TSDZ2 OSF for all displays, VLCD5-VLCD6-XH18, LCD3, 860C-850C-SW102.

[James Broadhurst]

No After i re-flashed 20-1b the temp are retourned normal

If you’re using an LM35 in TO92 package I had a similar problem after almost a year and it was one or other of the pins making an electrical contact with the motor case.

 

[w0utje]

No After i re-flashed 20-1b the temp are retourned normal

If you’re using an LM35 in TO92 package I had a similar problem after almost a year and it was one or other of the pins making an electrical contact with the motor case.

He flashed back and then temps where down again.

 

[Elinx]

No After i re-flashed 20-1b the temp are retourned normal

Have you measured the power with an external Power meter too or only the temperature?
I ask because I understand (see above) the calculated powerlevels with LCD3 are different for both versions.
If you had a limit of 380W on the older 20beta1 LCD3 version, it should be 4/5*380=304W with latest v20.1C for LCD3.
If you had a limit of 380W too with the latest version than is this compared with older version 475W.
With a relative high cadence (>80) uphill, the fieldweakening takes a lot of that power.
With relative low cadence (<30) the boost does this.

 

[andrea_104kg]

no only with the wattmeter of lcd03. But it's not this the problem, the speed was the same, 7kmh. It is enough that someone with a thermometer faces a climb of a couple of km, perhaps trying the various levels of the engine. Until then the rest are just speculations.
I did the post to save your engines, not mine, my invitation is simply to check the temperature, especially for those who use the bike uphill or do mtb
If the results are very different from mine then I will have to investigate my configuration ...
And if you don't want to do anything, well I don't know what to tell you but good luck.

 

[mbrusa]

ok, i did the comparison. Ascent 2.1 km, max 17% divided into 2 parts, 200mt 15%, 500mt 3-4%, the rest gradually rises up to 17%.
Engine start at 37 °. No limits but without forcing too much by staying around 550w, speed 7kmh.
With the new software 93.8 °
I got home it was impossible to keep my hand on the side cover (pads transmit heat).
I have decided to reschedule 20.1b.
Same climb, same speed and watt, reached the top 67 ° !! 26 degrees less, I'm sorry but the new version is not for me.

I see that you only have certainties, you have no doubt that this anomalous heating may also have other causes.
Not even in the face of the evidence that the comparison was not made under the same conditions.
Taking a power of 550W rather than 440W as a reference will change something. Or not?
Then there is another important aspect, you wrote "no limits" with reference to the power, but the current always has a limit.
At the same value, with 20.1C it is equivalent to having set it 20% more. Does it seem to you that the conditions are the same?
A clarification to avoid confusion, 20.1A and 20.1B are my previous versions for stock displays, the one for LCD3, with different current / power calculation, is 20 beta 1.

 

[ilu]

I'm glad that you guys have warned about the heating tendency, whatever may the reason be. I've been using stock fw this winter, and I ditched the temp sensor because before with v.1.0.0 the motor never got above 40C. I like to have a throttle mainly for some situations where pedal strikes are a concern or I need to start from a standstill in a difficult spot. I do want to try this new version to get finer tuning of assistance, so it's good to know that at least first it's safer to use the temp sensor to see how the motor heats in my case.

 

[casainho]

I'm glad that you guys have warned about the heating tendency, whatever may the reason be. I've been using stock fw this winter, and I ditched the temp sensor because before with v.1.0.0 the motor never got above 40C. I like to have a throttle mainly for some situations where pedal strikes are a concern or I need to start from a standstill in a difficult spot. I do want to try this new version to get finer tuning of assistance, so it's good to know that at least first it's safer to use the temp sensor to see how the motor heats in my case.

The original firmware also burns the motor and has not temperature sensor protection. Our OpenSource firmware push further the motor, giving higher motor speed / higher pedal cadence, customized motor current and battery current, but to have all that, the motor can heat more BUT is up to the user to do a more conservative configuration of the values if want an almost maintenance free motor -- here are pictures of the motor I did burn with original firmware:

More info: https://github.com/OpenSourceEBike/TSDZ2_wiki/wiki/TSDZ2-motor-demagnetized-due-to-overheating

 

[dameri]

I'm glad that you guys have warned about the heating tendency, whatever may the reason be. I've been using stock fw this winter, and I ditched the temp sensor because before with v.1.0.0 the motor never got above 40C. I like to have a throttle mainly for some situations where pedal strikes are a concern or I need to start from a standstill in a difficult spot. I do want to try this new version to get finer tuning of assistance, so it's good to know that at least first it's safer to use the temp sensor to see how the motor heats in my case.

Mbrusas v20.1C version is very good for these situations. For 860C display there was not possibilities for it before.

