TSDZ2 mid drive with 860C, 850C or SW102 displays only -- Flexible OpenSource firmware (Casainho code only)

I just wanted to say thank you guys and Casainho, for all the amazing work, I found you guys thur a U-tube vid by that Aussie guy with the TSD kit...
after having done all the research found this to be hands down the best value and performace of any kit I can find under 2k here in AU

after using the TSDZ2 kit stock I found the RPM a bit slow...for my knees...

So I uploaded the older OSF firmware as ECO cycles recomoned... (config screen is short click then long press of main power button on 850C)

WOW< its a new motor, and a big difference... but it lacked power mid range, using stock setting of the new Open source firmware.
This was a lack of setup on my side, as after checking the touque sensor readout...against what the settings were...I could see, my older TS was outputing lower numbers...so the motor was not seeing me pressing on the pedals in the mid range, with my puny 70kg weight...once I adjusted the values to match what I was outputing, the mid range was much better.

I still wanted it to tweek it more...I wanted very lite power at low foot press...so I can ride in parks with kids around...at very slow speed...or tech my way up a off road hill... so to start I used a low PAS mode...but at low PAS...I don't have that raw power in the mid range. so I would change up..to a higher PAS, for that more power...

I would have stayed in higher PAS all the time and feather the foot press....but in high PAS the 'at start power' was a bit too much...for going slowly around kids... I kinda did not want to have to change PAS level

maybe this is in the new firmware just releaced, I am not sure..but I was on older firmware I did not have that option to change the start up speed of a PAS level...I had a boost at start...but I needed the oppisite if I wanted to say in a high PAS level with a slow start... there was no NEG value in the boost, so what I did was just change the touque sensor settings so to trick the motor into thinking I was pushing less at the start.... this gave me my 'low speed mode' at the start of my touque range but still keep the great power once I pressed harder, as I was in a higher PAS level...(totaly the wrong way to do it, I know)

I am really happy now...and can't wait to upgrade to this new high cadence versions...

a bit of info....when I am clipped in...to my pedals, my RPM is higher....than if i am using flat pedals and normal shoes...if I want good speed on my commuite, I would be clipped in and using higher cadence for sure...when cruzing...I would use flats and reg shoes and lower cadence

this newer high cadence mode is a very good thing to try...as it opens the range of the OSF to many more people...

this is such a great project I made sure I supported how I could, I donated $50 to Casainho, so he can keep going...and will support this project in Australia any way I can...I work in electronics and use 3d printers here at work...so maybe we can get some mod boxes done for AU testers, with profits going to Casainho, open to ideas....

keep up the amazing work!!
 
Sorry for that question, but I don't really understand that calibration procedure.

First of all the ADC values vary from left to right side. Is this normal and what do I have to note?

When do I have to switch the calibration value from disabled to enabled?
Does enabled mean that I always have to carry out a special procedure on switching on my 850C display?

Should the shown kgs values match with the real weights I put on the pedals?

Thanks for your help.
 
Maverix said:
Sorry for that question, but I don't really understand that calibration procedure.

First of all the ADC values vary from left to right side. Is this normal and what do I have to note?

When do I have to switch the calibration value from disabled to enabled?
Does enabled mean that I always have to carry out a special procedure on switching on my 850C display?

Should the shown kgs values match with the real weights I put on the pedals?

Thanks for your help.
It was a bit confusing to me as well. The basic idea is that the values the torque sensor reports (raw values) are different for almost every tsdz2 out there. To normalize the values curve, you need to measure the value on the torque sensor for various known weights. This way the software can build a curve and map torque sensor values to actual weight on the pedals.

So you need to have a set of known weights (or use a luggage scale as some have done) and put these weights on the pedals while pressing the brakes so the bike doesn’t move and with crank arms parallel to the ground.

You then write down the torque sensor value and the weight that was on it. For both left and right (they have different values)

Once done, enter them in the google docs to have the curve so you can see if you didn’t make a mistake (curve should not have drastic spikes or you probably made an error in measuring), and you can also use it to interpolate missing weights if you don’t have a good range of available weights.

