Kepler
10 MW
Good to hear you are on top of it now. I will be very interested to see what settings you come up with to control a high powered setup.
Beta CA build for R/C controllers
- Thread starter justin_le
- Start date
johnrobholmes
10 MW
Forgive me if this was already covered, I haven't read all the posts of the thread yet.
There should probably be a voltage and amperage based throttle profile, particularly for bikes with higher power. At 10% throttle it would have both duty cycle and amps as limiting factors, so it wouldn't try to run away down hills and it wouldn't try to buck too hard to hit the amp limit when easing the throttle. I know it would be much harder to ride a bike that was always trying to pull 16a at 10% throttle than it would be to ride a bike that would just cruise at 10% duty until the amp limits dictated less.
I could see a strictly amp based throttle being very useful for some racing duties to give a very reliable torque control, but it would just be annoying for commuting IMO. I think most people would want the throttle to mimic a gas engine. Throttle controls both speed and power at the same time.
My implementation would be as follows:
1st rule: PWM follows throttle % until other factors are limiting. IE 50% throttle is 50% duty cycle when other factors are not limiting.
2nd rule: amperage limit follows throttle %. IE 50% throttle will always be 50% or less than maximum amp limit.
3rd rule: Allow for a table or formula to change throttle curve depending on user preferences. Maybe a user wants a gentle 1/2 half of throttle and aggressive 2nd half, like an exponential curve.
This way the throttle is always predictable in both speed and torque values. If I ease open the throttle I will be limited by PWM, so the bike won't keep accelerating to peg the given amp limit. If I hit a hill or whatever, the amp limit will kick in and I can open up the throttle for more torque and speed. If I slam open the throttle I will get max torque and the bike will keep accelerating until either voltage or amperage limits are pegged.
There should probably be a voltage and amperage based throttle profile, particularly for bikes with higher power. At 10% throttle it would have both duty cycle and amps as limiting factors, so it wouldn't try to run away down hills and it wouldn't try to buck too hard to hit the amp limit when easing the throttle. I know it would be much harder to ride a bike that was always trying to pull 16a at 10% throttle than it would be to ride a bike that would just cruise at 10% duty until the amp limits dictated less.
I could see a strictly amp based throttle being very useful for some racing duties to give a very reliable torque control, but it would just be annoying for commuting IMO. I think most people would want the throttle to mimic a gas engine. Throttle controls both speed and power at the same time.
My implementation would be as follows:
1st rule: PWM follows throttle % until other factors are limiting. IE 50% throttle is 50% duty cycle when other factors are not limiting.
2nd rule: amperage limit follows throttle %. IE 50% throttle will always be 50% or less than maximum amp limit.
3rd rule: Allow for a table or formula to change throttle curve depending on user preferences. Maybe a user wants a gentle 1/2 half of throttle and aggressive 2nd half, like an exponential curve.
This way the throttle is always predictable in both speed and torque values. If I ease open the throttle I will be limited by PWM, so the bike won't keep accelerating to peg the given amp limit. If I hit a hill or whatever, the amp limit will kick in and I can open up the throttle for more torque and speed. If I slam open the throttle I will get max torque and the bike will keep accelerating until either voltage or amperage limits are pegged.
Im starting a DIY controller project... Its going to take me a while but I will learn a lot as I figure it out. Justin I'm going to be in Vancouver for 2 days at the end of the month hope you are around the shop so I can finally come a meet you!justin_le said:
johnrobholmes said:
That, John, is a pretty clever idea! It totally takes care of people being confused about the motor going full tilt when unloaded at part throttle, and it still fully gives all the advantage of a real current throttle during acceleration and at lower speeds. The only down side is that at higher speed, the useful throttle range mode where you have good current control is limited to a much smaller span of throttle movement.
So at speed you have like 0-80% throttle still be doing PWM at a lower duty cycle to be of any use, then all the action from 0 to Max Current would happen in the last 20%.
It might work well instead to have it run such that 0-50% throttle corresponds to a 0-100% duty cycle, overlapped with 0-100% throttle corresponding with 0-100% current limit.
Either of these would be fairly easy things to implement and is worth exploring.
