FLIPSKY new 20s 100A tiny controller (vesc based)

[MorbidlyObeseKoala]

So the thinking is it's likely low risk to run without the antispark if you have another switch or circuit breaker between your vesc and battery?

Cools fast because it has an improved heat sink

Also @Chito, are you saying this controller has an improved heat sink built in or you improved the heatsink yourself? Interested to hear how you improved it if that was what you are saying.

 

[Chito]

I use the controller without the box and I changed the aluminum block of the mosfets for a copper one

 

[SlowCo]

I use the controller without the box and I changed the aluminum block of the mosfets for a copper one

Why?

 

[oded]

So, any real life experience with this controller in a working rig?

 

[Chito]

I use the controller without the box and I changed the aluminum block of the mosfets for a copper one

Why?

to better dissipate the heat, since I am using it at maximum power

 

[Ianhill]

I use the controller without the box and I changed the aluminum block of the mosfets for a copper one

Why?

to better dissipate the heat, since I am using it at maximum power

Watch out for galvanic corrosion on the back of the fets from 2 dissimilar metals and thermal paste making a crude capacitor

I see flipsky are offering a micro bms upto 24s.

Theres lots of products buts its a bit disjointed theres no clear path of a group of items that work together as such some of the controllers, motors, and now bms seem they are developed singularly.

The new bms would work a treat on a electric scooter, the potential to have stinkingly big filthy power on a micro scale is soon coming to fruition, a scooter that can clock very high speeds the concorde of its field.

 

[jaykup]

Has anybody managed to update firmware? I'm really curious if it works or if there really is something stopping this (other than the appropriate cable not being outside)

Also said that firmware is 5.2 & cannot be updated.

Got mine yesterday. I didn't find the ST interface exposed so if the existing firmware doesn't support downloading then some mods will be required.

I'm not even sure how they would stop firmware updates. There's a usb going to the VESC chip... It's going to be updateable. If they try to eliminate that in firmware they'll quickly arouse the wrath of Ben and Frank.

I don't believe Flipsky did anything special to block firmware updates, but they refuse to release the source code for the firmware, so there wasn't anything to update it with.

I wrote hardware config files for it so the firmware can now be compiled. I compiled a few versions and loaded it over USB.

Write up here: https://forum.esk8.news/t/how-to-update-firmware-on-the-flipsky-75100-foc-esc/61819

 

[afzal]

I wrote hardware config files for it so the firmware can now be compiled and updated. You can try thought the USB port, but I was only able to do it through an ST-LINK attached to the SWD port.

Write up here: https://forum.esk8.news/t/how-to-update-firmware-on-the-flipsky-75100-foc-esc/61819

Thanks!

How was the unmodified firmware that ships with it obtained ?, reading the flash via SWD ?

 

[mxlemming]

Has anybody managed to update firmware? I'm really curious if it works or if there really is something stopping this (other than the appropriate cable not being outside)

Also said that firmware is 5.2 & cannot be updated.

Got mine yesterday. I didn't find the ST interface exposed so if the existing firmware doesn't support downloading then some mods will be required.

I'm not even sure how they would stop firmware updates. There's a usb going to the VESC chip... It's going to be updateable. If they try to eliminate that in firmware they'll quickly arouse the wrath of Ben and Frank.

I don't believe Flipsky did anything special to block firmware updates, but they refuse to release the source code for the firmware, so there wasn't anything to update it with.

I wrote hardware config files for it so the firmware can now be compiled and updated. You can try thought the USB port, but I was only able to do it through an ST-LINK attached to the SWD port.

Write up here: https://forum.esk8.news/t/how-to-update-firmware-on-the-flipsky-75100-foc-esc/61819

Have you examined the binary code from the flipsky device? Have they added anything different to what you can compile?

It seems really strange to me that they're refusing to release the code, it's not like there's any relevant IP in there and it's not like it's more than a few hour job to work out the header files.

I'm wondering if they'd done things to stop people boosting the limits like we all do, or to improve some specific stability things for ebike motors or ...

 

[jaykup]

How was the unmodified firmware that ships with it obtained ?, reading the flash via SWD ?

Yes, I connected using the ST-LINK utility and saved the binary firmware when I first got the ESC. I was able to switch back and forth many times while testing temperatures, voltages, etc.

Have you examined the binary code from the flipsky device? Have they added anything different to what you can compile?