 

[andrea_104kg]

The version with which I made the comparison is the beta1.
I simply kept the new version for 15 days during which I saw the temperature rise but did not give it importance. Then I did some tests, same climbs, same watts, same ratios and speed. I put back the beta1 version and I get 27 ° less. Stop.
I see everyone scrambling to find an error in my setup without doing significant temperature tests on their own. I think, within the limits of my abilities, to have done them, as I have said several times I could have been wrong but I shouldn't have warned?
If you keep looking for errors in my setup without checking yours, then don't complain if you have problems in the summer. I have already written a long post, to make it clear that I know the temperature dynamics very well, I cannot do more, I am not angry with anyone, least of all with mbrusa and with the other software developers whom I thank.

 

[Waynemarlow]

If you had a limit of 380W on the older 20beta1 LCD3 version, it should be 4/5*380=304W with latest v20.1C for LCD3.
If you had a limit of 380W too with the latest version than is this compared with older version 475W.

Mbrusa / Elinx on the latest version are you saying the displayed motor Watts is incorrect and will be 5/4 times the displayed Watts ?

 

[Waynemarlow]

no only with the wattmeter of lcd03. But it's not this the problem, the speed was the same, 7kmh.

Andrea, you have a cadence display on the LCD3, can you check please on what cadence you are using as there are motor speeds where the Field Weakening begins to take effect. It would be good to know at what rpm definatively you are operating in.

Also be a little aware that using the same climb, but not on the same days for testing can have huge impacts on motors efficency and power useage from environmental changes such as a very slight head wind, temperatures or even tyre pressures / change of tyre, even things like your weight and what your wearing will make significant differences. All testing should be within as close a period of time as possible with no other changes to the bike other than firmware.

But can you please confirm what cadence you are using ?
Thanks.

 

[andrea_104kg]

I did the tests in the same afternoon, with the same bike. I have no interest in doing it because the difference I found is not 5 ° but a huge difference, 93 ° against 67 degrees ... too much for the same test the same afternoon with the same bike. Unfortunately putting the software back on both the lcd03 and the engine, doing the tests, putting another software back and running the tests again is quite demanding for me, and I don't think that "details" make the difference. Moreover I know the speed, 7kmh and the ratios, 34/42 with which I did the tests and considering the 26 'wheels you could also calculate the cadence ...
but I repeat, the difference is so great that it makes the bike unusable for me. I live in the hills and the climbs are normal, I can't think of having an engine that reaches 93 ° in 2km. Nor can I begin to reduce parameters, as the software that already works exists, it makes no sense to remove from the new one, make a great effort and then get the same thing as the previous one. I would like to have feedback from others who have the software and live in areas with climbs, yes ... also to see if I have done something wrong ... but so if I am the only one with these problems it makes no sense ..

 

[Elinx]

, speed, 7kmh and the ratios, 34/42 with which I did the tests and considering the 26 'wheels you could also calculate the cadence ...

.. I repeat, the difference is so great that it makes the bike unusable for me. I live in the hills and the climbs are normal, .....

The average cadence is 47 rpm
Offcourse it isn't usable that way for you, but we want to know which cause this and is prevention possible without powerloose.
Nobody wants uncontrolled heat and a burned motor as Casainho illustrated.
That is why we try to see the differences with your comparision of the two OSF versions.
The difference that is startup boost and fieldweakening are responsable for more power use in the latest version
Also the powercalculation is different in the two versions for LCD3. With the same limit there 20% more power use possible
Power limits, Startup Boost are adjustable, but fieldweakening isn't.
So the question is.... could fieldweakening be active with 47 rpm cadence

 

[casainho]

, speed, 7kmh and the ratios, 34/42 with which I did the tests and considering the 26 'wheels you could also calculate the cadence ...

.. I repeat, the difference is so great that it makes the bike unusable for me. I live in the hills and the climbs are normal, .....

The average cadence is 47 rpmwielvssnelheid.jpg
Offcourse it isn't usable that way for you, but we want to know which cause this and is prevention possible without powerloose.
Nobody wants uncontrolled heat and a burned motor as Casainho illustrated.
That is why we try to see the differences with your comparision of the two OSF versions.
The difference that is startup boost and fieldweakening are responsable for more power use in the latest version
Also the powercalculation is different in the two versions for LCD3. With the same limit there 20% more power use possible
Power limits, Startup Boost are adjustable, but fieldweakening isn't.
So the question is.... could fieldweakening be active with 47 rpm cadence

In my version of firmware I made Field Weakening as a configuration that can be enable / disabled (other than the Power limits, Startup Boost, etc), so anyone that wants the best battery range or less motor heat, can quick disable it while riding, using the configurations on the display. Much more advanced than the original firmware!!!

