Nucular electronics - complete kit for ev!

Thank you for the explanations !
I don't plan on using an external battery monitior since it's already on the display, it's just embedded on the combo and I'll leave it unwired.
 
I finally got around to setting up a 12 fet controller. I looked at the documentation long enough to figure out the wiring, but never looked at programming. I wanted to see if I could make the controller run without reading anything. Historically FOC controllers have been fairly difficult to configure. I know this from personal experience. I wanted to see if these controllers would be easy or hard to configure. As it turns out, it was not hard at all. There's tons of features I really need to read about since I have no idea what they do. However within 20 minutes of power up, I had it running an inrunner.

ALL EV's, BMS, battery packs, contactors, motors and controllers I have are wired interchangeably. As a result I had to convert the Nucular 12 fet to work with what I do as a standard. It had 6mm bullets on the phase wires, but I use 5.5mm bullets everywhere. I use XT90's for charging ports and nothing else. It had to be replaced with 5.5mm bullets. I had to replace the better 6mm bullets for 5.5mm bullets or adapt down. It was easy enough to swap them out. I cut off the small connectors and replaced them with IP68 connectors. My motors, bench throttle and all my EV's use these exact connectors wired identically every time. Now I can plug this controller into any of my EV's, a little bit of programming and it is ready to go.

6mm bullets are better than 5.5mm, but fooey...everything I have uses 5.5mm.

Nucular%2012%20fet%20controller%2030.jpg


This too got pulled off. 5.5mm bullets are a fair bit better than XT90's and you can connect up one power lead at a time with bullets. In my EV builds this is a charging port.

Nucular%2012%20fet%20controller%2031.jpg


I'm not fond of non-water proof connectors at all and I don't like small unsupported wires. They tend to get broken. So a long time ago, all this sort of wiring went into IP68 connectors where the individual small wires are protected and can't get damaged.

Nucular%2012%20fet%20controller%2033.jpg


This is the end result. 5.5mm bullets and IP68 connectors. THe 6 pin has halls and motor temp in it. The 8 pin has enable, throttle and 3 speeds.

Cable%20termination%201.jpg


Cable%20termination%202.jpg


Cable%20termination%203.jpg


Pinouts for the 2 IP68 connectors. Ignore the wire colors listed here. That's from another controller.

IP68%20connector%20pin-outs.png


This is the small signal wires coming out of the Nucular controller. My connectors don't include brakes or variable regen. I never use the brake signal, but now that I have variable regen, I may use that via the connector on the back of the LCD. I never use cruise or reverse...don't care at all about them.

Nucular%20small%20wires.jpg


Plugged in and powered up for the first time.

Controller%20LCD%20-%20first%20powerup.jpg
 
As usual electriGod well edited beautiful photo,I look forward to seeing the rest of your tests.
 
tahitiboob said:
As usual electriGod well edited beautiful photo,I look forward to seeing the rest of your tests.

Thanks for the compliment!
I want to make what I do repeatable by anyone. That means good descriptions and pictures.
 
Has anyone tried one of these controllers with a Cyclone 3 kw motor?

I have heard that the ASI BAC 800 and Phaserunner can have issues with the Cyclone hall sensors but I want a nice, smooth and efficient controller.

I also want to make my own version of a "Cycle Stoker" which is a single chain mid-drive using a strain gauge on a chain idler as a pedaling torque sensor. I think the strain gauge has an output that's like a 4-20 mA but I'm not sure. The real Cycle Stoker uses a CA-V3 to control the throttle signal and a converted hub drive. I would rather have more power and less weight with a Cyclone motor but if I can eliminate the CA-V3, I have an LCD display for my BMS that should show everything I need to see and if your controller has Bluetooth, I should be able to see everything.

Thanks.
 
VasiliSk said:
It should work fine, since lmx motors works too.

There is Bluetooth in 12F and 24F, but no app yet.
Our own bms also under development

Can you add me to the que for the 12f version?
 
Hey Vasili, put me in the queue for a 12F unit as well? Is the queue shorter for the 24F? Tangent needs to test one of your babies with our RC engines, and I have a good feeling about replacing the Castle TalonHV/Cycle Analyst combo with a Nucular controller...

The controller can be used without the display?

-dave
 
VasiliSk said:
24F queue much shorter but it's still under testing.
It can be used without lcd.

