Critique this performance velomobile idea

General Discussion about electric bicycles.
User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 16 2021 11:36pm

So far, with the tail removed, the CA3 indicates a consumption of about 8 Wh/mile when not riding like a jackass and doing about 30 mph on the flat, with pedal input accounting for roughly 1/3 the motive force. I can ride 30 miles on this 46.8V 10.5AH pack and the CA3 indicates it's only about half drained, so this pack should give me a 60 mile range or thereabouts to dead, and maybe a safe 50 mile range. My Leafbike motor also had a faster wind than I thought. It is the 4T wind instead of the default 5T wind, and I've already reached 45 mph on the flat. The bike is stable at speed. I've been faster than that even, 50+ mph downhill, but that was years before I ever installed the motor.

Putting the tail back on will improve things for sure.

It should get very interesting when I put a 1.5 kWh 72V pack in it.

That said, the tires/ wheels/hubs/axles/spindles/brakes are not suited for 45+ mph as a cruising speed. It seems safe to cruise at 35 mph, as that is roughly at the limit for which bicycle components are designed to handle. And for the most part, that is the speed I intend to operate it at, 30-35 mph.

The next build after this is going to use light-duty motorcycle components and have an integrated roll cage. I really badly want to build a pedalable with motor disabled solar-electric velomobile that with the motor enabled can safely cruise at highway speeds and maybe even top out somewhere in the triple digits, with rapid acceleration on the way there! But that will come after I complete this first one.

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 17 2021 4:02pm

I put an almost empty pack(CA indicated nothing in the battery charge indicator, but resting voltage was about 44V, demonstrating it maybe had 20-25% charge left) up to the Satiator charger today. It charged it to full in 2.5 hours, putting 7.4AH back into the pack, the pack being rated 46.8V 10.5AH. I got about 45 miles from those 7.4AH. So, the 8 wh/mi I've been getting over the past two days is consistent, and this is in cold weather where efficiency and deliverable capacity both tend to suffer.

That is not bad.

I also rode it for 4 miles with the battery disconnected and the motor giving me its cogging losses. I maintained a rolling average of 14.5 mph. Keep in mind I live in a hilly area. And I'm still operating without the tail, which the lack thereof adds a noticeable amount of drag. I peaked at 38 mph going down a moderate hill for that ride, and on anything resembling a flat section, was holding about 20 mph.

Once I get the tail on it, and work out a few issues with the torque sensor so that it more accurately reads human power(and would thus probably require me to put out a little more pedal force to maintain 30 mph), maybe I'll have an 80 mile range at 30 mph with everything turned on. That would be very good range for a 491 Wh pack.

I'm looking forward to what the future holds for this project. This is going to be an excellent test bed to figure out what I really want for the next build. I'm going to make a 3rd body shell for this KMX for sure, just to try to get the aero right. I want to be able to sprint to 40 mph on flat ground with the EV system shut off and while overcoming the motor's cogging losses. As it was with the tail, I could only reach 37 mph, without the heavy/lossy motor in the back slowing me down, and now with the motor installed but without the tail, my flat ground sprints top out around 32 mph when everything is disabled.

I'm about to go for another ride and find a good place with no possibility of law enforcement encounters and do a genuine top speed run with the motor on.

Some brainstorming/musing for what may be the next build:

I think my next build is going to have the same 39" track width, but the wheelbase will be extended out another foot or more, and it will use a rack and pinion steering system like a car(probably one sourced from a racing kart) where one-half turn of the steering wheel from center equates to a turn of minimum radius, which would allow me to keep the brake levers on the steering, and the "wheel" will be a butterfly style like found on a fighter jet. I'd make a custom frame designed to allow the seat to be lowered an extra 2" from what I have now, and it would be reclined a lot more, to keep the center of gravity as low as possible. Probably go with 16" motorcycle wheels all around with Mitas MC2 LRR tires, hydraulic disc brakes, full suspension with about 1.5-2" travel(really don't need anymore), and a ground clearance around 4-4.5". I'd have some wheel hubs custom made, strong enough to handle highway speeds with reliability, laced to some light-duty motorcycle rims. I'd work on making the body as slippery and low frontal area as possible in the context of the wide front track width, possibly frontal area in the 0.45-0.5 m^2 region. This one may end up shaped something like the Versatron Vector from the 1980s, but with less glass and more roof, and solar panels on that roof, perhaps as much as 200W worth of them could fit on the vehicle.

