Additionally, the minuscule angular deflection in a short length of solid shaft resulting from human torque makes this approach unlikely to succeed. A new arrangement would have to radically different from what @kisazul posted.stinkycats wrote: ↑Oct 04, 2018 1:18 pmYes, the phase difference of two pulse trains can indicate the amount of torque. However, as I pointed out, a pulse train is nearly useless as a measure of torque if you don't have enough pulses-per-revolution. One pulse every 360° is useless. One pulse every 180° (2 pulses per revolution) is almost as useless. One pulse every 90° means you have to rotate the pedals 1/4 of the way around before you get a torque measurement. This is also fairly useless. In my opinion, you would need at least 32 magnetic poles (every 11.25°) to get a smooth torque reading without moving the pedals too far.
There is no way to see if the axle has that many magnetic poles from the pictures posted here, or even if it is pulse train based or magnitude based (analog output).
I’m not the sharpest knife in the draw when it comes to electronics & I don’t have a proper scope but I do have a Fluke Scopemeter https://www.inlec.com/fluke-105b-oscilloscope, which might work.
Need help in identifying where on this wiring layout I might find a torque sensor signal. I suspect I rather need to be in the controller, right? If so, does anyone know how to remove this custom 3-indent locknut? @kisazul – you must have managed it? Also see lack of grease on my secondary gears, if done properly it would have been quieter.