Justin
johnrobholmes
10 MW
Glad I could offer some fresh thinking on it. I like your idea of PWM limits being mapped over the first half of the throttle, and the current mapped over the full range. The best implementation will likely be a combination of user preference and bike setup. Some bikes may be set up for full throttle never hitting amp limits in steady state on flat ground, only using the current limits during acceleration. Some bikes may be set up for amp limiting being the true full speed limit, in which case some combination of amp and voltage curves will be a good fit. Every setup may want something different. A choice between two or three throttle styles could suit almost everybody.
Are you planning any phase amp limiting? This is sorely needed to make RC style controllers more reliable IMO.
Are you planning any phase amp limiting? This is sorely needed to make RC style controllers more reliable IMO.
recumpence
1 GW
I like the idea of a voltage based throttle. I have always liked the feel that style throttle gives. I would be thrilled to see this implemented. 
Matt
Matt
I've driven both types. Personally, I liked the full current mode throttle the best. If you hold the throttle at some partial setting, the thrust you get remains nearly constant until you reach full speed. On a downhill, you could reach full speed with only a tiny amount of throttle, but even the slightest amount of wind or upgrade will slow you right down. The biggest benfit I see is when you are coasting at or near full speed, you only need to give a little throttle to get some thrust. With a normal speed mode or PWM mode throttle, you have to really crank the throttle full open to get any thrust. The other thing is you don't get a huge surge of current when you start up (assuming you don't snap the throttle full on). This reduces drivetrain stress and minimizes wasted power on startup.
A similar option is what they call a 'blended' throttle, where you have a blend of current mode and speed mode. This is what you get when you have a current mode throttle and the feedback loop has very low gain. Low gain in the loop also reduces the tendency to get oscillations. Some Alltrax and Curtis controllers have a blended mode as a factory setting.
A similar option is what they call a 'blended' throttle, where you have a blend of current mode and speed mode. This is what you get when you have a current mode throttle and the feedback loop has very low gain. Low gain in the loop also reduces the tendency to get oscillations. Some Alltrax and Curtis controllers have a blended mode as a factory setting.
rodgah
10 kW
yet to test this as i dont have a working system nor bike working yet LOL...... but the thing i like about current throttle too is that it keeps the slack up in the system ie freewheels....
imagine accelerating....then you back off a fraction to stop accelerating..... power on again....off a little again.....
in theory i think the freewheel wouldnt disengauge that whole time.
cheers
imagine accelerating....then you back off a fraction to stop accelerating..... power on again....off a little again.....
in theory i think the freewheel wouldnt disengauge that whole time.
cheers
recumpence
1 GW
The issue I have is hills........
I love approaching a hill at, say 60% throttle going 25mph. As I hit the hill, the controller automatically gives more current to try to maintain that speed. With a current throttle, you are constantly working the throttle to maintain a consistant speed. With a current style throttle, the motor will behave like a 2 stroke off the pipe..... No torque.
Matt
I love approaching a hill at, say 60% throttle going 25mph. As I hit the hill, the controller automatically gives more current to try to maintain that speed. With a current throttle, you are constantly working the throttle to maintain a consistant speed. With a current style throttle, the motor will behave like a 2 stroke off the pipe..... No torque.
Matt
AussieJester
1 TW
Tbh, I can't tell the difference now, has taken more than 10 hours of Rodgahs and my time testing and adjusting settings on my setup, granted, it would of been quicker if I wasnt retarded and actually had a clue, and /or Rodgah were in the same state as me LOL but Rogah is very patient with me HAHA..so yeah,we got there eventually ... The throttle control is very smooth imho, the one and only gripe is still the start up even with the pot adjustment mentioned in the previous post I made, still tiny tiny rotation of throttle at startup produces a lil too much thrust for my liking, no fiddling with settings improved this once we bumped the max amp limit over 100amp. As such, imo these setups unless this issue is addressed some way, would not be to ideal for slow offroad riding on rough terrain, I could see bumping the throttle resulting in a crash, now, wether this os a current based throttle issue or magura throttle issue I dont know, beside the point I'm happy as pig in shit with my RC CA...
FYI the pot adjustment on Magura throttle can be done WITHOUT taking the throttle apart, simply loosen
grub screw on the throttle housing and turn the main throttle input wires, while measuring throttle output voltage we need it set at O.3v put as close to it as you can get its extremely sensitive and takes a lil time fiddling MAKE SURE YOU HAVE REAR WHEEL OF THE GROUND WHEN DOING THE ADJUSTING! It will rev to full speed as you try to get the pot set.