You then enter all this in the menu and Bob’s your uncle. The weight reported in the software after calibration should match the weight in kg of whatever is on the pedal with crank arm parallel to the ground at that moment. In my experience it’s not ultra accurate but should be within a kilo or two of the actual weight in kg.
 
skestans said:
Maverix said:
Sorry for that question, but I don't really understand that calibration procedure.

First of all the ADC values vary from left to right side. Is this normal and what do I have to note?

When do I have to switch the calibration value from disabled to enabled?
Does enabled mean that I always have to carry out a special procedure on switching on my 850C display?

Should the shown kgs values match with the real weights I put on the pedals?

Thanks for your help.
It was a bit confusing to me as well. The basic idea is that the values the torque sensor reports (raw values) are different for almost every tsdz2 out there. To normalize the values curve, you need to measure the value on the torque sensor for various known weights. This way the software can build a curve and map torque sensor values to actual weight on the pedals.

So you need to have a set of known weights (or use a luggage scale as some have done) and put these weights on the pedals while pressing the brakes so the bike doesn’t move and with crank arms parallel to the ground.

You then write down the torque sensor value and the weight that was on it. For both left and right (they have different values)

Once done, enter them in the google docs to have the curve so you can see if you didn’t make a mistake (curve should not have drastic spikes or you probably made an error in measuring), and you can also use it to interpolate missing weights if you don’t have a good range of available weights.

You then enter all this in the menu and Bob’s your uncle. The weight reported in the software after calibration should match the weight in kg of whatever is on the pedal with crank arm parallel to the ground at that moment. In my experience it’s not ultra accurate but should be within a kilo or two of the actual weight in kg.

Thanks a lot.

Does the value "calibration" has to stay on "enabled"?
 
gatorsean said:
casainho said:
I found the issue with the build script, it was not cleaning old version on the local disk and build a new one. I updated the release with the new file but I was not able to test on SW102, can you guys see if it works?
Hello! Today I tried the new SW102 update file and it did update the display FW to 1.0.0. However, the problem remains and there is still no communication to the controller and the error is e: Brakes.
I just tested on my bicycle and I have the same issue... nothing was changed, in fact a user even reported on 850C to have solved his issue on motor init. The code base for communications and motor init is the same for both displays...

I will focus on this issue today.
 
Casainho, thank you for this release and all your effort on writing and improving this software. It is my pleasure to contribute to your project. As an overall perception the improvement is significant. The motor runs smoother and looks like some of my issues at high assit levels are almost gone.

I did not experience any problems with the communication between the display and the motor. At least for me this release solved the problem. I see other users with contradicting experience. In case you need some specific tests, I am here to help.


I tested the two features related to the coaster brake implementation. The results are below:
casainho said:
New firmware: TSDZ2 cadence increase from 90 to 120 RPM as also motor power "amplification" on this same high cadence
- added coast brake ADC sensitivity configuration: the TSDZ2 coast brake version should now fully work on this firmware version
Coaster brake settings: Works very well. I tested different values. The suggested default value of 15 is a good one. Some tweaking is recommended based on the coaster brake used and maybe the riding style. I tested lower and high values:
- lowering the value, for me this happened at 5, caused the motor to start experiencing sudden stops in case of decreasing the pedalling speed or effort. In my opinion this might the "but kicking" effect reported by some users
- increasing the value might be also an option
casainho said:
New firmware: TSDZ2 cadence increase from 90 to 120 RPM as also motor power "amplification" on this same high cadence
- added configuration for cadence fast stop mode, which is enabled by default. Enable for regular bicycles and disable for some full suspension bicycles
I did not test the feature in this release. However is it possible that person that experienced the but kicking effect, to try to disable the coaster brake by increasing significantly the value and see if he can reproduce the but kicking with the setting for regular bicycles. I have the feeling that there might be dependancy between the two features that were implemented together in the same release.

I remember there was another intermediate value used in this setting. An improvement can be instead of on and off to introduce e.g. fast, medium and slow response, using the 3 values from the different test releases.
 
Maverix said:
skestans said:
Maverix said:
Sorry for that question, but I don't really understand that calibration procedure.

