Falco e-Motors

[the_dude]

@ Imaleone

Thanks. I'm pretty stoked to have it going. Yes I can maintain a steady cadence in any gear without the motor trying to overtake me. However, like you and others I'd prefer level 1 PAS provide a little less assistance so I can do more of the work. The torque sensor references your effort and your current speed. So as the speed goes up the amount of assist goes up. What I've found is that at slower speeds I notice a difference between level 1 and level 5 but at 25ish mph there is very little difference in the two. Would be neat to program that to lower the amount of assist. Honestly at level 1 it is perfect for what I wanted in a commuter but I'd prefer perfect for me to be around level 3 assist so I can do easier or harder depending on the situation.

Your setup sounds odd with only maintain 16ish unless in level 5 and then only 21ish. The amount of effort I put in to pedal 25 mph is about the same as 10-12 mph felt before my conversion. That motor packs a serious punch.

 

[Tominfaribo]

Dude: Did you program your tire size correctly in the console? There is a limit of 20mph unless you bought the off road version.

 

[hcrider]

The_dude: It would be good to install at least one torque arm one your motor. The motor shaft has a great desire to rotate. If it does so, it will damage / destroy the dropouts, and likely cause you to crash. A search of ES for the subject of torque arm will bring up a lot of stories. Rakesh supplied me with a Grin Tech V2, and it works well. You can look at the one on my Trek by the first link below (click on the pic to enlarge). The second link gives a closer look at what it is.

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/download/file.php?id=129493&mode=view
http://www.ebikes.ca/product-info/grin-products/torque-arms.html

hcrider

 

[the_dude]

Dude: Did you program your tire size correctly in the console? There is a limit of 20mph unless you bought the off road version.

Yes I programed the tire size. I did buy the offroad capable console. I also compared the speeds per the Falco console to my existing bicycle computer and they read the same.

The_dude: It would be good to install at least one torque arm one your motor. The motor shaft has a great desire to rotate. If it does so, it will damage / destroy the dropouts, and likely cause you to crash. A search of ES for the subject of torque arm will bring up a lot of stories. Rakesh supplied me with a Grin Tech V2, and it works well. You can look at the one on my Trek by the first link below (click on the pic to enlarge). The second link gives a closer look at what it is.

http://endless-sphere.com/forums/download/file.php?id=129493&mode=view
http://www.ebikes.ca/product-info/grin-products/torque-arms.html

hcrider

Thanks for looking out hcrider. I do have a torque arm installed as of earlier this evening. I purchased one Falco torque arm but it came as bare metal without paint. So I painted it yesterday and waited 24 hours for it to dry before installing it. Because of all the talk about torque arms here on this forum I actually requested two at the time of my order but the shop talked me out of it as they said one was plenty with the 500w motor. I guess we will see.

 

[Miles]

I don't see what the debate is?

I see it as being about communication. For a company that also gives courses on motor technology................

 

[Bike_on]

Ok, I took a video with my iphone. I posted it on utube. Here is a link.

I got my spokes replaced and balanced the wheel today. Thanks for calling us out to get to this going.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS1usgYXHP4

I still have to set up the rpms vs torque measurement/calc.

 

[Punx0r]

I did the 4th test after discovering how much easier the wheel turned when I loosed the motor plate. Not sure of the underlying cause yet.

Sounds like its binding internally?

 

[Bike_on]

Stay tuned for testing.

Thank you! Your efforts are appreciated by many!

I was able to use the CA and my new Falco console. I set the wheel OD to 2682 in order for 1 mph ==> 10 rpm.

See attached for results.

Summary:
The torque is below 1nm up to about 350rpm. Then is bends and has a steeper curve.

The baseline level is a bit more than Bionx.

This is a single test on one Falco, HX 500W motor.

 

[the_dude]

Thanks for running the test Bike_On. How did you determine your adjusted power numbers? I see you have a power number calculated and then are subtracting 4 to get adjusted? What is that?

So if I understand this test in comparison to the graphs Justin posted on page 11 then the Falco has a somewhat similar torque curve to the Tidal Force bikes and is much higher than all the other motors (except tidal force) Justin tested?

 

[liveforphysics]

How did you solve for torque without knowing phase current?