I haven't, but both binaries are posted so they could be compared by someone with expertise. I don't know what I'd be looking for.

They claim that this device only supports FOC, but BLDC is not disabled in their firmware. It works once you are moving, but cogs quite a bit at take-off even with sensors. I would have expected their custom firmware to disable it, but since they didn't, maybe they haven't modified anything but the hardware configs.

It seems really strange to me that they're refusing to release the code, it's not like there's any relevant IP in there and it's not like it's more than a few hour job to work out the header files.

Exactly. It looks like this device is meant to compete with other ebike black box controllers, so they probably want to have this device be the same way? That or they just don't support open source projects.

Here is what Flipsky said when I emailed asking if they could provide the source code

This esc doesn't support firmware update. We have set it before shipping out. Our engineers have done some changes based on vesc, not opening source. Sorry.

I'm wondering if they'd done things to stop people boosting the limits like we all do

Want to hear something funny? Their firmware's max voltage limit is set to 120v! The caps, fets and other chips are only 100v max... so if they allow people to set max voltage as high as 120v, I don't believe they are limiting firmware to try to protect the device.

 

[afzal]

Have you examined the binary code from the flipsky device? Have they added anything different to what you can compile?

I haven't, but both binaries are posted so they could be compared by someone with expertise. I don't know what I'd be looking for.

Even if the same source is used, it is most likely (not necessarily always) that binary will differ unless it is the exact same compiler as the one used by them.

 

[afzal]

jaykup wrote

I think loading firmware can be done without using the SWD port at all, but I’ve flashed so many times someone else with a stock unit will need to confirm it.

Perfect sir, I confirm it. On stock unit, after flashing bootloader, firmware could be updated via USB, no need to open the case, no need of SWD.

Though I did open the unit to save existing firmware via SWD, no flash write was done via SWD.

I was initially misled by linker script in VESC,

flash : org = 0x08000000, len = 16k
flash2 : org = 0x0800C000, len = 393216 - 16        /* NEW_APP_MAX_SIZE - CRC_INFO */
        crcinfo : org = 0x0805FFF0, len = 8             /* CRC info */

I thought binary is from 0x800C000 for a size 393208 and original binary in my unit was not matching yours, when binary was taken from 0x8000000, it was fine

 

[jaykup]

Perfect sir, I confirm it. On stock unit, after flashing bootloader, firmware could be updated via USB

Awesome! Let me know if you see any strange performance. We have snow here with temps below 0C so I haven't done much road testing. One setting in the hardware config that I'm not certain about is the CURRENT_AMP_GAIN setting. I used 20 as that's what a lot of other hardware versions use, but some use 10 so I don't know if that's correct. I did notice slightly higher motor resistance readings with my firmware compared to the stock firmware when measuring the motor with the VESC tool.

It looks like 0x0800C000 is the start of the firmware only, while 0x08000000 is the firmware + user settings. I pulled 0x08000000, glad to see it matched yours.

 

[drdrs]

I think the current amp gain is determined by the part number on the amp. The FSESC 7550 uses the INA240A1 and the data sheet says 20 V/V.

I didn't see a part on the photos on esk8 news with a part number that matched a current amp.

 

[jaykup]

Ahh that makes sense. I snapped a picture of the current sense chip this morning. It appears to say 18JD

 

[drdrs]

alldatasheet says that 18JD marking corresponds to the TI INA181 family of current sense amplifiers. According to the datasheet, the chip comes in 20, 50, 100, and 200 V/V gains. I couldn't determine if the marking tells you which chip in the family it is.

 

[b264]

It seems really strange to me that they're refusing to release the code, it's not like there's any relevant IP in there and it's not like it's more than a few hour job to work out the header files.

It's beyond strange, it's actually ILLEGAL and it's theft.

 

[jaykup]

alldatasheet says that 18JD marking corresponds to the TI INA181 family of current sense amplifiers. According to the datasheet, the chip comes in 20, 50, 100, and 200 V/V gains. I couldn't determine if the marking tells you which chip in the family it is.

Thanks for the lead. It looks like TI's datasheet says 18JD corresponds to INA181A1IDBVR/INA181A1IDBVT, and mouser says 20 V/V so I think we are good with the original setting.

https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ina181.pdf
https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Texas-Instruments/INA181A1IDBVR?qs=5aG0NVq1C4wLgDhUNMFt2A%3D%3D

 

[mxlemming]

It seems really strange to me that they're refusing to release the code, it's not like there's any relevant IP in there and it's not like it's more than a few hour job to work out the header files.

