Falco e-Motors

[neptronix]

ARe you asking Falco to disclose every piece of proprietary technical information, with empirical data, and then disclose all profits?.

You are a prize champion strawman fighter. Good job.

All i am asking is for a dyno graph like 99% of other motor manufacturers are willing to provide to show their motor's performance and prove the marketing claims.

And a video of the wheel spinning to confirm the easy pedaling characteristics that are claimed.

I have requested this information, and only this information about 5 times now; if the above post is not crystal clear to you, i would have to conclude that you have a reading comprehension problem.

 

[Bike_on]

Step 5. Ignore repeated requests for that exact information ( dyno graph )
Step 6. ???
Step 7. Profit!

ARe you asking Falco to disclose every piece of proprietary technical information, with empirical data, and then disclose all profits?

You guys are too much!

From what I have read so far, Falco has gone beyond pale to explain their design, and deservedly so, for coming on a DIY, well informed forum.

Torque: I believe there are some torque graphs posted on the website??. Torque vs speed.[/quote]


Nep-

LOL. Great pics!

Hey, I want to see those graphs of the dyno too.

I was referring to your istep #7. Are you asking them to disclose profits?

 

[liveforphysics]

I don't think he is asking for profit info.

I also don't feel like Falco has given anyone actually useful motor performance data anywhere that I've seen. Bar graphs and things are hardly useful motor data.

I interpret what neptronix is saying to mean, they tell us BS and give mostly useless graphs and data for indicated motor performance, then don't perform the useful tests requested, and instead focus making profits.

I'm semi-in agreement with him, but i have faith they some need some technical guidance that we can/have provided, and they will learn how to properly show - off the product they have in a factual way.

 

[cal3thousand]

I was referring to your istep #7. Are you asking them to disclose profits?

No, he's just using Interwebz humor:

Profit

 

[Bike_on]

Here is a graph from their motor data sheet I found.

View attachment Hx-rr_HT_eBike_Hub_Motor_Propulsion_System.pdf

 

[Punx0r]

That reminds me of this

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=42706&p=699244#p699244

 

[liveforphysics]

Here is a graph from their motor data sheet I found.

The amount of motor relevant data in that whole sheet is the weight of the motor. Doesn't have a single additional bit of useful motor performance info.

Yes, they mention "85% efficiency", but most motors do have some efficiency point that isn't too shabby.

An efficiency number doesn't become meaningful until you can see the efficiency curve with power/torque values being made at that number etc.

It is my guess that this motor would stack up very nicely against most of the ebike motors available in the world, and in that case they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by sharing full characterization of the motors performance.

Even better, Justin is such an awesome guy, I bet if you sent him one, he would be so kind as to dyno it and add this motors performance characteristics to the ebike simulator. That would give you free worldwide market exposure to your product, because I can confirm Justins sim gets used all over the world for people building ebikes at all levels.

 

[Willow]

I would like to see them (or anyone) do a good quality - mid range (power wise) 3-phase, with no internal controller... at a reasonable price. Cro-motor does the job at the Beast end of the market.... but then it's a fight-out between the 'Chinese Giants' (tongue firmly in cheek) at the lower power end - up to 3KW.

...Falco are positioned in the name-brand production market, not hobbyists I guess.

Maybe the Cro-mob could do a Sparrow Motor...

 

[neptronix]

That reminds me of this

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=42706&p=699244#p699244

:lol: omg i forgot about that entirely.

Bike_on, that graph really tells us nothing. I'm looking for same kind of dyno graph that all other motor makers provide to show the efficiency and power output curve.

I've had no problems getting these out of crystalyte, motenergy, bafang, even an engineer from the USA side of MAC motor after asking.

Of course the company has dyno test results on hand and a spin test result is easy to do. Like LFP says, ebikes.ca can provide data in the simulator too, which is good enough.

 

[speedmd]

My Guess is that with eff. graphs posted, there would be no point in trying to sell advantages that are simply non existent or virtually undetectable by end users. May be a very high quality build, but with too much bullshit added into the mix for market flavoring, it just spoils the taste for me. Post the independently verifiable data or stop making claims. :x If it were a motor car, they would be pulled off the market by now for this crap.

Sorry, too much coffee this AM.

 

[Bike_on]

Folks,

Someone did mention the span of the torque curve. That graph, though poor quality, does give some idea of the torque output, does it not?

I cannot supply these other graphs, don't have them. I believe FAlco emotors is following this thread, and knows what the forum is asking. It is up to them to disclose.

... The hoards of Mordor await outside the gate, reeking the smell of death...

speedmd:
Your point about minor overall improvement may be true and brings to point the need to consider the overall system performance. For most DIY members here, I suspect the issue is NOT efficiency to give 15-20% more range, but rather less thermal power dissipation , running at high power and full load. Of course, that involves good thermal design, besides outright efficiency. So the 3-ph motor that has good eff at light load, may be close to the overall 5ph eff of the Falco, but what happens under heavy load? .. yes, we need data.