 

[neptronix]

Those are some awfully high RPM numbers for a 500 watt motor, unless it was wound to run in a 16 inch wheel or something. ( sorry if i am missing something here )

How did you get adjusted power and torque?

Anyway, since the manufacturer nor the dealers want to prove their claims of it being easy freewheeling, here is a comparison to a geared motor which is the best freewheeling geared motor i've seen for comparison.

[youtube]JM_rX-toEI4[/youtube]

I don't do a full spin-down test here, but you can clearly hear when i am applying power and when not. This is what a motor which is transparent during unpowered pedaling looks like.

[youtube]lm4pQ8_OCkE[/youtube]

Here is a typical $150-$200 9C/MXUS/Golden motor/ampedbikes/ebikekit motor spinning down from 80 volts.

I don't have a video of spinning up/down a magic pie, but the magic pie slows down notably quicker than the 9C and sure gives a lot of resistance.

So there is a quasi-scientific frame of reference..

 

[Bike_on]

Thanks for running the test Bike_On. How did you determine your adjusted power numbers? I see you have a power number calculated and then are subtracting 4 to get adjusted? What is that?

So if I understand this test in comparison to the graphs Justin posted on page 11 then the Falco has a somewhat similar torque curve to the Tidal Force bikes and is much higher than all the other motors (except tidal force) Justin tested?

Dude-
Yes, the comparison is to Justin's graphs on page 11.

No, Falco is not much higher. Up until the 350rpm range, it tracks with the other motors. After 350, there is a knee and it increases. I believe that effect was explained as back EMF force being overcomed??? Falco has a feedforward mode.

I need to do a couple extra things and re-test.
1. Verify my wheel circumfrencfe to match the rpm value x10. The new Falco console shows mph and doesn't seem to allow kph, so I need to programm 2682mm and make sure it is saved. In my commute to work today, I expected the Falco mph to be >> than the CA mph, which is set to 2136. they were off by 2-3mph at 20-25 cruising speeds.

2. I can test with the speed restricted and unresrricted and see if it matters.

note: max display speed is 99mph. I could NOT max out.

I used the different levels to control power and applied the throttle. The new program steps up the power more evenly.

 

[Bike_on]

How did you solve for torque without knowing phase current?

LFP,

I used Justin's equation, t = rpm *2 * pi/60. I followed Justin's instructions to test it. I coul dnot control or measure phase current, to the power is out of the battery and into the controller first. I assume this limits the usefullness of the results, but it is all I can do with the integrated hub.

All-
I subracted 4W from each measurement since that is Icc to the controller.

 

[Bike_on]

Is this graph comparing 3-phase motors with 7-phase TIDAL FORCE?

The graph showing the tidal force torque was done differently, by actually measuring the torque on the axle with a load cell while spinning the wheel. So yes you are seeing the drag force of various 3 phase crystalyte motors compared with the 7 phase tidal force motor, all as measured mechanically on the axle itself while spinning the wheel at constant RPM with an external drive.

BIONX with external controller? It is not BIONX anymore.

Sure if you say, but the drag torque to spin a BionX hub motor isn't going to change whether it has the original or an external controller. Core loss is core loss and with the motor unpowered there's not much a controller can do to change that.

Anyways my point in this thread was just to say that there's no need to have long arguments about marketing claims of drag torque and whether they are BS or not, since most people here have the tools already on their bike to give a very accurate quantitative number. It's easy and precise to get from the unloaded power draw. So if Bike_on, or anyone else with a Falco system and an ammeter, can provide the power stats on their hub at a few different RPM's then we'd know how it actually compares.

The BionX PL350 data was provided to give context to the results, as Falco had already staged their comparison of cogging torque ripple in terms of BionX motor. But as Luke and others pointed out, the cogging torque ripple is of only marginal concern, it can reduce the subtle feeling of motor vibration as you bike but it doesn't affect the net drag of the hub to feel like it is truly 'freewheeling'. If you are claiming that a direct motor is virtually freewheeling, then you would want to back that up with a graph of the motor drag (Nm) versus RPM.

-Justin

Updated results. Justin phrased the issue very well.

