triple has no derailer so I leave it on the middle gear most of the time, since up to now I'm not providing any motive power. I'd leave it on the high gear but if I have to back up (common maneuver) it often jams up or ocmes off (or both) on the IGH input sprocket

I can change the gearing some, but not a lot, with some fairly easy changes like bolting a bigger ring on the outer front triple ring (IIRC it's swaged together so can't change that ring itself). I can't change the gearing downstream of the triple, because I need that low gearing in case of having to pedal with no motor power at all, to creep along at 1mph or so without killing my knees/etc. So I can only cahnge the triple's biggest gear, and maybe the middle one, definitely not the small one (unless I were to put a smaller one on that for even lower gearing in lowest possible).


The PAS takes over a second to stop providing power if I stop pedalling, *unless* I pedal backwards, which stops power nearly instantly. That's a real big problem in parking lots and other places where I need fine and instant control, and may not have time to pedal backwards once a power cessation is required. (of course braking will completely stop me, but often that isn't what's needed--just simply ceasing power output instantly when I stop pedalling is what I want).

I've adjusted the Stop Threshold in both directions (lower and higher than the default) and it doesn't appear to make much (if any) difference. Either I'm doing something wrong or it's interrelated with some other setting to cause this, or something the TDCM sensor is doing is simply feeding the CA wrong info.


The Start Threshold makes some difference in how long it takes to start going, but I still can't get the instant response I need out of the system.

Based on searching/reading around the main CAv3 thread, and how things appear to work inside the CA, I have a feeling I'm going to have to ditch the whole TorquePAS idea, and find one of the old voltage-output PAS sensors (rather than pulse) and use that to run to the throttle input rather than the PAS input. Then use the pedals as another throttle. But this still won't give me instant power without spinning the pedals, so I may ahve to keep the TorquePAS sensor there and use it's output via some electronics I'll have to design and build to make yet another throttle output to feed into the CA.

Then some electronics to mix those two throttles with the actual hand-operated throttles, with some pattern of overrides so that first if I use the hand-throttles, the system does what those command, regardless of what the PAS/etc says to do. Next in priority is teh torque sensor cuz I need it to give instant power if I'm pushing hard on it wehther cranks are moving or not. Then the spinning-pedals sensor to control speed (or power, etc) with once it's actually moving.

I don't even know if I can do things that way, but taht's what I need it to do.

I'm just really hoping it's not that complicated, and I can get what I need out of the CA's actual functionality. :/

I had more stuff ot say but I've forgottn it. I know it was about the CA, but can't rmeemmber what it was.

Just as a comparison with the old CA, here's the trip stats. Note that it's the same shunts as before, and same setting in the CA for them, but there is a definite significant difference in power usage between them. This could've been caused by using the PAS (and the apparent limiting problem I'm having right now), so tomorrow I will ride my commute as normal with no CA connection to any throttle to get a better baseline for how this CA reads.


50.5wh/mile (this is usually 60-65)
0.038ohms Rbatt

0.8% regen
0.0368Ah regen
4.2075 fwd AH

-6.4A Amin
85.0A max (this is usually over 100 to 130A).

20.2mph max
13.5mph avg
0hrs 20m 19s
4.602miles trip odo
3641miles total odo

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Mar 03 2018 10:26am
by eCue
Strange its lacking full power Im wondering if the speed limiter is on without you knowing.
For the Pas delayed response my suggestion is make sure the Pas setting is set for the correct magnet count of your sensor

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Mar 03 2018 1:05pm
by amberwolf
Of course the speed limiting is on, it says so in the post above; it's there to keep from exceeding 20MPH.

But that isnt' power limiting, which is a separate set of things, if you read the CA manual. You can read the post above for my settings of that.

The PAS sensor is setup for TDCM settings, using hte TDCM option in the menu, which sets them correctly by default.

Re: The SB Cruiser: Amberwolf&Dogman's 2WD CargoTrike&DogCarrier

Posted: Mar 03 2018 1:35pm
by amberwolf
Today's experiments, before heading off to work:

I reconnected the CA between the right throttle and the right motor, so the PAS can control it.

I experimented with various PAS Start and Stop Threshold values, and found something odd, that perhaps I just don't understand what these really do, vs what their function names and value names imply.

If I decrease both to minimums, it radically *increases* the time to start PAS, to something like two or two and a half seconds (multiple rotations of the pedals in my lowest gear). Stopping also takes at least that long after I cease pedalling.

If I leave the Stop Threshold at minimum and increase the Start to maximum, it doesn't appear to change the start of PAS, but it seems to decrease teh time to stop.

If I set Stop to 1.00 and Start to 0.10, then Starting takes a second or so, and stopping still takes a couple of seconds.

Basically, it appears that the values are interdependent in some complex way I'm not able to quickly understand, when I would expect them to be completely separate.

It also appears from an hour of experimenting with different values along the range that nothing decreases the time to stop throttle output to the controller from the PAS input below about a second and a half or so (though it seems much longer subjectively ;) ).

This is a deal-breaker kind of thing, as if I can't decrease this to a tenth of a second or less (essentially instant) then I have to create electronics of my own to detect cessation of pedal rotation, and apply a "mute" signal to the throttle (perhaps via the CA's ebrake input, not presently used).

Sure, I could add a separate ebrake button and manually do it, but that's one more thing I have to do manually, and has reaction time involved, and I might as well just use the throttle instead of PAS if I'm going to have to use my hands anyway.

I could also pedal backwards to cut it off essentially instantly (which means the CA *can* detect a change in rotation fast enough to do what I need, it's program or settings just arent' allowing it as I have it setup right now). But again, it's reaction time, and having to think about doing it, when I should be able to get the CA to do it.


When I was done with the above, I then set the Power Feedback Gain to 999.9 (from 450) so there should be no power limiting of any kind, as all the power and current limiting settings are maxed out--but I still see the W come on as soon as the motor starts from a stop, and sometimes hear a stuttering as the CA's throttle output cuts down power just for an instant and then restores it, repeatedly.

Tomorrow (my next day off) I'll see about backing up this CA config, and creating a new one in Low Range mode (rather than High Range mode it's in now). HOwever, none of the actual A or W values will be correct that way, as I can't set teh shunt value correctly (it's 0.500mOhm, and minimum I can set in Low Range mode is 0.750mOhm). So I don't know how valid the test will be, being that the A and W values will be off by the ratio of actual-to-min-setting-allowed shunt resistance.

The shunts are soldered in, and doubled up (2x 1.000mOhm parallel) because of voltage drop under max current issues I'd had before, all along the power cabling. When fixing that I just reduced all the possible drops in the battery cabling that I could at once, so I dont' actually know that paralleled shunts is necessary. But the Grin basic shunts are rated at 45A, while my max current draw is more than twice that. I don't normally see that for more than a couple seconds, but if I have to go up hills I could see it the entire time. (not many around here, but there are some). So paralleling two cuts the heat each one generates and experiences in half, reducing risk in the case I have to do a hill.