In terms of whr/mi, a less powerful motor and more leg work will give you better range and overall efficiency. So correct me on this if needed, the benchmark of a dd motor, should be : Max Sustainable Power output/weight?

 

[neptronix]

A torque curve is not an efficiency curve and says nothing about efficiency until you see power in, power out, torque, and RPM together.
Many motors that cost 33%-50% less have dramatically better torque output, and also much higher peak efficiency.

But there is a lot of value in a motor that has high efficiency across the entire powerband. If this motor has that, it might be worth the additional cost. Otherwise it can be assumed that it may be better than the average motor, but not worth the cost since the manufacturer is unwilling to prove many claims of it's superiority.

The highest number of some curve tells you nothing about the rest of the curve.

It is not unreasonable to request a type of standardized graph that ~99% of other motor makers are willing to provide.
Do you get what i am saying yet?

 

[Bike_on]

The highest number of some curve tells you nothing about the rest of the curve.

It is not unreasonable to request a type of standardized graph that ~99% of other motor makers are willing to provide.
Do you get what i am saying yet?

Yes, I agree, not unreasonable to ask for curves. I alreeady agreed with you on that.

I inquired to Falco about characterizing their motor thru Justin and maybe making it compatible with the CA, last fall 2013. I believe they have talked, but I don't know if Justin has a motor. Falco did decide to move forward with power/amp feedback on their own console, and not wire in to a CA. I know that because I am upgrading my console to the next revision with CA type information.

About that torque graph. It does show a flat, constant, max torque (55nm) out to a certain speed, then it tapers. That is a lot flatter than the torque curves from Justins simulator for every motor. They peak at 0 rpm and decay immediately. True, no power or eff is associated with it, but you do see a flat section in the torque curve. That makes the graph meaningful, IMO.

 

[neptronix]

Actually his simulator does not allow you to enter phase current; it just assumes a 2.5:1-3:1 ratio of phase to battery amps or something like that, which is typical of how many ebike controllers are programmed from the factory.

I have a nice and fairly flat power curve on my MAC motor setup by means of tuning the phase current appropriately. If i jack up the phase amps 3:1, my MAC motor, just like many others, has incredible torque from a stall and then kind of peters down as you go higher in RPM. With a flat curve, it is more controllable/predictable.
I do this for efficiency, since saturating the motor from a stall instead of pedaling to gain speed initially uses quite a lot more energy.

So what the Falco motor controller is doing isn't really an indicator of the motor's raw performance at all; it's just being operated at the parameters that they see most fitting.

 

[liveforphysics]

About that torque graph. It does show a flat, constant, max torque (55nm) out to a certain speed, then it tapers. That is a lot flatter than the torque curves from Justins simulator for every motor. They peak at 0 rpm and decay immediately. True, no power or eff is associated with it, but you do see a flat section in the torque curve. That makes the graph meaningful, IMO.

Any and every ebike motor sold could be controlled to produce that identical curve if you tuned a controller to deliver the right phase current. From the most tiny 250w motor to the biggest hubmonsters. Some would over-heat rapidly (like the little "250w Cute" I'm running on my roadbike), but all motors could identically match that curve if you gave them the right input.

It is not any indication of anything related to the motors performance or capabilities IMHO. It's indicative of showing what you what they set a controller to supply, and that's about it.

You get a dead-nuts flat torque curve with any motor if you simply set it up to have constant average phase current (as long as you're not driving it into saturation at least).

Actually his simulator does not allow you to enter phase current; it just assumes a 2.5:1-3:1 ratio of phase to battery amps or something like that, which is typical of how many ebike controllers are programmed from the factory.

Not correct. He precisely measures the motors winding resistance, and he knows the Kv, and RPM, so he always knows the phase voltage. Since he knows input power, and he knows output phase voltage, he therefore can correctly (perhaps +-3%?) solve for Iphase at all times (or at least average Iphase, which is what determines torque anyways). It's just a plug-n-chug calculation once you have gathered the needed motor variables, no guessing needed.


I have no interest in hassling these guys. I like the product, and may be a future customer. They have a product I like and want to buy. Yes, I know it's not the best bang-for-the-buck in a motor, but for many buyers, it simply doesn't matter if the motor costs $200 or $2000, I've almost entirely replaced car use with road-biking, and that saves me many thousands yearly.

I just get turned-off by taking a cool product and slathering so much marketing sludge all over it that I can't help but feel suckered if I bought it, even though I think the product is good and worth the money.

I see excellent potential in Falco though, because marketing can be corrected by just editing some text files to reflect reality and perhaps share useful motor data to enable informed customer product selection. That's way less work than taking a company with a shitty product and trying to make the product good.

 

[John in CR]

...it may be better than the average motor, but not worth the cost since the manufacturer...

That's the conclusion I came to when they first came out, and an even bigger detraction for me is being stuck with only their proprietary controllers.

 

[FalcoeMotors]

Read all the posts with great interest.

Thank you for all the questions.

We are also shooting the video as you have asked. We will provide the test data you have asked. We are not backing out from that.