First of all the ADC values vary from left to right side. Is this normal and what do I have to note?

When do I have to switch the calibration value from disabled to enabled?
Does enabled mean that I always have to carry out a special procedure on switching on my 850C display?

Should the shown kgs values match with the real weights I put on the pedals?

Thanks for your help.
It was a bit confusing to me as well. The basic idea is that the values the torque sensor reports (raw values) are different for almost every tsdz2 out there. To normalize the values curve, you need to measure the value on the torque sensor for various known weights. This way the software can build a curve and map torque sensor values to actual weight on the pedals.

So you need to have a set of known weights (or use a luggage scale as some have done) and put these weights on the pedals while pressing the brakes so the bike doesn’t move and with crank arms parallel to the ground.

You then write down the torque sensor value and the weight that was on it. For both left and right (they have different values)

Once done, enter them in the google docs to have the curve so you can see if you didn’t make a mistake (curve should not have drastic spikes or you probably made an error in measuring), and you can also use it to interpolate missing weights if you don’t have a good range of available weights.

You then enter all this in the menu and Bob’s your uncle. The weight reported in the software after calibration should match the weight in kg of whatever is on the pedal with crank arm parallel to the ground at that moment. In my experience it’s not ultra accurate but should be within a kilo or two of the actual weight in kg.

Thanks a lot.

Does the value "calibration" has to stay on "enabled"?
I’m not sure. I left it enabled on mine and it works as expected.
 
casainho said:
gatorsean said:
casainho said:
I found the issue with the build script, it was not cleaning old version on the local disk and build a new one. I updated the release with the new file but I was not able to test on SW102, can you guys see if it works?
Hello! Today I tried the new SW102 update file and it did update the display FW to 1.0.0. However, the problem remains and there is still no communication to the controller and the error is e: Brakes.
I just tested on my bicycle and I have the same issue... nothing was changed, in fact a user even reported on 850C to have solved his issue on motor init. The code base for communications and motor init is the same for both displays...

I will focus on this issue today.

The issue I was having with an older firmware version was e: Comms, that was persistent and could not be cleared with restart or battery disconnect. The way to clear the error was to change assist level or configuration and then power off and power on. I tried to reproduce e: brakes but failed. So it is not exactly the same.
 
Maverix said:
skestans said:
Maverix said:
Sorry for that question, but I don't really understand that calibration procedure.

First of all the ADC values vary from left to right side. Is this normal and what do I have to note?

When do I have to switch the calibration value from disabled to enabled?
Does enabled mean that I always have to carry out a special procedure on switching on my 850C display?

Should the shown kgs values match with the real weights I put on the pedals?

Thanks for your help.
It was a bit confusing to me as well. The basic idea is that the values the torque sensor reports (raw values) are different for almost every tsdz2 out there. To normalize the values curve, you need to measure the value on the torque sensor for various known weights. This way the software can build a curve and map torque sensor values to actual weight on the pedals.

So you need to have a set of known weights (or use a luggage scale as some have done) and put these weights on the pedals while pressing the brakes so the bike doesn’t move and with crank arms parallel to the ground.

You then write down the torque sensor value and the weight that was on it. For both left and right (they have different values)

Once done, enter them in the google docs to have the curve so you can see if you didn’t make a mistake (curve should not have drastic spikes or you probably made an error in measuring), and you can also use it to interpolate missing weights if you don’t have a good range of available weights.

You then enter all this in the menu and Bob’s your uncle. The weight reported in the software after calibration should match the weight in kg of whatever is on the pedal with crank arm parallel to the ground at that moment. In my experience it’s not ultra accurate but should be within a kilo or two of the actual weight in kg.

Thanks a lot.

Does the value "calibration" has to stay on "enabled"?
I used my body weight as the final calibration weight and stood on each pedal in turn. I then used the weights pre-set in the display and pulled up on the pedal using luggage scales, wrote down the raw ADC value and entered that into the menu.

I think what is important is getting your body weight as the maximum, with the corresponding ADC value, otherwise if you are lighter than the default value you will never get maximum performance from the motor. I think...
 