I re-checked my Falco console and the Wheel OD was not set to 2682. It was limited to 2234. Therefore, I applied a 2682/2234 = 1.2 factor to the RPMs. (The speed shoul dhave been 1.2* higher, and the RPMs 1.2*10)

Good news is the Falco pedal force is less than originialy stated. However, it is still stightly more than Bionx at same lower RPMs.

Can anyone explain why it does not stay linear when under power?

 

[miro13car]

I will contrast that with the fact that my wife and I rode to dinner last night, she on her stock bike and me on my Falco equipped bike. I rode my bike with the battery/motor turned off and a short ride to dinner (just under 2 miles each way) at my wife's comfortable riding speed in the 14-15ish mph range (I have a bike computer) I couldn't tell much difference in how my bike rode with the Falco than before. I am used to commuting 3 days a week to work for between 20-34 miles round trip for the past 3 months so I am in much better cycling shape than her.
if I understand it right dude, your FALCO-equipped bike felt almost the same as before installing FALCO on it?
And you rode 1.5miles at 14mph on depowered FALCO-equipped bike?
It can only tell me that FALCO has really low cogging resistance.
I don't have a reason to not believe you

 

[Punx0r]

And you rode 1.5miles at 14mph on depowered FALCO-equipped bike?
It can only tell me that FALCO has really low cogging resistance.
I don't have a reason to not believe you

That is not an accurate summary of what "the_dude" said, nor any of the empirical evidence presented so far.

 

[miro13car]

the quote says it.
not any summary.

 

[Punx0r]

No, it does not.

 

[justin_le]

Updated results.

Hey nice work Bike_on, that's a good job compiling test data and the results are more or less what we'd expect from a direct drive motor, ie. in a similar range of drag as other PM motors of similar size! The 0 RPM data point should be taken off the graph (since there's a /0 in the torque equation, this isn't a value), and an extrapolation to find the actual 0 RPM torque would be can be interesting, as this is the point where you have no eddie current losses and only the hysteresis of the core material. Is it possible to get a few more data points at lower speeds, like getting down to 100 RPM or so, or is it too difficult to maintain a steady wheel velocity at really low throttles?

It looks from here like it would project to about 0.3 N-m of stall static torque to get the wheel turning from a standstill, which if true is definitely a bit lower than most of the motors that tend to be typically 0.4-0.6 Nm at 0RPM. The Crystalyte brushed DC motor is the only DD hub motor I've characterized that came it at 0.3 Nm.

Good news is the Falco pedal force is less than originialy stated. However, it is still stightly more than Bionx at same lower RPMs.

To put it in perspective, at 300 RPM we have
BionX ~ 0.53 Nm
Falco ~ 0.61 Nm
Ultra Motors ~ 0.75 Nm
9C 28XX ~ 0.90 Nm
Clyte H35XX ~ 1.3 Nm

So it fairs pretty will compared to standard chinese hubs, but comperable to other well engineered motors.

Can anyone explain why it does not stay linear when under power?

An engineer from Falco would be best to explain this. Most motors have a drag profile that is pretty linear, where to first order the offset shows the hystersis loss of the core, and the slope shows the eddie current losses which increase with the motor speed. I think what you might be seeing could be an artifact of the controller doing funky stuff in order to achieve these higher rpms but that's just a guess.

 

[hcrider]

Could the slightly higher drag of the Falco vs. the Bionx be the result of a 500w vs. a 350w sized motor? IE; given similar engineering, a more powerful motor would tend to have proportionately more drag?

 

[the_dude]

I will contrast that with the fact that my wife and I rode to dinner last night, she on her stock bike and me on my Falco equipped bike. I rode my bike with the battery/motor turned off and a short ride to dinner (just under 2 miles each way) at my wife's comfortable riding speed in the 14-15ish mph range (I have a bike computer) I couldn't tell much difference in how my bike rode with the Falco than before. I am used to commuting 3 days a week to work for between 20-34 miles round trip for the past 3 months so I am in much better cycling shape than her.

if I understand it right dude, your FALCO-equipped bike felt almost the same as before installing FALCO on it?
And you rode 1.5miles at 14mph on depowered FALCO-equipped bike?
It can only tell me that FALCO has really low cogging resistance.
I don't have a reason to not believe you

It felt really easy to pedal that ride yes. My purely subjective opinion during that ride was that it wasn't significantly different in pedal effort for the Falco equipped version and my previous no motor.

