Jump to content

GotWay Msuper V3 1600wh specification


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, zlymex said:

Power consumption is very small as I can read the amp from Wheellog, and I can lift the EUC at a relatively constant speed, no fast accelerating, I even de-accelerate during the test. I'll show you my test graph later.

Ok, so if you are not accelerating or slowly decellerating at high speed, your torque is probably very low and you are almost at the faceplant limit. Perhaps there is some logic that can detect that and sounds the 3rd alarm at the power level equal to 80% of the power level which corresponds to the moment the "faceplant" occurs at this high speed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zlymex said:

There is no such speed alarm as 1 beep per second. We get one occasionally because it is an incomplete 2 beeps per second alarm.   There is a 1 beep per second alarm, that is a low battery warning.

Therefore, 1st alam - 2 beeps, 2nd alarm - 3 beeps, 3rd alarm - 5 beeps(continuous). 

Better still, a lift test, at least for 1st and 2nd alarm.

So I'm getting a 2nd alarm when my load is high with a low battery? Yet I've disabled the 1st and 2nd alarms?

According to the Gotway manuals the beeps per alarm is how I wrote them. Alarm one is 1 beep per second.

I don't have my manual in front of me, but here's a link to the older MSuper manual that lists the beeps and alarms: http://www.wheelzworld.com/DATA/images/specs/WheelzWorld MSuper Gotway En.pdf

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

So I'm getting a 2nd alarm when my load is high with a low battery? Yet I've disabled the 1st and 2nd alarms?

According to the Gotway manuals the beeps per alarm is how I wrote them. Alarm one is 1 beep per second.

I don't have my manual in front of me, but here's a link to the older MSuper manual that lists the beeps and alarms: http://www.wheelzworld.com/DATA/images/specs/WheelzWorld MSuper Gotway En.pdf

I believe @zlymex is correct. Just like kingsong, the first alarm is 2 beeps, 2nd is 3 beeps. Even in the specs are the beginning of this thread, it is listed the same way. Low battery alarm is a different kind of alarm.

Edited by Cloud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cloud said:

Ok, so if you are not accelerating or slowly decellerating at high speed, your torque is probably very low and you are almost at the faceplant limit.

There are two meanings for torque, one is the max torque beyond which the faceplant will happen. The second is the torque the motor actually produce, which may be very small or even negative(in the case of down-hill) but the rider is still safe.

The term power also has similar two meanings, one is the max power, the other is the actual power the motor produce, which vary very much(I can show you the power graph later), on which is very difficult for an alarm to base. 

Yes, the max power is probably known and specified for other versions to be >3000W before, but again omitted in the spec above. The 80% of power cannot be base on this 3000W, can they?
V3specCH.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zlymex said:

There are two meanings for torque, one is the max torque beyond which the faceplant will happen. The second is the torque the motor actually produce, which may be very small or even negative(in the case of down-hill) but the rider is still safe.

The term power also has similar two meanings, one is the max power, the other is the actual power the motor produce, which vary very much(I can show you the power graph later), on which is very difficult for an alarm to base. 

Yes, the max power is probably known and specified for other versions to be >3000W before, but again omitted in the spec above. The 80% of power cannot be base on this 3000W, can they?
V3specCH.jpg

@zlymex i agree with you, there is maximum torque and actual current torque. There is also maximum power and current motor power which can vary. 

No, i dont think the 80% is based on the maximum power of 3000W.  Bcause i believe that 3000 is momentary maximum power that the motor can produce. I dont think that the wheel can sustain 3000w over a long period of time.

It doesnt matter what the current consumed / produced motor power is ;. I believe that the "maximum power" Gotway uses to calculate 80% of is equivalent to the maximum Volts x Amperes consumed to provide sustained riding at maximum sustained motor power. In other words, i believe the alarm is at 80% of the wheel's power capacity, at which the faceplant will occur due to lack of torque.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

I don't have my manual in front of me, but here's a link to the older MSuper manual that lists the beeps and alarms: http://www.wheelzworld.com/DATA/images/specs/WheelzWorld MSuper Gotway En.pdf

That spec about alarm was wrong.
Refers to what Jane Mo said: 

However, what Jane Mo said is incomplete(and also the 80% of power is in debate).