New alpha version that now works on SW102: https://github.com/OpenSource-EBike-firmware/Color_LCD/releases/tag/860C_850C_SW102_v1.0.0-alpha.2
(note that the TSDZ2 firmware version remains the same v1.0.0-alpha.1 as it was not changed)

I found the issue for SW102 and I am happy because it was my fault (I did not change the communications to twice of frequency as I did on 860C/850C and on TSDZ2 firmware) and not something not expected, meaning the motor initialization is robust.

Changelog from previous version:
- corrected issue with SW102 not working on previous version
- corrected issue on build script of SW102
- display: removed old configuration for motor 36V and 48V experimental high cadence mode


casainho said:
gatorsean said:
casainho said:
I found the issue with the build script, it was not cleaning old version on the local disk and build a new one. I updated the release with the new file but I was not able to test on SW102, can you guys see if it works?
Hello! Today I tried the new SW102 update file and it did update the display FW to 1.0.0. However, the problem remains and there is still no communication to the controller and the error is e: Brakes.
I just tested on my bicycle and I have the same issue... nothing was changed, in fact a user even reported on 850C to have solved his issue on motor init. The code base for communications and motor init is the same for both displays...

I will focus on this issue today.
 
raw said:
casainho said:
You guys get ready for the most advanced and powerful TSDZ2 firmware!!
Of course! I have tested it now - works like there was never a 90rpm limit! :flame:
Great Job!
Thanks for the feedback. If more users report like this, then I will make a stable version.

HughF said:
Any option to have torque mode only in this release? I will try 1.0.0 when I build up my bike with gears (alfine 8 gear) but I still run the torque mode only fork on my single speed because it seems to give better Performance at low pedal rpm.
When you or others collaborate in implementing and test that feature, and submit it, doing a pull request on the github repository.

cityboy19 said:
I have a lighting problem.
I will focus next on this. I don't have lights to test but I know what is the issue. The TSDZ2 motor controller has only one sensor to measure the battery current and that also includes the current on the lights. The firmware is not accounting for that and so gives that issue. I plan to make an option to see the ADC value of the current sensor and user see the difference and configure that value BUT use a default value that may work for most of the users. I think it will be something like 1, 2 or 3 ADC units and then maybe used always a fixed value and remove this configuration.

ezrider1199 said:
Casainho, was there a chance to fix the throttle bug? In 0.8 the bug was introduced, then it was purported to be fixed but it was still broken when i tested it. Im very eager to give all the new developments a try but lack of the throttle is a deal breaker. Open issue for the throttle bug - https://github.com/OpenSource-EBike-firmware/Color_LCD/issues/92. Thank you.

edit: if it will be of any help, i can offer to test it before releasing.
As I told before, I don't have throttle and so I can't develop and test. I hope that you or others collaborate in implementing and test that feature, and submit it, doing a pull request on the github repository.

skestans said:
It was a bit confusing to me as well. The basic idea is that the values the torque sensor reports (raw values) are different for almost every tsdz2 out there. To normalize the values curve, you need to measure the value on the torque sensor for various known weights. This way the software can build a curve and map torque sensor values to actual weight on the pedals.

So you need to have a set of known weights (or use a luggage scale as some have done) and put these weights on the pedals while pressing the brakes so the bike doesn’t move and with crank arms parallel to the ground.

You then write down the torque sensor value and the weight that was on it. For both left and right (they have different values)

Once done, enter them in the google docs to have the curve so you can see if you didn’t make a mistake (curve should not have drastic spikes or you probably made an error in measuring), and you can also use it to interpolate missing weights if you don’t have a good range of available weights.

You then enter all this in the menu and Bob’s your uncle. The weight reported in the software after calibration should match the weight in kg of whatever is on the pedal with crank arm parallel to the ground at that moment. In my experience it’s not ultra accurate but should be within a kilo or two of the actual weight in kg.
I will update the wiki with this notes. Thanks.
 
casainho said:
New alpha version that now works on SW102: https://github.com/OpenSource-EBike-firmware/Color_LCD/releases/tag/860C_850C_SW102_v1.0.0-alpha.2
(note that the TSDZ2 firmware version remains the same v1.0.0-alpha.1 as it was not changed)
SW102- display: removed old configuration for motor 36V and 48V experimental high cadence mode
I assume that it will disappear also on 850/860 display later, so my question how this combines with the new feature is already answered.
 
casainho said:
As I told before, I don't have throttle and so I can't develop and test. I hope that you or others collaborate in implementing and test that feature, and submit it, doing a pull request on the github repository.