I need too get photochop re-installed so I can resize pics and arrange them all nicely then I'll up The settings Rodgah and myself ended up with for higher powered RC setups might make it easier for the next person
KiM
FYI the pot adjustment on Magura throttle can be done WITHOUT taking the throttle apart, simply loosen
grub screw on the throttle housing and turn the main throttle input wires, while measuring throttle output voltage we need it set at O.3v put as close to it as you can get its extremely sensitive and takes a lil time fiddling MAKE SURE YOU HAVE REAR WHEEL OF THE GROUND WHEN DOING THE ADJUSTING! It will rev to full speed as you try to get the pot set.
I need too get photochop re-installed so I can resize pics and arrange them all nicely then I'll up The settings Rodgah and myself ended up with for higher powered RC setups might make it easier for the next person
KiM
Kepler
10 MW
Good stuff Kim. You are officially a beta tester 8) . In relation to touchy throttle, I would have thought lowering AGain would have solved that. Perhaps once you go into big amp setups though, it doesn't have the same effect as it does on the low powered setups.
johnrobholmes
10 MW
Well it certainly sounds like there are as many opinions on throttle control as there are people in here :lol:
Voltage based
amperage based
mixed control
Any way to have each type selectable on this Justin?
Voltage based
amperage based
mixed control
Any way to have each type selectable on this Justin?
AussieJester
1 TW
Kepler said:
Yup, believe this is the case Kepler, under 90amps its acceptable, once you start getting over that its lil hard off the mark, we have been adjusting Again and the hv160 throttle settings (have this on 3 now Fyi...0 was a shocker front wheel off the ground stuff lol.. Re: me a beta tester lol, well it being a team effort I see myself more as the test rider in this beta testing outfit lol, Rodgah does all the thinking I just push the buttons then tell him the degree each setting affected the overall setup under actual riding conditions, I found we could get it spot on with numerous settings on the bench, loading motor up via breaking with the rear hydro brake, but it performed differently, under actual riding conditions.
KiM
Edit. Have a ride planned this afternoon with ES member Jehu, sjall give out a good test out, better still have the "juice" over Richards 9c frock setup , I'm seriously not concerned, will eat a 9c for breakfast, even limited to 90v lol
recumpence said:
This is true. If the current mode is based off battery current (I assume this is the case for the CA), it's really going to be power that vairies with throttle, not straight torque. If your goal is to maximize range, holding a constant power on hills is probably going to help. You can also control heating on hills this way. If you want constant speed, then yes, you have to work the throttle to keep it steady.
I find the current based throttle behaves more like a 4 stroke engine. Not totally gutless like a 2 stroke. Going downhill or with a tail wind, speed picks up, uphill or head wind, you slow down, but you still get instant full power anytime you crank the throttle full. I think one of the primary benefits would be off-road or in slippery conditions where you can avoid sudden torque peaks that would cause the tires to lose traction. I think it would also minimize wear and tear on the drive train.
While sudden bursts of torque are bad for drive train wear, traction, batteries and heating, they are fun
so I can totally understand a preference for one over the other.
AussieJester
1 TW
I dunno Mr Shumaker, this CA setup has bundles of punch when you hit the throttle up any grade hill, Jehu & myself went for a 20km ride yesterday up some decent grades .. and down em The rc CA setup was flawless, Richard got his first ride of the bike yesterday also, coming from his 9c setup & judging by the "ev-grin" he had on his face after riding my rc CA equipped cruise, he liked the throttle setup to.
We both had a great time on the ride, called into my best mates workon the way back just in time for "beer o' clock" too, least Richard could enjoy a beer, I'm still on the wagon lol.
KiM
The rc CA setup was flawless, Richard got his first ride of the bike yesterday also, coming from his 9c setup & judging by the "ev-grin" he had on his face after riding my rc CA equipped cruise, he liked the throttle setup to.We both had a great time on the ride, called into my best mates workon the way back just in time for "beer o' clock" too, least Richard could enjoy a beer, I'm still on the wagon lol.