We can not reveal our design details. There is a lot more data available about our motors than from BionX or Bosch.

By the way, can someone post a torque speed curve from a BionX motor or a Bosch motor or a Pansonic motor or a Yamaha motor?

Thank You.

 

[FalcoeMotors]

That's the conclusion I came to when they first came out, and an even bigger detraction for me is being stuck with only their proprietary controllers.

Don't understand the comment about proprietary controllers.

The golden rule which we preach to all our clients is that the controller MUST BE MARRIED TO THE MOTOR. It is a system. It is the overall system performance which matters. And it is UNRELIABLE and INEFFICIENT to have controllers outside. We have proven this over and over again. First with TidalForce, then with E+ and now with Falco.

If other manufacturers can not do what we can, is it our fault or does that become a suspicious claim?

There is a reason why we offer a 5-year warranty. Even Bosch can not do 5 year. If they can or even BionX or even all of the Chinese manufacturers or Japanese manufacturers put together, we fold Falco today.

Let us know a system which delivers power, performance and reliability and can beat Falco.

None of our customers have a broken Falco.

 

[cal3thousand]

That's the conclusion I came to when they first came out, and an even bigger detraction for me is being stuck with only their proprietary controllers.

Don't understand the comment about proprietary controllers.

The golden rule which we preach to all our clients is that the controller MUST BE MARRIED TO THE MOTOR. It is a system. It is the overall system performance which matters. And it is UNRELIABLE and INEFFICIENT to have controllers outside. We have proven this over and over again. First with TidalForce, then with E+ and now with Falco.

If other manufacturers can not do what we can, is it our fault or does that become a suspicious claim?

There is a reason why we offer a 5-year warranty. Even Bosch can not do 5 year. If they can or even BionX or even all of the Chinese manufacturers or Japanese manufacturers put together, we fold Falco today.

Let us know a system which delivers power, performance and reliability and can beat Falco.

None of our customers have a broken Falco.

The proprietary nature being the 5 phase controller. You guys are the only ones breaking from the 3 phase 'standard'. In the world of ebikes, nearly nothing is standard except that red = positive, black = negative and there are 3 phases to a motor and controller.

So I hope you can understand when we want so much proof and information from you. We're not John Q Public that has no clue what is going on inside. With that said, for the folks here at ES (the regular posters, not the lurkers) to adopt any such change in 'standard', you have better come with profound scientific developments and the proof of that (since we are not going to blindly accept things)

To give you an analogy, think about trying to introduce a new standard for the red = positive and black = negative. If you are going to change it, we need good reason.

With that, I leave you with Carl Sagan: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

 

[Punx0r]

I understand the packaging advantages of putting a controller inside the motor, but how is it supposed to improve reliability and efficiency? It's always going to be warmer inside a motor than outside so the controller will suffer greater resistance losses and reduced component life.

 

[FalcoeMotors]

I understand the packaging advantages of putting a controller inside the motor, but how is it supposed to improve reliability and efficiency? It's always going to be warmer inside a motor than outside so the controller will suffer greater resistance losses and reduced component life.

That is the trade secret.

Germans can't do it. Chinese can't do it. Some companies can do it upto 250W/350W. We can do it upto 1500W and climbing.

 

[Teh Stork]

Don't feed the troll.

 

[FalcoeMotors]

Don't feed the troll.

Alright, Let us have a company who can do it and still offer 5 year warranty.

 

[miro13car]

FalcoeMotors,
absolutely right.
FALCO drive is not aiming to be competitor for China brand hub drives.
Rakhes ,FALCO lead engineer was clear about it in his interview with EVworld.
It is in its own class .
You are also correct:
how many torque curves and technical details you can find from BIONX and BOSH , I have not seen any - so you make good point here, fair enough.
When properly design DD motor internal controllers can be very reliable as example of TADIAL FORCE, EPLUS and now FALCO shows.
in design to Western standards product protects itself and fail safe.
FALCO will not allow user to overheat motor , it is so obvious to me /no need to open motor and start adding thermistors/
FALCO will protect itself from overheating, overvoltage, overcurrent, etc. - it is only one of the reasons it cost more and I am happy to pay for it.
Can you build drive like FALCO for less?
You for sure can build ebike which goes from A to B at X speed , but it will never match FALCO even remotely in many aspects quality included.

 

[Punx0r]

I understand the packaging advantages of putting a controller inside the motor, but how is it supposed to improve reliability and efficiency? It's always going to be warmer inside a motor than outside so the controller will suffer greater resistance losses and reduced component life.

That is the trade secret.

Germans can't do it. Chinese can't do it. Some companies can do it upto 250W/350W. We can do it upto 1500W and climbing.

I'm not saying you can't have a controller inside a motor that will last five years. You just need to use sufficiently over-rated (and expensive) components to ensure that they will survive despite the deleterious effect the heat will have on them. That is inefficient, though.

Unless you have superconducting components, or the inside of your motor is somehow colder than ambient then an in-motor controller cannot be more energy efficient.