Ok thanks I hope at least itll work on versions marked stable when the time comes.
Edit: I'm definitely willing to test any code change for throttle. If anyone wants to fix it and make it more responsive I'll get them and casainho beer, lots of it. Thanks.
 
casainho said:
raw said:
casainho said:
You guys get ready for the most advanced and powerful TSDZ2 firmware!!
Of course! I have tested it now - works like there was never a 90rpm limit! :flame:
Great Job!
Thanks for the feedback. If more users report like this, then I will make a stable version.

HughF said:
Any option to have torque mode only in this release? I will try 1.0.0 when I build up my bike with gears (alfine 8 gear) but I still run the torque mode only fork on my single speed because it seems to give better Performance at low pedal rpm.
When you or others collaborate in implementing and test that feature, and submit it, doing a pull request on the github repository.

cityboy19 said:
I have a lighting problem.
I will focus next on this. I don't have lights to test but I know what is the issue. The TSDZ2 motor controller has only one sensor to measure the battery current and that also includes the current on the lights. The firmware is not accounting for that and so gives that issue. I plan to make an option to see the ADC value of the current sensor and user see the difference and configure that value BUT use a default value that may work for most of the users. I think it will be something like 1, 2 or 3 ADC units and then maybe used always a fixed value and remove this configuration.

ezrider1199 said:
Casainho, was there a chance to fix the throttle bug? In 0.8 the bug was introduced, then it was purported to be fixed but it was still broken when i tested it. Im very eager to give all the new developments a try but lack of the throttle is a deal breaker. Open issue for the throttle bug - https://github.com/OpenSource-EBike-firmware/Color_LCD/issues/92. Thank you.

edit: if it will be of any help, i can offer to test it before releasing.
As I told before, I don't have throttle and so I can't develop and test. I hope that you or others collaborate in implementing and test that feature, and submit it, doing a pull request on the github repository.

skestans said:
It was a bit confusing to me as well. The basic idea is that the values the torque sensor reports (raw values) are different for almost every tsdz2 out there. To normalize the values curve, you need to measure the value on the torque sensor for various known weights. This way the software can build a curve and map torque sensor values to actual weight on the pedals.

So you need to have a set of known weights (or use a luggage scale as some have done) and put these weights on the pedals while pressing the brakes so the bike doesn’t move and with crank arms parallel to the ground.

You then write down the torque sensor value and the weight that was on it. For both left and right (they have different values)

Once done, enter them in the google docs to have the curve so you can see if you didn’t make a mistake (curve should not have drastic spikes or you probably made an error in measuring), and you can also use it to interpolate missing weights if you don’t have a good range of available weights.

You then enter all this in the menu and Bob’s your uncle. The weight reported in the software after calibration should match the weight in kg of whatever is on the pedal with crank arm parallel to the ground at that moment. In my experience it’s not ultra accurate but should be within a kilo or two of the actual weight in kg.
I will update the wiki with this notes. Thanks.

First of all, I want to say thank you to Casainho and all contributors!! Your firmware doubled the value of my TSDZ2!
After the fix I were now able to install 1.0.0 on my SW102 and I have to admit, it put my motor on a new level. I found no issues yet at all. I use the motor with a 24v battery, which I removed from an electric skateboard, hence until now the motor only supported up to a cadence of 50. But the update destroyed this large disadvantage. So if you need feedback or testing of particular features with this voltage, I'd be pleased to help.

Furthermore, I'd like to offer you to re-write and optimize some parts of the Wiki (including tourque calibration). I have the motor and firmware in use since one month, hence I still have a list of improvements in mind of the guides I followed.
 