Two days later I did a ride down to the beach and while on the actual beach path I rode with the assist at zero as I needed to stay around 12ish mph. This ride there was noticeable drag. I noticed that the console showed a few bars of regen as I pedaled and I couldn't' get it to stop even if I turned off the battery. I didn't mess with it too much as the drag was fine at those speeds and I was out for fun and fitness. But it does concern me in the worst case scenario of pedaling home from work unassisted. One thing that may of made a difference was that I turned off the battery while at speed so the regen already occurring may have continued to power the controller and keep a link to the console. I will need to experiment with turning off the system at a dead stop and then pedaling.

 

[Punx0r]

I only mention this as a potential warning as I do not know the specifics of your system. Some kits warn that the bike must not be operated with the battery disconnected as it acts as a sink for back EMF from the motor, and the controller can be damaged without it present. Your system may be protected from this, but I would check the instructions if you are uncertain

 

[the_dude]

I only mention this as a potential warning as I do not know the specifics of your system. Some kits warn that the bike must not be operated with the battery disconnected as it acts as a sink for back EMF from the motor, and the controller can be damaged without it present. Your system may be protected from this, but I would check the instructions if you are uncertain

Thanks for the heads up. My Falco kit did not come with a manual or any information about how to use the kit. They have an installation guide available online at their website which also has information bout using the console but I don't recall it saying anything about this. I will avoid doing it in the future though.

 

[justin_le]

Could the slightly higher drag of the Falco vs. the Bionx be the result of a 500w vs. a 350w sized motor? IE; given similar engineering, a more powerful motor would tend to have proportionately more drag?

Most definitely, but you can't really use a manufacturers "power rating" as a way to normalize the motor since power rating is really subjective, and I'd have no problem calling the BionX PL350 a 500 watt motor as well. All else being the same, you should expect a more powerful (wider stator) version of the same motor to have proportionally more drag torque, and if this test was repeated with the 750W or the 250W version we'd see different values. On that token, the ultramotors hub weighs 7.2kg and is possibly a more powerful motor design, so even though its drag torque is higher than Falco it might proportionally be a bit better.

If there was an objective way to quantify the sustainable "torque output" of a hub motor, then the best way to characterize the effectiveness of the motor design would be to divide the drag torque by the output torque. But from a rider's perspective, what you feel is the actual drag torque, and so that's the number that you'd want to use when comparing the effective freewheeling characteristics.

 

[miro13car]

-This does seem to be a very well engineered and quality-built product with an awesomely integrated design, and not piecemeal cheap China junk. That is why I'm interested in it, not because of the misleading marketing fluff.
For those of you who argue that you can get better performance for less... that can be said about every single type of consumer product on the market anywhere. You're coming from a DIY hot-rodding point of view, and there is nothing wrong with that. I'm a hot rodder too, but not every product has to be 100% DIY on-the-cheap super hi-performance awesomeness. As always... Fast, Reliable, Cheap. Pick two. There are also variations on the particular aspects (Efficient, Easy, etc)... but pick two. This one leaves 'cheap' out of the equation, and there's nothing wrong with that as long as it does well at the others. Furthermore, I think that the current ebike paradigm of dirt cheap low quality Chinese products has clouded the minds of much of the community. I don't just mean the products that come regularly DOA that are risky to even buy, I mean everything that carries a moderate risk of it failing within a reasonable service life under normal use. You've gotta admit... The vast majority of all present and past ebike products fit those descriptions perfectly. I'm not exactly rich, but I feel that most ebike parts and kits are laughably inexpensive and these Falco kits are priced very reasonably for anything that holds itself to a reasonable standard. I'm really glad that we're starting to see higher standards being set in many areas.

excellent points, exactly
I am not surprised by results of drag torque also.
Well engineered ebike drive indeed.
I think FALCO went out of their way to please customer.
Providing free access to program software to customer liking is unprecedented.
For example in my Tidal Force ebike case servicing company charges $250 to reprogram software.
my another EPLUS ebike can only be programm/diagnosed by service company,
same for BIONX - only dealer knows all access codes to change setting /for example for PAS sensor/.