A Leafbike 1500W 3T wind would be a good start for the motor, and I'd get one of the high-end controllers(Nucular Electronics, BAC8000, ect) and run it at like 96V or more, so the top speed would be no less than 90 mph, maybe more if a higher voltage pack can be accommodated, since 100+ mph would be really nice. A 150A max phase current and 7 kW power limit should be good for 0-30 mph in 4 seconds, 0-60 mph in 10 seconds, assuming an unladen weight of 100 lbs and a 140 lb rider with 30 lbs tools/luggage/spare parts. It would need a torque sensing bottom bracket modified to accommodate a Schlumpf HS drive with a triple crank, and perhaps a 26/40/52T crank that the HS drive could multiply by 2.5x into a 65/100/130 when engaged, with a 7-speed 34-11 freewheel in the rear. This would give gearing for climbing a steep hill unpowered and loaded for touring at 2.6 mph at 60 cadence, in top gear cruising at 70 mph at 100 cadence, and careening down the highway at 100 mph at 140 cadence. Get it efficient enough, say a CdA of 0.06 m^2, and a fit rider might still sprint to 45 mph on flat ground with the motor turned completely off due to a drained battery and suffering the cogging losses from no power going to the motor at all, and be able to maintain 25 mph for hours on end.

I know this is possible. My current preliminary results are very encouraging. And speed/performance is only a question of when hub motors catch up to existing technology, as the Leafbike is a far cry from what is possible from even 5 years ago. A 7 lb synchronous reluctance hub motor could be made for 3 kW continuous and 15 kW peak at 96V due to its high efficiency, make cogging losses and rotational inertia almost completely unnoticable to a fit rider when ridden powered off, and such a thing would make musclecar-like acceleration in a vehicle like this possible, forget the slow ass 0-60 in 10 seconds proposal, maybe 0-60 mph in 4-5 seconds in such a vehicle can be done... What fun that would be! And once solid state batteries enter the market in the near to mid-term future, we're looking at the prospect of stuffing a 4 kWh pack in a 15 lb package, which could give such a thing a 200+ mile range at 60 mph with the rider inputting 150W and the motor doing the rest. The operator would literally get thousands of miles per gallon over the life of the vehicle, and it would be efficient enough for solar to be the sole source of power for most people given that a modest amount of solar could give it 100+ miles range a day in most of the world.

This is the type of "car" that can be sustainable if all 8 billion people on Earth were to have one. And it wouldn't have to suck.

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 17 2021 5:14pm

I had to abort the top speed run. When I got to the location I was going to try it at, it started snowing. While it was fun sliding around in the snow at 40+ mph when I first got it going, being pelted in the eyes by snowflakes at that speed is no fun, and I'm not dare going to suffer that at what will nearly be 50 mph. Maybe tomorrow conditions will be conducive towards this.

User avatar
thundercamel   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 454
Joined: Jul 23 2018 2:58pm
Location: Round Lake, Illinois

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by thundercamel » Jan 18 2021 12:10am

It's nice to see you up and running, and reading all your details! From what I remember, Leaf won't make the 1500w 35mm motor in a 3T, only the 1000w (27mm?). Also fighter jets use a stick instead of a wheel, but when you said butterfly I immediately envisioned this:

Image
My Ebike builds - Existing bikes, affordable motor kits, self built 14s6p batteries - Now with more recumbent!

markz   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 12205
Joined: Jan 09 2014 11:38pm
Location: Alberta Canada

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by markz » Jan 18 2021 12:45am

https://youtu.be/nxz9x3wF3DM?t=377
thundercamel wrote:
Jan 18 2021 12:10am
[/img]