KiM
AussieJester
1 TW
Back with some "Safe Like-Date"!!! to present
......ES Forum member Danny Mayes was up today i insisted he took
the bike to grab himself some lunch rather than use his car hehehe So!....with little objection to my suggestion LOL
Danny took the cruiser for a blat, AND hehe I raised to 130amp MaX on the CA & made him the guinea pig test pilot
on slightly higher current settings
...as it turns out The rc CA does the job of restricting the current
it seems, alot better than the CC alone if the data is correct :wink:
The HV160 limiting feature still allows the current to creep over the 200amp mark even when the 160amp
soft cut option is chosen...anyhoot he's the screenies of the Data from the D-MaN's ride-->
View attachment 1
I haven't ridden it yet with the 130amp limit so can't comment what difference it has made to the rc CA's performance
over the 120amp mark, to knackered to have a squirt now shall again be out tomorrow
though, loving this setup Justn! Hope this data is useful for you
KiM
......ES Forum member Danny Mayes was up today i insisted he took
the bike to grab himself some lunch rather than use his car hehehe
So!....with little objection to my suggestion LOLDanny took the cruiser for a blat, AND hehe I raised to 130amp MaX on the CA & made him the guinea pig test pilot
on slightly higher current settings
...as it turns out The rc CA does the job of restricting the current it seems, alot better than the CC alone if the data is correct :wink:
The HV160 limiting feature still allows the current to creep over the 200amp mark even when the 160amp
soft cut option is chosen...anyhoot he's the screenies of the Data from the D-MaN's ride-->
View attachment 1
I haven't ridden it yet with the 130amp limit so can't comment what difference it has made to the rc CA's performance
over the 120amp mark, to knackered to have a squirt now shall again be out tomorrow
though, loving this setup Justn! Hope this data is useful for you
KiM
Jehu
10 mW
AussieJester said:
90v who needs 90v to beat a frock?
realy comparing apples to pears.
AJ =48v, peak amps=120 Lipo cap=20Ah = TOY
Hub= 48v, peak amps=70 Lipo cap= 10Ah = Dayly transport
The advantage you had was range (double battery capacity) and top speed, my motor is a slow wind, and when pushing it on hills, both motor and controller were only slightly warm, the rc was slightly warmer
interestingly, on this 20km trip, the hub motor had used 10Ah, and AJ 9AhIn hindsight High speed wind would be better.
Rode AJ;s hobo, Such a buzz! great design, handled well, great ridding position, could ride it all day.
Throttle was smooth as, though I reached 100% throttle way to quick
could use more gears lol motor did not have to work real hard, 3 speed AJ? Torque was good, powerful, yet smooth, enough to send the corners of my mouth east and west real quick!
It was limited to 120amps i think.
Hard to compare with my bike. It's wound for low speed, will only do about 40km, but, like my diesel hilux, it takes a big hill or load to slow it down.
In all great to compare
Thanks for the opportunity Kim
Danny Mayes
1 kW
As above, again i had the joy of riding AJs bike.
The throttle response of the RC CA is much better than the servo tester.
Before i elaborate, as a disclaimer, the servo tester was a $8 Turnigy unit (correct me if i am wrong AJ) and i am only making comments on AJ's set up, not generalisations. The better performance of the CA could be due to any combination of factors. Also AJ, may be you could comment on the differences or similarities of the Turnigy vs the Astro testers to give those using Astro units some reference to what i am saying -
If the RC CA's throttle had a resolution of 100 then the servo tester had a resolution of about 30. said another way, if the throttle was not a pot, but a 100 point switch, the old servo tester felt like it was only a 30 point switch. So not a subtle difference but a significant and welcome one for the sensorless set up.
I can't comment on what people are saying about current vs voltage because i don't have a complete understanding of both but i can say that how AJ's throttle is set up, i have no desire for it to be any other way, It works an absolute treat on that bike and i would be totally happy with it that way for my own bike. Having the option between voltage and current or some mix, I think would be great if it did not complicate setting it up/adjusting it too much more. Why not have the options if it can be done. But is it complicating things too much??
The RC CA has much better syncing down low too than the previous servo tester. Only very minor jittering on slow throttle start up. could this be attributed to the fact that it is constant current?
Does the RC CA run at a much higher frequency than the servo testers accounting for the experience of higher throttle resolution?