BMS under development, no timelines yet. it is up to 24S

Put me in queue for 2 of the 24 fet versions with LCD.
 
Maybe it's already been tested, but has anyone tried the 24F model on a Sur Ron motor? If it's giving 500amps phase current and has field weakening for top-end, it should offer incredible hot-rodding potential.

Thank you VasiliSK for making such a cool controller! I wish you well, and remember all life's EV problems are solved by more phase current. The correct amount of phase current for a controller is always more!!! :) :) ;)
 
If the BMS is cutting out, you can always shunt-mod it. You could also parallel RC hobby packs. With 500amps RMS phase and big field weakening for top-end, you should be able to draw battery currents >700amps without more current in the MOSFETs (if the PCB and dc caps etc didn't explode).
 
VasiliSk said:
it's just 60V, that's not enough for full power.

Do you have field weakening? That Sur Ron motor loves a ton of it.
 
liveforphysics said:
Maybe it's already been tested, but has anyone tried the 24F model on a Sur Ron motor? If it's giving 500amps phase current and has field weakening for top-end, it should offer incredible hot-rodding potential.

Thank you VasiliSK for making such a cool controller! I wish you well, and remember all life's EV problems are solved by more phase current. The correct amount of phase current for a controller is always more!!! :) :) ;)

not happy with ASIs 700a flagship? if not, share your findings plz.
 
Merlin said:
liveforphysics said:
Maybe it's already been tested, but has anyone tried the 24F model on a Sur Ron motor? If it's giving 500amps phase current and has field weakening for top-end, it should offer incredible hot-rodding potential.

Thank you VasiliSK for making such a cool controller! I wish you well, and remember all life's EV problems are solved by more phase current. The correct amount of phase current for a controller is always more!!! :) :) ;)

not happy with ASIs 700a flagship? if not, share your findings plz.


Plenty happy, but always excited to see more controller options. 500amps is likely plenty for that motor.
 
liveforphysics said:
Merlin said:
liveforphysics said:
Maybe it's already been tested, but has anyone tried the 24F model on a Sur Ron motor? If it's giving 500amps phase current and has field weakening for top-end, it should offer incredible hot-rodding potential.

Thank you VasiliSK for making such a cool controller! I wish you well, and remember all life's EV problems are solved by more phase current. The correct amount of phase current for a controller is always more!!! :) :) ;)

not happy with ASIs 700a flagship? if not, share your findings plz.


Plenty happy, but always excited to see more controller options. 500amps is likely plenty for that motor.

If I might ask a question about feild weakening...

I know you get more RPM's using it and also it uses more current to do it.

Do some motors have more potential for more field weakening than others and if so why?
What makes the Sur-Ron motor so good at this?
 
ElectricGod said:
Do some motors have more potential for more field weakening than others and if so why?

Yes, IPM motors have the best potential for field weakening because aside from a gain in RPM you can also gain torque if you add field weakening current. These motors can make additional reluctance torque due to the flux return in the rotor steel, but i think not all IPM motors have similar potential as it highly depends on the design of the rotor.

On motors with surface mounted magnets (as Surron has and most other) you can gain RPM at the cost of efficiency and they cannot produce any reluctance torque.
 
madin88 said:
ElectricGod said:
Do some motors have more potential for more field weakening than others and if so why?

Yes, IPM motors have the best potential for field weakening because aside from a gain in RPM you can also gain torque if you add field weakening current. These motors can make additional reluctance torque due to the flux return in the rotor steel, but i think not all IPM motors have similar potential as it highly depends on the design of the rotor.

On motors with surface mounted magnets (as Surron has and most other) you can gain RPM at the cost of efficiency and they cannot produce any reluctance torque.

On an HLD inrunner with surface mounted magnets, I was messing with field weakening at my bench. It did spin much faster on the bench under no load. I have yet to try it under load with FW. Trying FW on a C80100 outrunner, was negligibly more RPM's under load. I think I got 20-30 more RPM at max FW with a lot more current usage. It translated to 2-3 mph more speed...not worth it for the efficiency loss.

What about axial flux motors?

Luke was pretty positive about the Sur-Ron motor having a lot of FW potential. IPM motors are not overly common except in hybrid cars.
 
Back
Top