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 18 2021 10:40am

thundercamel wrote:
Jan 18 2021 12:10am
It's nice to see you up and running, and reading all your details! From what I remember, Leaf won't make the 1500w 35mm motor in a 3T, only the 1000w (27mm?).
The 1000w may be advantageous for its reduced cogging losses anyhow. The goal IS to keep the thing as fast as possible when operated purely under pedal power, within the context of being stable/mechanically reliable when traveling highway speeds with the motor on. I want it to be efficient enough for a fit rider to maintain rolling averages in the 20+ mph range and sprint to like 40+ mph top end, while a professional athlete might be able to do sub 4 hour century rides and sprint to 50 mph in it, including powering through the cogging losses with everything shut off while riding on DOT rated rubber(appropriate tires with low enough rolling resistance coefficient may not currently exist on a commercially available basis to make this possible even, but the Mitas MC2 seem promising and are advertised as "low rolling resistance", but failing that, purpose built solar race car tires could work considering how light this vehicle would be even if they may not be DOT approved and even if they would be expensive and/or difficult to obtain).
Also fighter jets use a stick instead of a wheel, but when you said butterfly I immediately envisioned this:
A tiller setup could suffice in lieu of a rack and pinion. It will depend upon a lot of currently unknown variables regarding the currently nonexistent chassis which system will work better. A rack and pinion could possibly allow the rider to exert more leverage and more easily keep the vehicle stable, but getting it to fit while providing leg/knee clearance for pedaling the bicycle drivetrain without it being a hazard during a wreck will be an issue. If I go so far as to have a roll cage, it will also need a safety harness.

It's going to take quite a bit of work to figure out how to to get something like this to work according to the requirements listed AND keep all of this under 100 lbs, but I do not think it is impossible, and as battery technology continues to improve, doing so will become a lot easier. Every single ounce is going to count for something.

fatty   100 W

100 W
Posts: 202
Joined: Nov 14 2020 9:15pm
Location: USA

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by fatty » Jan 18 2021 5:29pm

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 17 2021 4:02pm
A Leafbike 1500W 3T wind would be a good start for the motor, and I'd get one of the high-end controllers(Nucular Electronics, BAC8000, ect) and run it at like 96V or more, so the top speed would be no less than 90 mph, maybe more if a higher voltage pack can be accommodated, since 100+ mph would be really nice.
Be advised both those controllers have a 90V limit. If you want to be able to run it hot off the charger and/or with regen, you'll be limited to a 21S pack (88.2V hot). Kelly KEB84801X is rated to 105V (24S), and PowerVelocity.com can do 130V (30S) or even 150V.
The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 17 2021 4:02pm
I know this is possible. My current preliminary results are very encouraging. And speed/performance is only a question of when hub motors catch up to existing technology...
And once solid state batteries enter the market in the near to mid-term future...
I appreciate your optimism, but Hub motors are largely Chinese niche, and will never catch up to contemporary motors (say, flight motors). Not to say hub motors won't (slowly) improve, but there will always be the efficiency deficit and weight penalty.
And solid-state batteries will not be entering the ebike market in the near to mid-term future.
Don't take advice from:
there is no difference between a mean well CC/CV power supply and a device sold as a charger. they operate in EXACTLY the same way
Testing has demonstrated that ordinary rim brakes thermally outperformed all but the best disc brakes...You'll always add weight and cost, while not equalling the capabilities of comparable rim brakes, if you use discs

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 18 2021 6:57pm

fatty wrote:
Jan 18 2021 5:29pm

Be advised both those controllers have a 90V limit. If you want to be able to run it hot off the charger and/or with regen, you'll be limited to a 21S pack (88.2V hot).
I mixed their specs up with the powervelocity one you mentioned. But yeah, that is correct.
Kelly KEB84801X is rated to 105V (24S), and PowerVelocity.com can do 130V (30S) or even 150V.
I'm not sure the Leafbike motor could handle that voltage without arcing over through the case. Maybe. If yes, some serious power could be made, maybe 10 kW peak for a few seconds at a time. At 72V, they're fairly reliable to operate at 4-7 kW peak, 2-2.5 kW continuous. That would be interesting to try one at 130V, but I don't currently have the funds to risk components in such an experiment.
I appreciate your optimism, but Hub motors are largely Chinese niche, and will never catch up to contemporary motors (say, flight motors). Not to say hub motors won't (slowly) improve, but there will always be the efficiency deficit and weight penalty.
None of that is a technological issue. At some point, I'd expect someone to make a quality, high-efficiency hub motor. It's a niche begging to be exploited, and there is going to be some sort of demand for it by the high-performance ebike crowd. The cost to manufacture a quality, high-efficiency hub of this sort is not going to be greatly more than existing hubs. Controlling it on the other hand is going to require some R&D and expense.
And solid-state batteries will not be entering the ebike market in the near to mid-term future.
Perhaps not, but they are expected to enter other markets soon, and there is no reason cells couldn't be stripped from initial products that use them and repurposed for an ebike. Ebikes and DIY car conversions using cells from wrecked Tesla Model 3s exist today.