The 1 beep alarm(when 1st and 2nd are disabled) may be part of other alarms such as low battery.
OliverH did amend in that thread "extreme low voltage power on,1 beep 1 second,totally 5 beep". And I tested that "extreme low voltage" yesterday to be 55.2V(3.45V per cell).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Cloud said:

Slowing down and making the alarm go away kinda supports the the hypothesis that the alarm is speed related

Easy to check in a very wide slopped parking lot (like the one above the Greek Theater) if you traveled in a large circle at a constant speed. If the alarm kicked in during the up hill higher load quadrants and went away completely in the down hill section then I think you could rule out 'speed'.
You could ride across the slope where your path would be level and then turn up hill to increase the load and turn down to decrease the load managing the question of speed as well as you can.
If I hear Marty (and others) correctly, there is some kind of 'load' alarm, (perhaps at 80%, lol) that is tied to available current.
It is very hard to understand a 'speed related alarm' that goes off at different speeds. That would suggest the alarm is actually measuring something other than speed.
If it does measure speed then the warning is conditional on other parameters, other wise it it would ALWAYS ring at 20km/h or 25km/h - Those other parameters are what drives that particular alarm and the speed is arbitrary.

Edited by Roll Model
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cloud said:

I believe that the "maximum power" Gotway uses to calculate 80% of is equivalent to the maximum Volts x Amperes consumed to provide sustained riding at maximum sustained motor power

That power must be 1500W. 
Most of EUC motors are made in China, and we have specific meaning on what is the rated power of a motor, which is the max sustained output power.

Ok, 80% of 1500W is 1200W. Gotway sound the 3rd alarm at 1200W? I don't think so, because:
1. I often experience large power output of more than 1200W during hill ride, My V2 and V3 never give the 3rd alarm
2. I often rider my V2 beyond the speed of 28kph on slightly declined road, and the 3rd alarm will sound, but the power is very small(less than 500W, measured by Wheelmetrics of esaj).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, zlymex said:

That power must be 1500W. 
Most of EUC motors are made in China, and we have specific meaning on what is the rated power of a motor, which is the max sustained output power.

Ok, 80% of 1500W is 1200W. Gotway sound the 3rd alarm at 1200W? I don't think so, because:
1. I often experience large power output of more than 1200W during hill ride, My V2 and V3 never give the 3rd alarm
2. I often rider my V2 beyond the speed of 28kph on slightly declined road, and the 3rd alarm will sound, but the power is very small(less than 500W, measured by Wheelmetrics of esaj).

I dont think the max sustained power is 1500w either. 1500w is rated or nominal power which is power at which the motor works most efficiently. I think maxumum sustained power is higher than 1500w.

why do you believe that the Chinese call the rated motor power the maximum sustained power?

Edited by Cloud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cloud said:

I dont think the max sustained power is 1500w either. 1500w is rated or nominal power which is power at which the motor works most efficiently. I think maxumum sustained power is higher than 1500w.

 

max sustained power = rated power, that is by definition.
There is a chart showing that the max power is not the point that the motor operate at the max efficiency.
performancecurve01.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, zlymex said:

max sustained power = rated power, that is by definition.
There is a chart showing that the max power is not the point that the motor operate at the max efficiency.
performancecurve01.jpg

They are showing so many parameters on the same graph, i dont think their axis are the same for different curves, so not sure its adequate to compare. also it doesnt say what kind of motor this graph is for.

yes i agree max power is not at the point of max efficiency.

i need to look up rated power, i dont think its maximum sustained...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, we can put aside what the max sustained power is for the moment. But what ever it may be for V3, the 3rd alarm cannot be base on that because it contradict:
1. I often experience large power output of more than 1200W during hill ride, My V2 and V3 never give the 3rd alarm
2. I often rider my V2 beyond the speed of 28kph on slightly declined road, and the 3rd alarm will sound, but the power is very small(less than 500W, measured by Wheelmetrics of esaj).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, zlymex said:

Ok, we can put aside what the max sustained power is for the moment. But what ever it may be for V3, the 3rd alarm cannot be base on that because it contradict:
1. I often experience large power output of more than 1200W during hill ride, My V2 and V3 never give the 3rd alarm
2. I often rider my V2 beyond the speed of 28kph on slightly declined road, and the 3rd alarm will sound, but the power is very small(less than 500W, measured by Wheelmetrics of esaj).