Also the RC CA is sitting almost a meter away from the esc. The servo tester was right next to it. I don't know but imagine those esc's spray a s@#t load of RF everywhere. I also bet that Justins RC CA has more built in imunity to RF than the 8$ Turnigy tester. lol. These 2 points may be the only reason why the better performance. I am interested in Mr recumpence's feed back on this product...
one last thing -
Justin, overall i think the RC CA is frikin awesome. It is a really great product and i think it does what it does really nicely. The size of it is great ( I am one of the majority that agrees it was a step in the right direction :wink: ). If i didn't already have one (older style) i would buy one in a snap The build quality is great. It replaced 3 separate components and overall does a better job than what it replaces (citation may be needed :wink: ). It's one elegent solution dude! On top of all that there is all the flexibility of programming it to suit personal taste and all the unique applications out there. Congratulations on a fantastic product. From my brief experience with it, I highly recommend it to anyone. I hope you sell thousands of them mate.
D
The throttle response of the RC CA is much better than the servo tester.
Before i elaborate, as a disclaimer, the servo tester was a $8 Turnigy unit (correct me if i am wrong AJ) and i am only making comments on AJ's set up, not generalisations. The better performance of the CA could be due to any combination of factors. Also AJ, may be you could comment on the differences or similarities of the Turnigy vs the Astro testers to give those using Astro units some reference to what i am saying -
If the RC CA's throttle had a resolution of 100 then the servo tester had a resolution of about 30. said another way, if the throttle was not a pot, but a 100 point switch, the old servo tester felt like it was only a 30 point switch. So not a subtle difference but a significant and welcome one for the sensorless set up.
I can't comment on what people are saying about current vs voltage because i don't have a complete understanding of both but i can say that how AJ's throttle is set up, i have no desire for it to be any other way, It works an absolute treat on that bike and i would be totally happy with it that way for my own bike. Having the option between voltage and current or some mix, I think would be great if it did not complicate setting it up/adjusting it too much more. Why not have the options if it can be done. But is it complicating things too much??
The RC CA has much better syncing down low too than the previous servo tester. Only very minor jittering on slow throttle start up. could this be attributed to the fact that it is constant current?
Does the RC CA run at a much higher frequency than the servo testers accounting for the experience of higher throttle resolution?
Also the RC CA is sitting almost a meter away from the esc. The servo tester was right next to it. I don't know but imagine those esc's spray a s@#t load of RF everywhere. I also bet that Justins RC CA has more built in imunity to RF than the 8$ Turnigy tester. lol. These 2 points may be the only reason why the better performance. I am interested in Mr recumpence's feed back on this product...
one last thing -
Justin, overall i think the RC CA is frikin awesome. It is a really great product and i think it does what it does really nicely. The size of it is great ( I am one of the majority that agrees it was a step in the right direction :wink: ). If i didn't already have one (older style) i would buy one in a snap
The build quality is great. It replaced 3 separate components and overall does a better job than what it replaces (citation may be needed :wink: ). It's one elegent solution dude! On top of all that there is all the flexibility of programming it to suit personal taste and all the unique applications out there. Congratulations on a fantastic product. From my brief experience with it, I highly recommend it to anyone. I hope you sell thousands of them mate.D
AussieJester
1 TW
It has been a great weekend for me! catching up with Richard (jehu) and Danny (Danny Mayes) and getting
their impressions of the RC compatible CA also, I had another good friend of mine around Sunday afternoon
who has been riding my cruiser alot since it has been going, he has ridden it my old setups from my first bike also
from Fecthers analoge throttle interface to the Recumpence throttle kit
and now the CA setup, he was extremely impressed with the throttle setup, best yet, by far!
The power delivery is smooth and constant from standstil right through the range of throttle movement
You want arm lengthing power mid throttle on a hill you get it, want to ride slowly through
the shopping center (yeah i get away with it i'm "special" hahaha) you can do that too, fom
walking pace to flat out and everything in between it is right on the money Justin, I'm definately sold
on the RC compatible CA.. At this point of what is avaialble it is a hands down winner in performance and setup
making BEC (battery eleiminating circuits) and servo testers a thing of the past, in real world
use off the bench, these setups work damn well once setup...
I just off loaded a few pics of the shunt assmebly, dopey me originally forgot to pair the shunts up
Rodgah noticed it after the fact also :-S so the first pics are showing only one of the shunts
Justin sent included on the first pics, SO for dunder heads like me that
read but miss the basic information haha you require BOTH shunts that Justin sends (if your not using those low
current 'toy' shunts for fairy friction and girlie frock setups <---should ensure a post from Kepler at least ROFL)
both shunts shold be 'double deckered' before soldering your main lead wires are soldered on.