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 19 2021 11:25pm

I finally topped it out. The Cycle Analyst says I reached 46.0 mph. Not bad for a 46.8V nominal pack limited to 1,250W! It may have a little more in it once I get the tail on and do some more aero tweaks. It said I was using 513W human power at the time, and I had it set up to where human power should be 1/3 of what is needed to make it move. It took about 1 mile to get up to top speed. I don't know how accurate the human power reading is. I was sprinting hard, but not full effort, and probably could have maintained it for at least another 1-2 minutes.

I look forward to a pack that can push the Leafbike motor to its limits. A 72V pack is going to give me a top speed around 65-70 mph, and it would be nice to have car-like acceleration on the way there! :twisted:

fatty   100 W

100 W
Posts: 202
Joined: Nov 14 2020 9:15pm
Location: USA

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by fatty » Jan 20 2021 4:03am

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 18 2021 6:57pm
None of that is a technological issue. At some point, I'd expect someone to make a quality, high-efficiency hub motor. It's a niche begging to be exploited, and there is going to be some sort of demand for it by the high-performance ebike crowd. The cost to manufacture a quality, high-efficiency hub of this sort is not going to be greatly more than existing hubs. Controlling it on the other hand is going to require some R&D and expense.
But R&D doesn't occur in a vacuum -- it's driven by market forces, and there's no market for high-end hub motors, or else we'd be using them. The R&D by Brose, Bosch, Shimano, Yamaha goes into mid-drive, which makes sense if you're developing a platform and not just a conversion.

Look at the rest of e-bike conversion parts: the quality, high-performance parts are commodity parts from larger markets, like RC motors and LiPo flight packs.

I agree it would be nice to see quality hub motors, but that's a shrinking niche within the larger high-performance e-bike niche, itself within the larger e-bike niche.
Don't take advice from:
there is no difference between a mean well CC/CV power supply and a device sold as a charger. they operate in EXACTLY the same way
Testing has demonstrated that ordinary rim brakes thermally outperformed all but the best disc brakes...You'll always add weight and cost, while not equalling the capabilities of comparable rim brakes, if you use discs

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 20 2021 5:33pm

fatty wrote:
Jan 20 2021 4:03am
But R&D doesn't occur in a vacuum -- it's driven by market forces, and there's no market for high-end hub motors, or else we'd be using them. The R&D by Brose, Bosch, Shimano, Yamaha goes into mid-drive, which makes sense if you're developing a platform and not just a conversion.
"Market forces" are often a very poor predictor of what the consumer actually wants, and are more an indicator of what the company making the product wants the consumer to buy as well as an indicator of what the other companies are willing to sell. That is why so much is spent on advertising, otherwise fools would not part with their money as readily as they do.

Electric cars didn't become viable on the mass market until Tesla stepped up and contradicted conventional wisdom, because "market forces" were demonstrating with sales figures that nobody wanted EVs(when no one was selling EVs), when in reality the pent-up demand was then and still is massive. The technology became ready for a niche market in the 1970s when control/motor technology improved and ready for mainstream appeal in the 1990s with the advent of the NiMH battery and the possibility of reliable 150+ miles range in streamlined sedans(Solectria Sunrise getting 200-250 miles in normal use, setting a 373 mile record while being hypermiled in the Tour Del Sol), but the big automakers were not keen on the idea in part because of their notion of "market forces", resulting in their unwillingness to try to sell something different from what everyone else was selling, and thus the niche adoption of the technology was delayed by 4+ decades and mass adoption of this technology was delayed about 2 decades while the batteries have gotten much better since the time that they were "good enough". In 2020 Tesla became the largest U.S. automaker by value, overtaking GM. Had GM actually sold the EV1 in the 1990s to the consumers who wanted to buy it, and not listened to the conventional wisdom or copied what everyone else was selling with the SUV craze, things could have played out very differently. Now the big automakers are all trying to catch up to Tesla.

Not to say that the pent-up demand for quality hub motors is similarly huge, but there is certainly a demand there judging by some of the posts on this website. The advantages in simplicity, reduced maintenance, reduced noise, reduced component wear, increased overall reliability, and ease of installation over a mid drive are compelling. It is not that hub motor technology is inferior to mid drives so much as it is the quality of the hub motors available on the market are inferior to the quality of the mid drives available on the market.