It's beyond strange, it's actually ILLEGAL and it's theft.

You sound like fun at a party.

 

[b264]

It seems really strange to me that they're refusing to release the code, it's not like there's any relevant IP in there and it's not like it's more than a few hour job to work out the header files.

It's beyond strange, it's actually ILLEGAL and it's theft.

You sound like fun at a party.

You mean the party that is you having all this cool VESC stuff that's 100% made possible by folks adhering to copyright laws? The kind of fun allowing YOU to build cool electric vehicles? It's all because of the laws, buddy. This helps YOU if they follow the law, not some foreign abstract concept that has no real world benefits.

You should really be advocating for yourself.

Flipsky wouldn't even be building this at all --- if other people hadn't followed the law before them. And, you wouldn't be able to buy it.

When you realize that the person they're stealing from is actually the community and you personally, it starts to become clear why the copyleft license is actually so good. But crime is crime, and in this case, Flipsky is the criminal.

 

[john61ct]

I wholeheartedly agree, for-profit ventures that use FOSS project code violating the licensing should be shut down and its owners heavily fined if not jailed.

No matter how cheap and useful their products.

Thanks for educating us about this case.

 

[mxlemming]

It seems really strange to me that they're refusing to release the code, it's not like there's any relevant IP in there and it's not like it's more than a few hour job to work out the header files.

It's beyond strange, it's actually ILLEGAL and it's theft.

You sound like fun at a party.

You mean the party that is you having all this cool VESC stuff that's 100% made possible by folks adhering to copyright laws? The kind of fun allowing YOU to build cool electric vehicles? It's all because of the laws, buddy. This helps YOU if they follow the law, not some foreign abstract concept that has no real world benefits.

You should really be advocating for yourself.

Flipsky wouldn't even be building this at all --- if other people hadn't followed the law before them. And, you wouldn't be able to buy it.

When you realize that the person they're stealing from is actually the community and you personally, it starts to become clear why the copyleft license is actually so good. But crime is crime, and in this case, Flipsky is the criminal.

I've written code and released it and designs and released them, I don't ride vesc, I ride my own code. All my stuff is released under BSD 3 clause. So no I don't rely on the vesc party.

Meanwhile there's good reason to stop people modifying the code onboard like... It lets people trivially up the current to 2, 3, 10x the design intent and a pile of warranty and potentially safety claims ensues.

Like everyone in this thread is already trying to do.

 

[b264]

It's beyond strange, it's actually ILLEGAL and it's theft.

You sound like fun at a party.

You mean the party that is you having all this cool VESC stuff that's 100% made possible by folks adhering to copyright laws? The kind of fun allowing YOU to build cool electric vehicles? It's all because of the laws, buddy. This helps YOU if they follow the law, not some foreign abstract concept that has no real world benefits.

You should really be advocating for yourself.

Flipsky wouldn't even be building this at all --- if other people hadn't followed the law before them. And, you wouldn't be able to buy it.

When you realize that the person they're stealing from is actually the community and you personally, it starts to become clear why the copyleft license is actually so good. But crime is crime, and in this case, Flipsky is the criminal.

I've written code and released it and designs and released them, I don't ride vesc, I ride my own code. All my stuff is released under BSD 3 clause. So no I don't rely on the vesc party.

Meanwhile there's good reason to stop people modifying the code onboard like... It lets people trivially up the current to 2, 3, 10x the design intent and a pile of warranty and potentially safety claims ensues.

Like everyone in this thread is already trying to do.

Bruh, if you have anything other than very minimal coding experience, then you know that the problem here isn't them modifying the code.

It's them modifying the code and refusing -- as legally obligated to -- to release their modified source code.

This is against the copyright law and revokes their legal permission to use the code in the first place, making it theft.

 

[john61ct]

Yes but as with all laws and rights

they may as well not exist if there's no one with power - lawyers guns and money - to defend / enforce them

 

[Bucket Residence]

Hey party people, does anyone here know if this controller is able to run a led headlight? I have an led that can handle 12-72v. Or do i need any additional hardware to be able to run it, like a dedicated led controller?