The only place you might notice a difference is on a hub motor, but it's sufficiently sinusoidal that the difference between true sine and this is not very great. If this was your first sinusoidal controller, you wouldn't know it all. If you have a true sinusoidal to do a side by side comparison, the difference would be small to essentially irrelevant.Alan B wrote:Nice review. Great information and good progress. I have one of these controllers in the "to do" box, but I guess it's already out of date.
You mention these are stepped sine, as opposed to pure. How does this compare with ASI or Sabvoton? I would think at some level they are all stepped, is there a difference in the granularity?
Are these true FOC, or one of the other Sinewave algorithms?
You probably had a hall or 2 that were not reading clearly and the controller wasn't able to run the motor as effectively as it should. Maybe the controller had timing off a bit as a result? Also, some controllers will run with a bad hall, but with reduced performance or will switch to trapezoidal if they are sinusoidal. Trapezoidal is a bit less efficient than sinusoidal so that may have been why you saw quicker over heating. Generally speaking the only place that sinusoidal vs trapezoidal is noticeable is on hub motors. Run just about any inrunner or outrunner and you probably won't be able to tell it is running trapezoidal or sinusoidal. On a hub motor, there's a small sound difference between the two.madin88 wrote:Could you share a link to the thread about the Hall Sensors, or tell us more here?
EDIT: i have seen the link
When swapping the halls on my MXUS 3k DD motor to honeywell SS411A, i noticed much better efficiency (not so quick overheating at abuse).
OK...thanks for the info, but what does that have to do with a controller review?Alan B wrote:An FOC controller should not use the halls above a certain speed, it computes the rotor angle from the phase currents with much greater precision than the hall sensors resolve. Halls may be used for starting and at very low speeds, where it is not actually running in FOC mode.
Alan B wrote:Thanks for posting this review. I'm just trying to understand this sinewave controller. It seems to be of the Non-FOC Sinewave design type.
This is a sinewave controller that is often quoted as having FOC (by users), but the characteristics reported don't quite seem to match FOC type controller characteristics. There are many sinewave controller algorithms, not all use Space-Vector control, aka Field Oriented Control. Nothing wrong with that, just not quite the same characteristics and features (or cost).
FOC is not mentioned in the PowerVelocity descriptions of these controllers (as I recall). Users mention it from time to time but this is generally not responded to, at least not that I have seen. You didn't answer it when I asked earlier. So this seems to be a point of confusion.
The 12090 I have is probably the highest eRPM motor I have tried. It's 14 poles and 50 kv at 72 volts that works out to 50,400 eRPM. It runs on these controllers at 72 volts or less, but loses sync at higher voltages. I've run it up to WOT at 66 volts with no problems under no load. I don't know what the Kv or poles of your motor is, but if you stay at 50k eRPM, you should be OK. I looked at the datasheet that I have and I didn't see anywhere that it took an external clock signal. My guess is that it has an internal clock. IE: overclocking doesn't appear to be possible. BUT I have to admit that finding the actual 3232 datasheet has been fruitless. I have the 3132 data sheet and I'm assuming that the 3232 is very similar.neptronix wrote:Since you have some high pole/high rpm motors lying around.. have you tried overclocking the MCU?
I have an eZee motor in a 20" wheel here and an old EB3.. at 39mph / 72v, i'm at 52,000rpm and the controller will choke..
I need another 10,000 erpm..
Trapezoidal on a hub does make a cool sound that you lose a good bit of on a sinusoidal controller.neptronix wrote:Cool, thanks.
The eZee is basically a slightly narrower and lighter MAC, but still has 16 poles with a 5:1 internal reduction.
39.6mph on 20" = 662 rpm x 5 = 3310rpm x 16 = 52,960 eRPM.
I'm thinking i might have to go the way of the phaserunner... but damn, if i don't like the simplicity of these infineon clones and love that noise of a trap controller for some reason
I love specs for stuff. Almost always there is some exaggeration going on or at least incomplete information that makes product X look so much better than it really is. Name a motor manufacturer that doesn't hype their wattage numbers. Name a controller seller that doesn't hype their power numbers. It's industry wide and rife. The phaserunner specs are no different. The ONLY time you will get that 40 amps is at 48 volts or less AND that's maximum amps, not continuous as I explain in the next paragraph.Alan B wrote:PhaseRunner Notes (BAC800)
compact FOC motor controller
90V max (36-72V Nominal Battery voltage)
96A peak phase current (firmware limited)
40A continuous phase current (nominal, depends on heatsink)
info from PhaseRunner thread on ES
one user reports max battery current of 43A reached with MXUS 4T 45mm
measurements indicate 50A phase current clamped to bike tube, and with a better heatsink up to 70A
The excellent PowerVelocity controllers use Sinusoidal Commutation rather than the mathematics of FOC. Mild Field Weakening doesn't require FOC. Different algorithms have different costs, benefits and capabilities.
For more information on Trapezoidal, Sinusoidal and Field Oriented (Space-Vector) Motor Controls see papers such as this one: http://www.copleycontrols.com/Motion/pd ... ontrol.pdf