If I had the money for the tools to do so, I'd give a go at producing such a motor and a matching controller to drive it. I am confident that if the product were good, I'd make a small but reliable profit. As more of the product entered the market, more users and potential buyers could see whatever advantages/disadvantages the product offered over the conventional products available. The fact that no one is doing this right now does not mean the idea has no viability. There is risk involved. The safe route is always selling to the lowest common denominator that buys what the advertisements are telling them they want, because "market forces" have already saturated us with nearly identical cookie cutter choices of the sort. But that tactic doesn't yield any remarkable innovation, and the R&D money easily ends up wasted.

If all anyone ever listened to was "market forces", all we'd have are bland, unmodifiable, 250-750W mid-drive ebikes limited to 15-28 mph with proprietary-everything where if something in the EV drive system breaks, only the manufacturer can fix it. But there exist other niches because some innovators were willing to think outside of what appeals to the lowest common denominator, and there is indeed a proven sizable market segment for things that "market forces" claim have no mass appeal, even if this market segment is split into many different smaller niches.

User avatar
_GonZo_   10 W

10 W
Posts: 97
Joined: Jan 18 2010 5:47pm
Location: Spain

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by _GonZo_ » Jan 21 2021 5:22am

Very interesting post. And congratulations for your achievements. :thumb:
As I seen that you are working with Polypropylene corrugated sheets (Coroplast)
It is a material I have worked with quite a lot. Not for Velomobiles but other things. But I had explored the possibility to make a similar vehicle as yours. But never did...
Anyway attached there is a design for a fully enclosed velomobile that can be made with panels. All curved surfaces are simple curves not compound I mean... It is only a design exploration.
If you are interested I can revisit it and review and pass you the files.

As well there is a FB group about Coroplast velomobiles and similar if you are interested: https://www.facebook.com/groups/15644592486
Attachments
Body 3.png
Body 3.png (1.25 MiB) Viewed 140 times
Last edited by _GonZo_ on Jan 22 2021 6:15am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 21 2021 11:01am

_GonZo_ wrote:
Jan 21 2021 5:22am
Anyway attached there is a design for a fully enclosed velomobile that can be made with panels. All curved surfaces are simple curves not compound I mean... It is only a design exploration.
If you are interested I can revisit it and review and pass you the files.

As well there is a FB group about foro-last velomobiles and similar if you are interested: https://www.facebook.com/groups/15644592486
That is an interesting design. I can see that it would pose a lot of practical issues if it were to be made, but as you said, it is only a design exploration. It looks good.

I'm aware of that FB group, but I'm not on FB and by the looks of things never will be. Too much datamining, censorship, monetization, and surveillance for my liking.

I'm going to try to put the tail back on today so I get my trunk space back, and see how much this cuts aerodynamic drag. Once I do that, as well as add wheel fairings and a windshield/roof, I'm hoping I can get energy consumption down to 6 Wh/mi at 30 mph. This would allow a 1.5 kWh pack to give me a 250 mile range at 30 mph, very close to the original goal I had mentioned early in this topic.

donn   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 683
Joined: Aug 13 2018 10:30am
Location: Seattle

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by donn » Jan 21 2021 1:55pm

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 20 2021 5:33pm
If I had the money for the tools to do so, I'd give a go at producing such a motor and a matching controller to drive it. I am confident that if the product were good, I'd make a small but reliable profit. As more of the product entered the market, more users and potential buyers could see whatever advantages/disadvantages the product offered over the conventional products available. The fact that no one is doing this right now does not mean the idea has no viability. There is risk involved. The safe route is always selling to the lowest common denominator that buys what the advertisements are telling them they want, because "market forces" have already saturated us with nearly identical cookie cutter choices of the sort. But that tactic doesn't yield any remarkable innovation, and the R&D money easily ends up wasted.
If you did that, how long do you think it would last, before you were competing with Chinese knock-offs at half the price?

fatty   100 W

100 W
Posts: 202
Joined: Nov 14 2020 9:15pm
Location: USA

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by fatty » Jan 21 2021 5:14pm

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 20 2021 5:33pm
"Market forces" are often a very poor predictor of what the consumer actually wants, and are more an indicator of what the company making the product wants the consumer to buy as well as an indicator of what the other companies are willing to sell. That is why so much is spent on advertising, otherwise fools would not part with their money as readily as they do.
:roll:
There isn't a secret cabal withholding what consumers actually want. (e)Biking is a visible, growing community of passionate white men with disposable income and access to copious capital, and often, apparently, business and machining/manufacturing infrastructure. If there was ever an opportunity for even marginally-competitive return on investment in this community, it would have been met.