 

[Waynemarlow]

47rpm doesn’t sound right, that’s a really low grinding cadence for most people, is the Boost still in place and operating at that point ?

 

[Elinx]

.....
Mbrusa / Elinx on the latest version are you saying the displayed motor Watts is incorrect and will be 5/4 times the displayed Watts ?

Yes/No

Yes,Only for the two LCD3 versions there is a difference with the calculated power/current. This is confirmed by mspider65 on the italian forum.

No, this is not incorrect, but the older OSF v0.20beta from Buba used another formula. That is why you can't use the same power limits in both versions.

47rpm doesn’t sound right, that’s a really low grinding cadence for most people, is the Boost still in place and operating at that point ?

This average cadence is calculated with the values given by andrea_104kg.
I have the link to the (dutch) calculator added

If you have default settings (250/25) for startup boost, 47 rpm is almost zero boost

 

[Waynemarlow]

Yes,Only for the two LCD3 versions there is a difference with the calculated power/current. This is confirmed by mspider65 on the italian forum.

No, this is not incorrect, but the older OSF v0.20beta from Buba used another formula. That is why you can't use the same power limits in both versions.

Ok I’m a little confused here with power limits. If we set say 18 amps max battery ( in my case 52 volts x 18 amps = 936 W ) but only 600W motor limit, what will the max motor Watts be ?

 

[Elinx]

.... If we set say 18 amps max battery.... 600W motor limit, what will the max motor Watts be ?

Only with LCD3 for the same max. motorstrenght in both versions:
18A limit 0.20beta1 must be 14.4A limit for 0.20.1C
600W limit 0.20beta1 must be 480W limit for 0.20.1C

 

[Waynemarlow]

Sorry still a little confused.

Are you saying that at 480W on V20.1C the power at the crank will be the same as 600W on the V20 beta ?

 

[Elinx]

[....
In my version of firmware I made Field Weakening as a configuration that can be enable / disabled ....

I don't know the difference between your version and mspider65 version v7 for fieldweakening.
mbrusa had tried and compared both versions for the activation of fieldweakening. There is a difference, but it depends of the user which he prefers.
Fieldweakening consumes more power if active in both cases, but I don't know how much and when if I pedal.
Only batterydrain and heat is a sign. With coolingmods and a temperaturesensor you can control the heat a bit.
But if this is sufficient enough is the question. If you motor throttle down going uphill, that won't be fun.
Switching it off is possible, but in that case you miss the benefits of it too.
Maybe that overvoltage (not overpower) the tsdz2 could be a better choice for a lower current with same power and less heat.

 

[Elinx]

....Are you saying that at 480W on V20.1C the power at the crank will be the same as 600W on the V20 beta ?

yes,
if you keep the old 600W limit with lcd3, you will produce more motorstrenght and/or heat

 

[casainho]

Ok I’m a little confused here with power limits. If we set say 18 amps max battery ( in my case 52 volts x 18 amps = 936 W ) but only 600W motor limit, what will the max motor Watts be ?

Will then always be max of 600W. Motor power is equal to the battery power.

And if you set max of battery current of 5 amps and your battery have 50V, motor max power will be 250W even if you set motor max power to be 600W.

 

[andrea_104kg]

47 rpm cadenceAT 7KMH it's impossible!
7km=7000 mt
diameter 26' wheel whit 2,4' tire approximate 2100mm
2100mm=2,1mt
7000/2.1=3333,33 revolutions per hour
3333,33/60 (minutes per hour)= 55,55 revolutions per minute of the wheel
bike sprockets 42 post/34 ant= 1.24
since we think backwards we need to multiply the revolutions of the wheel to obtain the cadence
55,55 * 1.24= 68,68 CADENCE

 

[Elinx]

....42 post...
... 68,68 CADENCE

I see, I assumed the 42t sprocket was the standard Tsdz2 front chainwheel,
With your calculation it is the rear sprocket and you mounted a smaller 32t frontgear.

 

[Danger_Toast]

Hey guys, just did the switch over from cashino's 1.0 and having a bit of trouble finding where I'm losing performance in the menu as there are fewer options.

I have a tsdz2 with 42t on the front, 7 speed on the back (i only use 3 of them).
My battery is 48w 14.5 ah

I've tooled around in power/hybrid/and torque modes, and I've noticed I'm not getting any motor assist past 240, and that it stops all together past 80 cadence (I thought .20 had the higher cadence option).

My motor settings are:

MV:48V
Power max: 500 (I tried 700 too, assuming it was saying max of human+motor but no change)
Acceleration: 35
Min ADC step: 1

Battery:
Max current: 14
low cut: 42
resistance 300