Martin555 said:
First of all, I want to say thank you to Casainho and all contributors!! Your firmware doubled the value of my TSDZ2!
After the fix I were now able to install 1.0.0 on my SW102 and I have to admit, it put my motor on a new level. I found no issues yet at all. I use the motor with a 24v battery, which I removed from an electric skateboard, hence until now the motor only supported up to a cadence of 50. But the update destroyed this large disadvantage. So if you need feedback or testing of particular features with this voltage, I'd be pleased to help.

Furthermore, I'd like to offer you to re-write and optimize some parts of the Wiki (including tourque calibration). I have the motor and firmware in use since one month, hence I still have a list of improvements in mind of the guides I followed.
Thanks for the feedback and your specific usage with a battery of 24V only is not very common, which is great because the Field Weakening really helps -- this is something I want to highlight on the wiki.

Please go ahead on the wiki and improve it.
 
casainho said:
HughF said:
Any option to have torque mode only in this release? I will try 1.0.0 when I build up my bike with gears (alfine 8 gear) but I still run the torque mode only fork on my single speed because it seems to give better Performance at low pedal rpm.
When you or others collaborate in implementing and test that feature, and submit it, doing a pull request on the github repository.

I might be mistaken but I thought you had plans to implement a sensor switching feature where we could disable torque sensor or disable cadence sensor and the system would fall back to a cadence only or torque only mode?

I will look into seeing if user r0mko who already made the hi-current, torque only fork can fork this latest version. I will also look into what is required to setup a dev environment for the stm8, but I am furiously busy with work at the moment (despite the current situation) and am not sure I can stretch my brain to another software project :)
 
casainho said:
New alpha version that now works on SW102: https://github.com/OpenSource-EBike-firmware/Color_LCD/releases/tag/860C_850C_SW102_v1.0.0-alpha.2
(note that the TSDZ2 firmware version remains the same v1.0.0-alpha.1 as it was not changed)

I found the issue for SW102 and I am happy because it was my fault (I did not change the communications to twice of frequency as I did on 860C/850C and on TSDZ2 firmware) and not something not expected, meaning the motor initialization is robust.

Changelog from previous version:
- corrected issue with SW102 not working on previous version
- corrected issue on build script of SW102
- display: removed old configuration for motor 36V and 48V experimental high cadence mode

What changes is made to 850C and 860C. There is new alpha.2 versions for them too?
 
dameri said:
What changes is made to 850C and 860C. There is new alpha.2 versions for them too?
- display: removed old configuration for motor 36V and 48V experimental high cadence mode
 
casainho said:
dameri said:
What changes is made to 850C and 860C. There is new alpha.2 versions for them too?
- display: removed old configuration for motor 36V and 48V experimental high cadence mode

Thank you. I will install it today and try it.
 
HughF said:
I might be mistaken but I thought you had plans to implement a sensor switching feature where we could disable torque sensor or disable cadence sensor and the system would fall back to a cadence only or torque only mode?
Yes I want to implement sensor disable but the final result will not be the same has. See that disabling the cadence sensor means the system should work without detect pedal rotation at all, means it can be dangerous at high assistance levels like by starting unwanted. While working on torque sensor mode as input for motor assistance means it should start consider the torque sensor value only when cadence > 0, so the cadence sensor must work both for start as also stop.

Feature for disabling will take a while to implement, is not that simple as there are many places on the firmware that both sensors inputs are considered.
 
casainho said:
- 48V motor on a 52V battery (almost fully charged, measured 56V)
- field weakening feature disabled: pedal cadence 110RPM, motor assisting only 70w
- field weakening feature enabled: pedal cadence 117RPM, motor assisting 500W!!

So, as you can see, the motor was pulling from battery 7x more power but for the measures I did, it is less efficient when field weakening get's automatically activated at high cadence, by 25% less eficient. So, only 400W, which means that with field weakening I got 570% more motor assist at near the limit of 120RPM cadence!!

Have you bicycles ready because I will release in some hours a new firmware version!!