I suspect you underestimate the cost of custom hub motor tooling, machining, and manufacturing, and overestimate the demand for such a hub motor.

After all, current hub motors fit their niche quite well. They are low cost suitable for conversions, and perfectly adequate within the intended performance envelope up to 28mph. Into 30-40+mph, full suspension becomes more desirable, where unsprung hub motor is undesirable -- which isn't to say that people don't build 30-40+ hub drive builds, but rather the addressable market for high-performance hub drive is small and shrinking.
Don't take advice from:
there is no difference between a mean well CC/CV power supply and a device sold as a charger. they operate in EXACTLY the same way
Testing has demonstrated that ordinary rim brakes thermally outperformed all but the best disc brakes...You'll always add weight and cost, while not equalling the capabilities of comparable rim brakes, if you use discs

fatty   100 W

100 W
Posts: 202
Joined: Nov 14 2020 9:15pm
Location: USA

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by fatty » Jan 21 2021 5:31pm

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 20 2021 5:33pm
Electric cars didn't become viable on the mass market until Tesla stepped up and contradicted conventional wisdom, because "market forces" were demonstrating with sales figures that nobody wanted EVs(when no one was selling EVs), when in reality the pent-up demand was then and still is massive. The technology became ready for a niche market in the 1970s when control/motor technology improved and ready for mainstream appeal in the 1990s with the advent of the NiMH battery and the possibility of reliable 150+ miles range in streamlined sedans(Solectria Sunrise getting 200-250 miles in normal use, setting a 373 mile record while being hypermiled in the Tour Del Sol), but the big automakers were not keen on the idea in part because of their notion of "market forces", resulting in their unwillingness to try to sell something different from what everyone else was selling, and thus the niche adoption of the technology was delayed by 4+ decades and mass adoption of this technology was delayed about 2 decades while the batteries have gotten much better since the time that they were "good enough". In 2020 Tesla became the largest U.S. automaker by value, overtaking GM. Had GM actually sold the EV1 in the 1990s to the consumers who wanted to buy it, and not listened to the conventional wisdom or copied what everyone else was selling with the SUV craze, things could have played out very differently. Now the big automakers are all trying to catch up to Tesla.
It's silly to compare Tesla to a bespoke hub motor -- they have literally nothing in common any way you want to look at it.
Tesla offered a halo platform to the end customer, and then leveraged -- marketed, really -- that platform through a cult of personality into a legitimate enterprise.
Again, you're talking about a bespoke hub motor for ebike conversions.
Don't take advice from:
there is no difference between a mean well CC/CV power supply and a device sold as a charger. they operate in EXACTLY the same way
Testing has demonstrated that ordinary rim brakes thermally outperformed all but the best disc brakes...You'll always add weight and cost, while not equalling the capabilities of comparable rim brakes, if you use discs

User avatar
neptronix   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 15066
Joined: Jun 15 2010 5:56pm
Location: Utah, USA
Contact:

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by neptronix » Jan 21 2021 5:59pm

A little birdy whispered into my ear recently and told me that an ebike company we know and love has experimented with a DD hub with 0.27mm laminations.

No timeframe was provided :/

It's a shame that the CYC Pro X1 is 3kw rated, otherwise it'd be so ideal to just ditch a drive stage and run one to the rear wheel of your velo. The motor has something like 0.2mm lams.. but probably falls out of it's efficiency band below 1.5kw, which is where your machine would spend a lot of it's time.
"Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them, humanity cannot survive." - Dalai Lama

My first major build: 1.6kW 8T MAC motor on a Trek 4500 MTB.
Monster MTB: Leafmotor 1500w @ 4kW on a Turner O2 full suspension.
The monster scooter: Heavy duty Cannondale semi recumbent - under construction.
Blue Dream: Maxaraya FS semi recumbent and high efficiency mid-drive - under construction.

User avatar
Chalo   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 8352
Joined: Apr 29 2009 11:29pm
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by Chalo » Jan 21 2021 6:16pm

neptronix wrote:
Jan 21 2021 5:59pm
It's a shame that the CYC Pro X1 is 3kw rated, otherwise it'd be so ideal to just ditch a drive stage and run one to the rear wheel of your velo. The motor has something like 0.2mm lams.. but probably falls out of it's efficiency band below 1.5kw, which is where your machine would spend a lot of it's time.
Wouldn't it be nearly as efficient if it were run at full current and reduced voltage?
This is to express my gratitude to Justin of Grin Technologies for his extraordinary measures to save this forum for the benefit of all.