Normally, rated power is P= Nominal voltage x no load current. Nomina voltage is the voltage at which the motor works most efficiently. So rated power cannot be maximum sustained power, because the motor is capable of producing power higher than Nominal voltage x no load current ( because the sustained current can be higher when required)

How high is the maximum sustained power you reguster during the hill ride? If the maximum sustained power is higher than 1500w, the 80% of it will be higher than 1200w

Maybe in the V2 the 3rd alarm was speed based. It is also possible that the 3rd alarm is power based but up to a certain speed. So the internal logic may be that it kicks in either at 80% max power or upon reaching a certain peed, whichever comes first. 

Edited by Cloud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cloud said:

Kudos to Gotway to listening to some of our suggestions and including more specific info ( like the riders weight at which the maximum climbing angle is measured, or speed at which the max range is measured. Gotway is on the right track.

A few things worth noting and also things that id like some clarification on:

1. The reported Safe crusing speed seems to have been reduced from the earlier communicated 40kmh for 820wh/1640wh 67.2V version Msuper3  to 30kmh for 1600wh 84V version if i am reading the specs correctly. Not sure why since the 84v version was slated as having more torque. Perhaps Gotway is tying to be super conservative, which may not be a bad thing for their sake.

2. It would be good to know at which speed the 3rd alarm comes in ( or perhaps it is a floating alarm (80% of max power) depending on the riders weight and conditions?)

3. Cruising range is indicated at 160km for 70kg rider in real life test - i am not sure this is possible with the battery cells indicated - i am 100kg and my KS14 with 820wh gets me 25 mikes max. 1600 would get me 50miles max, and in reality probably less. If i was 0.7 times lighter, id get around 71 miles but not 100 miles. For another reference, a 60kg person i know rides 35miles on 680wh KS14.  1600wh would give him about 82miles. 

I believe Linnea simply meant that if you lift the wheel and tilt it and let it spin free up to the max speed, the cut off will occur approx. 2 seconds after. 

Of course if you lift the wheel and dont tilt it there will be no cut off as the wheel doesnt know uts been lifted.

Cloud you mentioned torque. The question was also in an other thread. To know more about it would be interesting to see the power/ torque curves over rpm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@zlymex, it actually may be much simpker than we think. Perhaps Gotway simply measuers the current  and takes 80% of the max allowable current ( per software limit, or per the fuse rating). The maximum current would be used in most extreme conditions ( faceplant ) or climbing a steep hill, or at torque close to maximum. ( for example, say, 40 A) . Perhaps Gotway simply sounds an alarm at 80% of , say, 40 A, which is 32A.

isnt it ironic that we make all these assumptions, while Gotway is represented on the forum, but its so difficukt to get the exact answer from the source?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cloud said:

@zlymex, it actually may be much simpker than we think. Perhaps Gotway simply measuers the current  and takes 80% of the max allowable current ( per software limit, or per the fuse rating). The maximum current would be used in most extreme conditions ( faceplant ) or climbing a steep hill, or at torque close to maximum. ( for example, say, 40 A) . Perhaps Gotway simply sounds an alarm at 80% of , say, 40 A, which is 32A.

isnt it ironic that we make all these assumptions, while Gotway is represented on the forum, but its so difficukt to get the exact answer from the source?

Gotway is never very responsive here, especially for parameters they did not specify(the 3rd alarm) in the specification, therefore we are talking something of the past. 

The 80% of max current is not the case either, because we get very large current when climb steep slope(which is the thing I'd like the most), but the 3rd alarm never sound in that situation.

I've ridden my V2 for over 6000km in every possible situation. what I can say is that the third alarm sound at 26 to 28.5 in speed.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Cloud said:

 

 it ironic that we make all these assumptions, while Gotway is represented on the forum, but its so difficukt to get the exact answer from the source?

All manufacturer are presented by sales here. Problem is to find an English speaking engineer to be able to get in some in depth talks. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In any case, the right way for maximum safety should probably be to sound the alarm at a certain percentage of the maximum torque the motor is capable of producing at the current speed. 

Edited by Cloud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ideally alarm should be base on parameters both well known and slow to change in time so that the warning is given before the rider has time to respond. Speed is the best candidates.

On the other hand, power, current and torque are all less known, and may change rapidly. One will get the idea if look at the curve of power and current. In physical term, speed cannot be changed instantly, but power, current and torque can. If the alarm is based on these parameters, either there is risk of false alarm, or the alarm is so quick before something bad happen, which lost the meaning of alarm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, zlymex said:

Ideally alarm should be base on parameters both well known and slow to change in time so that the warning is given before the rider has time to respond. Speed is the best candidates.