Here's how i installed the shunt into the bikes main leads might help others out with their setups-->
View attachment 5
View attachment 4
View attachment 3
View attachment 2
So after realizing both shunts were required, i removed the single shunt from the
board, applied solder to the second shunt's ends and plopped it on top of
the main wires, leaving the tip of the iron on it till all the solder melted and they
become one haha problem sol-vered
View attachment 1
( apologies for pic quality on last pics, another camera bit the dust down to Cell phone camera again..please
also note, the wiring of the CA is only temporary and is to be re-done all wires yet to be
soldered and cable sleeving applied... :-( )
The whole lot is then covered in hot glue to ensure all wiring stays put, double sided
heat shrink is then used to cover the entire shunt/wiring before connecting into
bikes main wiring...
Rodgah had me adjust the CA accordingly and we were set to continue testing
Settings...this is the settings i have on the CA that have been used and unchanGed (aside from AMP limit which was raised from 90-120-130amp
over the course of a few days)
My setup is as follows..
STOCK Turnigy 80-100-130v Turnigy V2
Castle Creations HV160 (4x additional caps on input '+' & '-' wires)
Magura Throttle
44v 20ah Turnigy 20c Lithium Polymer Packs
CA Settings
Amps Limit 130amp
Low Volts limit 39v
Main Display Watts
Set Range High (0.1A)
Averaging 5
Set RShunt .7000m0hm (using the two shunts combined as one, Justin Sent with CA)
Volt Sense 31.10V/V
PSGain 0.08V/kph
ISGain 200
AGain 300
VGain 800
ITerm Max 2.00mS
ITerm Min 1.21mS
Aux Thresh 0.75V
Vshutdown 10V
I hope this information can be used by others setting up their own RC Cycle Analyists
Thanks again to Justin for making these units avaialble so quickly & at such a low price!
and to Rodgah (Roger)for his time and patience advising me how to set the unit
up, to get such a rider friendly RC motored e-bike ... Kudos mate
KiM
EDiT p.s yesterday Mick and I set the Garmin GPS up on my bike to calibrate the RC CA we come up with a tire diameter of 1970
for the 24in HookWoRM the 1965 setting usually used for 24in tires was 3km/hr too fast ... according to the GPs the 1970
bought the readings withing 0.05km/hr difference...
EDiT2: Forgot to mention, the ever dreaded voltage spike, thus far since the RC CA has been in use, we have yet to record a spike exceeding 2.5v according to Data logging on the CC HV160 RAPT about this also haha
their impressions of the RC compatible CA also, I had another good friend of mine around Sunday afternoon
who has been riding my cruiser alot since it has been going, he has ridden it my old setups from my first bike also
from Fecthers analoge throttle interface to the Recumpence throttle kit
and now the CA setup, he was extremely impressed with the throttle setup, best yet, by far!
The power delivery is smooth and constant from standstil right through the range of throttle movement
You want arm lengthing power mid throttle on a hill you get it, want to ride slowly through
the shopping center (yeah i get away with it i'm "special" hahaha) you can do that too, fom
walking pace to flat out and everything in between it is right on the money Justin, I'm definately sold
on the RC compatible CA.. At this point of what is avaialble it is a hands down winner in performance and setup
making BEC (battery eleiminating circuits) and servo testers a thing of the past, in real world
use off the bench, these setups work damn well once setup...
I just off loaded a few pics of the shunt assmebly, dopey me originally forgot to pair the shunts up
Rodgah noticed it after the fact also :-S so the first pics are showing only one of the shunts
Justin sent included on the first pics, SO for dunder heads like me that
read but miss the basic information haha you require BOTH shunts that Justin sends (if your not using those low
current 'toy' shunts for fairy friction and girlie frock setups
<---should ensure a post from Kepler at least ROFL) both shunts shold be 'double deckered' before soldering your main lead wires are soldered on.