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10863
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by Dauntless » Jan 21 2021 7:13pm

_GonZo_ wrote:
Jan 21 2021 5:22am
As I seen that you are working with Polypropylene corrupted sheets (Coroplast)
Corrogated? The proper term for coroplast is 'Fluted.'

It's kewl stuff, you can get plenty of it free when the elections are over. PP doesn't like things trying to stick to it, haven't used the Krylon Fusion that claims it'll work.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

User avatar
neptronix   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 15066
Joined: Jun 15 2010 5:56pm
Location: Utah, USA
Contact:

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by neptronix » Jan 21 2021 8:06pm

Chalo wrote:
Jan 21 2021 6:16pm
neptronix wrote:
Jan 21 2021 5:59pm
It's a shame that the CYC Pro X1 is 3kw rated, otherwise it'd be so ideal to just ditch a drive stage and run one to the rear wheel of your velo. The motor has something like 0.2mm lams.. but probably falls out of it's efficiency band below 1.5kw, which is where your machine would spend a lot of it's time.
Wouldn't it be nearly as efficient if it were run at full current and reduced voltage?
Based on what i've seen from dyno graphs and also the ebikes.ca simulator, there's a certain RPM you need to be at to hit the efficiency sweet spot on most motors.

That sweet spot tends to be at the rated voltage, or maybe a little higher.. but the lower you go from the rated voltage, the more you lose generally.

We don't have a dyno graph of the CYC Pro motor, but this is generally a safe assumption.

Maybe the penalty is only 2-4% if you run it on say, 36... but now we're in hub motor efficiency territory, which can negate the whole idea.

..alternately, a ~1250w rated cyclone motor may be more suitable ( and cheaper ). They claim high efficiency for some of them.... but.. i doubt that's true!
"Love and compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them, humanity cannot survive." - Dalai Lama

My first major build: 1.6kW 8T MAC motor on a Trek 4500 MTB.
Monster MTB: Leafmotor 1500w @ 4kW on a Turner O2 full suspension.
The monster scooter: Heavy duty Cannondale semi recumbent - under construction.
Blue Dream: Maxaraya FS semi recumbent and high efficiency mid-drive - under construction.

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 21 2021 10:23pm

fatty wrote:
Jan 21 2021 5:14pm
After all, current hub motors fit their niche quite well. They are low cost suitable for conversions, and perfectly adequate within the intended performance envelope up to 28mph. Into 30-40+mph, full suspension becomes more desirable, where unsprung hub motor is undesirable -- which isn't to say that people don't build 30-40+ hub drive builds, but rather the addressable market for high-performance hub drive is small and shrinking.
With a significantly more efficient design, such as the synchronous reluctance or synchronous reactance types that peak at 97-99% efficiency and have broad operating efficiency around 90-95%, the amount of mass for a given continuous power rating can be greatly reduced, making the issue of unsprung weight much less of a compromise.

The addressable market for a high-performance hub drive is an unknown, because a high performance hub drive that can actually compare/compete with a high performance mid drive doesn't currently exist. The fact that such a thing can be built means it's an unexploited opportunity, regardless of whether it will succeed or fail.
It's silly to compare Tesla to a bespoke hub motor -- they have literally nothing in common any way you want to look at it.
The intent wasn't to compare Tesla to a hub motor, it was to explain that the so-called "market" has massive blind spots. The belief that "market forces" always generate the best possible types and variety of products available is a fallacy.
Tesla offered a halo platform to the end customer, and then leveraged -- marketed, really -- that platform through a cult of personality into a legitimate enterprise.
GM could have done the same thing 10+ years before Tesla existed, but the common excuse for not doing so was "market forces". This is without even going into the sordid details of how they sabotaged their own product. Without Tesla or the government subsidizing Tesla, it is doubtful we'd even have mass market EVs right now. The OEM EVs from the major automakers were a response to the cars Tesla had made available. Tesla were the only ones who initially took the opportunity to meet the pent-up demand for such vehicles that the major automakers refused to acknowledge even existed. The fact that it was a cult of personality who made it all happen is irrelevant, and the marketing was also arguably irrelevant because the cars almost sold themselves on their merits alone. They were the manifestation of an idea whose time was long past due.