On the other hand, power, current and torque are all less known, and may change rapidly. One will get the idea if look at the curve of power and current. In physical term, speed cannot be changed instantly, but power, current and torque can. If the alarm is based on these parameters, either there is risk of false alarm, or the alarm is so quick before something bad happen, which lost the meaning of alarm.

Yes that true, but for different rider weight the max safe speed will be different. So if you set the alarm correctly for a heavier rider, it will come in too early for a lighter rider and will be annoying. And if you set it right for the light rider, the heavier rider may faceplant by the time the alarm sounds.

what do you mean power, current and torque are less known? Software can calculate these parameters just as easily as speed. They are less obvious to the rider, but the rider doesnt have to know them.

yes soeed cannot change instantly and torque can. You are right, there coukd be a false alarm, but a momentary false alarm is not such a big problem. It will sound for a split second and will stop. 

I think ideally the alarm shoukd be a combination of speed and percentage of maximum torque for the speed. So it should be a percent of the max. Possible torque at the current speed and also a certain speed level regardless of the torque (whichever comes first).  In my opinion this woukd be the safest way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a formula that takes into account speed, acceleration and current should be used along with battery level and condition to calculate when an alarm should be triggered rather than examining single factors alone.  For instance, climbing a steep grade would draw a high current demand while the speed is noticeably low with low associated acceleration.  

Going down a hill the current draw would be dropping and going negative while speed increases. If acceleration is too great than the wheel can keep up with, tiltback /alarms should  be tiggered right away while there is some reserve speed available for tiltback.

Riding against a strong headwind would be similar to the hill climb.  By analysing the demand of current in relation to speed and acceleration rider weight would automatically be factored in by taking in account rate of current rise perhaps.  A lighter rider would not draw as much current as quickly as a heavier rider over the same path.

I think we need a fuzzy logic controller board or just smarter programming!?  There's probably some smart way to calculate load weight by analyzing speed and current demand relationships while taking into account gyro tilt and accelerometer readings?

I wonder how the Ninebot does it.  It's a very very safe wheel with beeps that only occur when needed plus easily detectable tiltbacks to slow rider speed down (1.2.5 is annoying safe - the tilt won't diminish until you slow considerably down!).  I've gone up moderate hills and tested a little extra push lean forwards and it beeps right away scolding me so I stop doing that.

If the same logc programming was applied to a faster wheel it would probably eliminate a lot of issues.

EDIT:. Ooh I am a full members plus!  I wonder what that means? :D

EDIT 2: I think the Ninebot One keeps a 1/3 reserve speed to keep the rider safe.  That is, the terminal speed of failure with an average rider weight is around 30 kph on a flat surface say so they limit around the safe top speed around the 20 kph mark giving 10 kph roughly in spare speed / power to accommodate for overspeeds, fast descents, etc so it can provide tilltback.  Maybe these other wheels should follow suit with the thirds rule.  If a Gotway can go 60 kph, it should start tilting back at 40 kph.  If it can only go up to 48 kph before failure, divide by 3 so it should tiltback at 32-34 kph.  Maybe with the more powerful wheels that 1/3 ratio can be diminished to maybe 1/4?  Would that work better? So maybe at 36 kph tiltback should start giving 12 kph safety margin.  If these high speed Gotways had mandatory tiltback like a Ninebot at 36 kph I bet we wouldn't see some of the crashes posted up.  Ninebot doesn't even give an option to adjust the tiltback since it's there to ensure rider safety.

Edited by HunkaHunkaBurningLove
Brain muddy fixed some sentences only slept 2.5 hours
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cloud said:

what do you mean power, current and torque are less known?

Let me put it this way. If there is a regulation saying "People riding an EUC at over 30kph will get fined of $100", that's simple and no misunderstanding. However, if the regulation says "People riding an EUC at over 80% of power will get fined of $100", then that will be chaos, people will ask all sorts of questions such as what is power? Is that the rated power of the motor? or the max continuous power? or the power at the highest efficiency? How can I know my power? Is there a power meter on the app? Will the power meter of the police different than mine?
That's what I mean by less unknown.

If you look at the speed-torque curve, there is a strict relationship between the two, and limiting speed is effectively take the torque into account. Therefore, there is no need to further add an 'torque alarm' any more, or take the torque into account again.