Here's how i installed the shunt into the bikes main leads might help others out with their setups-->
View attachment 5
View attachment 4
View attachment 3
View attachment 2
So after realizing both shunts were required, i removed the single shunt from the
board, applied solder to the second shunt's ends and plopped it on top of
the main wires, leaving the tip of the iron on it till all the solder melted and they
become one haha problem sol-vered
View attachment 1
( apologies for pic quality on last pics, another camera bit the dust down to Cell phone camera again..please
also note, the wiring of the CA is only temporary and is to be re-done all wires yet to be
soldered and cable sleeving applied... :-( )
The whole lot is then covered in hot glue to ensure all wiring stays put, double sided
heat shrink is then used to cover the entire shunt/wiring before connecting into
bikes main wiring...
Rodgah had me adjust the CA accordingly and we were set to continue testing
Settings...this is the settings i have on the CA that have been used and unchanGed (aside from AMP limit which was raised from 90-120-130amp
over the course of a few days)
My setup is as follows..
STOCK Turnigy 80-100-130v Turnigy V2
Castle Creations HV160 (4x additional caps on input '+' & '-' wires)
Magura Throttle
44v 20ah Turnigy 20c Lithium Polymer Packs
CA Settings
Amps Limit 130amp
Low Volts limit 39v
Main Display Watts
Set Range High (0.1A)
Averaging 5
Set RShunt .7000m0hm (using the two shunts combined as one, Justin Sent with CA)
Volt Sense 31.10V/V
PSGain 0.08V/kph
ISGain 200
AGain 300
VGain 800
ITerm Max 2.00mS
ITerm Min 1.21mS
Aux Thresh 0.75V
Vshutdown 10V
I hope this information can be used by others setting up their own RC Cycle Analyists
Thanks again to Justin for making these units avaialble so quickly & at such a low price!
and to Rodgah (Roger)for his time and patience advising me how to set the unit
up, to get such a rider friendly RC motored e-bike ... Kudos mate
KiM
EDiT p.s yesterday Mick and I set the Garmin GPS up on my bike to calibrate the RC CA we come up with a tire diameter of 1970
for the 24in HookWoRM the 1965 setting usually used for 24in tires was 3km/hr too fast ... according to the GPs the 1970
bought the readings withing 0.05km/hr difference...
EDiT2: Forgot to mention, the ever dreaded voltage spike, thus far since the RC CA has been in use, we have yet to record a spike exceeding 2.5v according to Data logging on the CC HV160 RAPT about this also haha
Grinhill
10 kW
Thanks for the detailed info Kim.
I've got one of the new CAs but I'm yet to get mine wired up.
I've got one of the new CAs but I'm yet to get mine wired up.
johnrobholmes
10 MW
Sounds awesome! Glad to hear you got it set up and handling very well 8)
Whiplash
1 MW
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 2,906
Very cool to hear AJ! So, I am still a little confused about this setup, does it actually limit the current now? Or is it just that it gives better control over the throttle and makes it smoother? I guess I am wondering it if fixes the low RPM high load problems associated with the R/C speed controls?
johnrobholmes
10 MW
It limits battery side current and converts the R/C controllers into a current based throttle instead of a voltage based throttle.
It does not fix the low RPM loading issue with these controllers, as there is no phase current or RPM detection. I think it may have a feature where it does not run below a set RPM however, and that could get around the issue.
It does not fix the low RPM loading issue with these controllers, as there is no phase current or RPM detection. I think it may have a feature where it does not run below a set RPM however, and that could get around the issue.
adrian_sm
1 MW
Hey Kim,
Great to hear the CA-LRC is working out so well on the cruiser.
I found it interesting that all the gain settings you settled on, appear to be the default ones that the CA-LRC ships with. This is great, since they are the ones that can require some tuning to set-up if you need to adjust them, the rest are relatively straight forward, measure/set/forget settings.
Hopefully this means that most people wont need to play around too much when setting up the CA-LRC, except for us "fairy friction" setup guys that have needed to tweak AGain to soften the response depending on the Amp Limit used.
- Adrian
Great to hear the CA-LRC is working out so well on the cruiser.
I found it interesting that all the gain settings you settled on, appear to be the default ones that the CA-LRC ships with. This is great, since they are the ones that can require some tuning to set-up if you need to adjust them, the rest are relatively straight forward, measure/set/forget settings.
Hopefully this means that most people wont need to play around too much when setting up the CA-LRC, except for us "fairy friction" setup guys that have needed to tweak AGain to soften the response depending on the Amp Limit used.
- Adrian
AussieJester said:
Similar threads