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 21 2021 10:27pm

neptronix wrote:
Jan 21 2021 5:59pm
A little birdy whispered into my ear recently and told me that an ebike company we know and love has experimented with a DD hub with 0.27mm laminations.

No timeframe was provided :/
Probably not Leafbike, since they already make DD motors with 0.27mm lams. Hopefully it's something that exceeds the efficiency of the PMDC DD motors that are ubiquitous.
It's a shame that the CYC Pro X1 is 3kw rated, otherwise it'd be so ideal to just ditch a drive stage and run one to the rear wheel of your velo. The motor has something like 0.2mm lams.. but probably falls out of it's efficiency band below 1.5kw, which is where your machine would spend a lot of it's time.
It would be a good basis for a geared hub motor, if a robust enough clutch/gearing system existed that could tolerate heat.

fatty   100 W

100 W
Posts: 202
Joined: Nov 14 2020 9:15pm
Location: USA

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by fatty » Jan 21 2021 10:33pm

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 21 2021 10:23pm
The fact that such a thing can be built means it's an unexploited opportunity, regardless of whether it will succeed or fail.
Sure, for us on this forum. But that's.. not the consensus business definition of an unexploited opportunity.
Don't take advice from:
there is no difference between a mean well CC/CV power supply and a device sold as a charger. they operate in EXACTLY the same way
Testing has demonstrated that ordinary rim brakes thermally outperformed all but the best disc brakes...You'll always add weight and cost, while not equalling the capabilities of comparable rim brakes, if you use discs

User avatar
The Toecutter   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 943
Joined: Feb 08 2015 4:02pm

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by The Toecutter » Jan 21 2021 10:39pm

Anyhow, I got the regen working great. The CA3 is displaying that my regen percent is between 3% and 10% depending upon the ride where it was noted. I've put 199 miles on the vehicle as an EV thus far and have placed 6 cycles on the pack. I even discharged the battery all the way down and got 8.95AH in the cold before the BMS shut it off, and this was after traveling 59 miles. I expect as the weather warms, battery capacity will increase to close to the rated value.

I also got most of the tail back on today, but I'm missing the trunk lid and turtle deck. My friend had to leave his shop before I could finish the job, so now the rear third of the vehicle is acting like a parachute, sort of like a truck bed with a closed tailgate. My energy consumption displayed on my CA3 jumped to about 11 wh/mi at 30 mph! But the important thing is that I can now carry my tools/spares again which will allow me to ride it a decent distance from home instead of staying within a few mile radius, given that if something breaks down, I must fix it since I have no way to transport it back home. Tomorrow I will have the trunk lid and turtledeck back on so that everything is sealed back up to the airflow and then get to see what kind of impact on the drag it made versus having no tail. I may even see a top speed increase out of it too.

fatty   100 W

100 W
Posts: 202
Joined: Nov 14 2020 9:15pm
Location: USA

Re: Critique this performance velomobile idea

Post by fatty » Jan 21 2021 11:02pm

The Toecutter wrote:
Jan 21 2021 10:23pm
GM could have done the same thing 10+ years before Tesla existed, but the common excuse for not doing so was "market forces". This is without even going into the sordid details of how they sabotaged their own product. Without Tesla or the government subsidizing Tesla, it is doubtful we'd even have mass market EVs right now. The OEM EVs from the major automakers were a response to the cars Tesla had made available. Tesla were the only ones who initially took the opportunity to meet the pent-up demand for such vehicles that the major automakers refused to acknowledge even existed. The fact that it was a cult of personality who made it all happen is irrelevant, and the marketing was also arguably irrelevant because the cars almost sold themselves on their merits alone. They were the manifestation of an idea whose time was long past due.
No, GM couldn't have even come close in the early to mid-90s. They didn't have the funding, tech, engineers, and demand (by way of subsidy) at that time, not to mention the risk of cannibalizing actually-profitable sales needed to keep the company solvent. Keep in mind, the closest contemporary, the Prius, sold at a $10k/vehicle loss for the first, what, 10 years?
Don't take advice from:
there is no difference between a mean well CC/CV power supply and a device sold as a charger. they operate in EXACTLY the same way
Testing has demonstrated that ordinary rim brakes thermally outperformed all but the best disc brakes...You'll always add weight and cost, while not equalling the capabilities of comparable rim brakes, if you use discs

Post Reply