Hi Casainho you are indeed a legend, this is what I was trying to explain to you in the past couple of years. I actually thought it was not possible to achieve this level of power after the Duty cycle was already at 100%. Anyway what is satisfying to me is that you were the first to experience this in real life and that you were impressed with what you had done. Great work :)

I wish you could port this change over to the ktlcd3 but alas I will have a go at understanding your changes and see what I can do, otherwise I may have to order a new display !
 
casainho said:
Yes I want to implement sensor disable but the final result will not be the same has. See that disabling the cadence sensor means the system should work without detect pedal rotation at all, means it can be dangerous at high assistance levels like by starting unwanted. While working on torque sensor mode as input for motor assistance means it should start consider the torque sensor value only when cadence > 0, so the cadence sensor must work both for start as also stop.

Feature for disabling will take a while to implement, is not that simple as there are many places on the firmware that both sensors inputs are considered.
I understand... I actually find that for the single speed bike (one of the benefits of electric assistance, you don't need gears) there is hardly any issue with the bike moving unintentionally. If you have 'assist without pedal rotation' enabled, then sure you can get a little creep/pushing at times, but because the gearing is so high, it will not cause you to move forwards. As a result, I would always recommend this is switched off. In fact, does anyone use this feature?

Perhaps r0mko would like to maintain a torque only fork that tracks your new code base, and can also include the field weakening features etc? I would love to take on this fork as I really like the single speed and will probably build another one, but alas I do not have the time.
 
casainho said:
cityboy19 said:
I have a lighting problem.
I will focus next on this. I don't have lights to test but I know what is the issue. The TSDZ2 motor controller has only one sensor to measure the battery current and that also includes the current on the lights. The firmware is not accounting for that and so gives that issue. I plan to make an option to see the ADC value of the current sensor and user see the difference and configure that value BUT use a default value that may work for most of the users. I think it will be something like 1, 2 or 3 ADC units and then maybe used always a fixed value and remove this configuration.

If you need help ... write to me
 
jbalat said:
I wish you could port this change over to the ktlcd3 but alas I will have a go at understanding your changes and see what I can do, otherwise I may have to order a new display !

Jbalat, I'm presently running the V20 on the LCD3 and on experimental mode 36volt with a 48 volt battery and I can pull almost full power circa 550W ( I ve limited my motor to 600W ) right up to beyond 100rpm whereas with the settings on normal 36 volt I can't.
 
jbalat said:
Hi Casainho you are indeed a legend, this is what I was trying to explain to you in the past couple of years. I actually thought it was not possible to achieve this level of power after the Duty cycle was already at 100%. Anyway what is satisfying to me is that you were the first to experience this in real life and that you were impressed with what you had done. Great work :)

I wish you could port this change over to the ktlcd3 but alas I will have a go at understanding your changes and see what I can do, otherwise I may have to order a new display !
I never had the expectations to implement Field Weakening on STM8, I though it could be complex and I never did read about it in detail... that is why I let it for the end of the project.

I just want to finish this project and move to the next one, that will be also for outdoor sports on mountain -- will be the ELegs / exoskeleton for sports, for going to trails on mountains!! I am also start running for the first time in my life and I wish in future to do both cycling and running (and I already do some short swimming on the ocean and on the pool).
So, I will not do nothing for other displays and I hope to have a good EBike solution using TSDZ2 for the following years!!

HughF said:
I understand... I actually find that for the single speed bike (one of the benefits of electric assistance, you don't need gears) there is hardly any issue with the bike moving unintentionally. If you have 'assist without pedal rotation' enabled, then sure you can get a little creep/pushing at times, but because the gearing is so high, it will not cause you to move forwards. As a result, I would always recommend this is switched off. In fact, does anyone use this feature?

Perhaps r0mko would like to maintain a torque only fork that tracks your new code base, and can also include the field weakening features etc? I would love to take on this fork as I really like the single speed and will probably build another one, but alas I do not have the time.
You can go read the messages backwards and you will see people reporting to use the "assist without pedal rotation", like having a throttle at max value and release the brakes at stop lights, then the motor will start fast as possible, in this case without need for any pedal rotation.

If r0mko or others prefer to keep other forks, then please create a specific thread to discuss them. On this thread, let's discuss only my code (as explicit on the title of this thread) and the latest version.
 
Back
Top