As for the rider's weight, ideally every warning should be the same, that is to say, not only the speed warning should be weight dependent, but torque warning and power warning should consider weight as well, if such warnings do exist. However, detection of rider's weight is difficult, it thus depends on the rider who decide the safety margin. Gotway already implement user definable tilt speed, for which people can choose according to the weight. I also think the 3rd warning should be user definable too as mik3 has already said. 

Here is one of my lift test result, recorded by WheelLog by JumpMaster.
V3LiftTest.gif

Some points can be drawn from the chart and the test:
1. I can lift the wheel(V3) as long as I like, if I'm not tired.
2. I can control the speed smoothly
3. The current is not very large, about 2A, and is not very much speed related at no load.
4. The power is not very large too, at about 140 Watts, and is not very much speed related at no load.
5. The 3rd alarm(5 beeps per second, or continuous) sound at 44 kph.
6. There must be a negative current(the battery was charged) when I slow down, but the WheelLog did not show that, maybe Gotway did not provide the sign.
7. I don't know the accuracy of the current, I'll test it later. Gotway exaggerate the current by 80% in V2, that is, it show 18A for 10A.
8. I have tested that the voltage obtained are very accurate.
9. The speed is relatively accurate too, with only 2% exaggeration. V2 exaggerate 8% by my test.
10. There is no current or power in Gotway's app, I hope the coming version has.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just having seen until now the "normal" torque over speed graphs like

motorcurve.gif?w=470

your speed over torque graph 

6 hours ago, zlymex said:


performancecurve01.jpg

messed up my mind quite a bit ;)

It took some time, to imagine the test setup to obtain this. Imho one spins up the motor to its max speed==no-load speed, or better no-external-load-speed, since some initial no load current~no-load torque is present to overcome the internal motor-load (friction, etc) and then applies an increasing load (increase the needed torque) and measure/compute the resulting speed of the motor up to the stall torque...

But both graphs show the absolute limits of an motor in regard of speed/torque values. Like already mentioned there are quite some more limiting factors as the overheating of the coil windings and also the capabilities of the controlling circuit.

Regarding the coil windings there seems to be a very fast reacting current limit implemented in the firmware (http://forum.electricunicycle.org/topic/5499-motor-slippage-on-acm-and-msuper-v3/?do=findComment&comment=65201). But this 120A exceed the maximum allowed package limitation current of normaly 75A. (Or did they switch to mosfets to other packaging as the by now "normal" To-220?)

For the mosfets the limits are defined by the current, too. Dissipated power for the conducting state is I²*Rds on. So it would make sense to implement the "mosfet/overheat protection" by current limiting, too. But this could be allowed to step in "much slower" than the 120A limit.

For Mosfets there is also a second component important - the switching losses. If one assumes (for simplicity but with still sufficient accuracy for a first estimate) the switching slopes as linear one comes to a power dissipation while switching of P=t switch * U battery / 2 * I / 2. Here we have a term proportional to the provided power by the battery (P=U*I) ~ the power used by the motor to drive the wheel. So some kind of real power limit could/should be also implemented in firmware.

These current/power limits seem to be _fixed_ values implemented in the firmware, since in the discussion in http://forum.electricunicycle.org/topic/5541-msuper-v3-top-speed-crash-wrecked-shell/ came imho to the "best guess" conclusion that the cut-off was due to the motherboard reaching a certain max temperature. This would/could have been prevented by a dynamic current/power limiting implemented in firmware.

The only real high/maximum load measurement figures from wheels we have by now are the dyno rig graph 

 

141d0jh.jpeg

from http://electrotransport.ru/ussr/index.php?topic=40242.msg929786#msg929786 (thanks again for the link @Raptor) Also the methodology/implementation of this test can be discussed/further refined it looks quite sane/fine to me. Anyway it is the first/only and best figure of such an max power/torque test we have. So after much writing my conclusion/best guess would be that this 3,2 HP ~2400 kW of max power are the max values limited by the firmware (Maybe with a dyno rig more adequate for EUCs the obtainable power could be a bit higher?) and the 3rd Alarm == 80% power alarm could be triggered in this dyno rig test for example at around 15 km/h (0,8*3,2HP=2,56HP~1,9kW). Additionaly this 3rd Alarm should/could also be triggered at some higher fixed speed, since the available motor power in this range could already be below this. The "ripples" in this dyno rig graph could be an indication, that this power limiting is kicking in "quite slowly and softly", so that short peaks for balancing/etc are possible and not trigger "continous" alarms while "normal" riding...

 

 

Edited by Chriull
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...