New Inmotion V10 / V10F

[quixfz]

9 hours ago, Glitched said:

So you're telling me there's no difference between the v8 board and v10f's, except for an additional bluetooth speaker??

not quite. there could still be differences on the pcb, even if they look similar. they could use better spec'd/quality components (less resitance mosfets, better drivers, less ESR caps, more/bigger caps, etc.)

but it could also be the absolutely same board with same components. if they are advertising some new features, it could be also done in software. 

[Zeno74]

1 hour ago, US69 said:

Another easy Explanation:

The CPU does technicall Nothing else as trying to have the pedals Always in horizontal.

When the gyro measures a leaning of the pedal(pressure), the CPU pushes more power into the Motor, to counter the leaning...so you lean Forward for example...and as hefty you do that, the faster the Wheel accelerates and uses power...

I know what a gyro is, it's a device with a double function, it can be used only as a sensor, so with almost 0 power consumption and it gives you a feedback on the position, without being affected by the inertia forces, the bigger brother on the other hand can also be used to stabilise things, so other than giving you the feedback of the position it can also actively influence the stabilisation of the object where it's mounted. (of course the bigger the angular momentum, the better is the stabilisation, here is my assumption that the V10F has some over-dimensioned gyros)

As far as I understand the functioning of our devices, I cannot believe that the motor alone can do the job to balance us with gyros only working as sensors, it is only my assumption (I work as engineer in the field of vehicle automation), that's why I'm asking you if you have any specific document saying that on our wheels the motor alone is doing this job.

So, I might be wrong because it's only an assumption, but 100% of the physic of our wheels is leading me to make this assumption, are you doing an assumption yourself as well or do you actually know for sure what you are writing?

If you know for sure can you please share this with us? ;-)

 

 

 

[esaj]

43 minutes ago, Zeno74 said:

I know what a gyro is, it's a device with a double function, it can be used only as a sensor, so with almost 0 power consumption and it gives you a feedback on the position, without being affected by the inertia forces, the bigger brother on the other hand can also be used to stabilise things, so other than giving you the feedback of the position it can also actively influence the stabilisation of the object where it's mounted. (of course the bigger the angular momentum, the better is the stabilisation, here is my assumption that the V10F has some over-dimensioned gyros)

As far as I understand the functioning of our devices, I cannot believe that the motor alone can do the job to balance us with gyros only working as sensors, it is only my assumption (I work as engineer in the field of vehicle automation), that's why I'm asking you if you have any specific document saying that on our wheels the motor alone is doing this job.

So, I might be wrong because it's only an assumption, but 100% of the physic of our wheels is leading me to make this assumption, are you doing an assumption yourself as well or do you actually know for sure what you are writing?

If you know for sure can you please share this with us? ;-)

I'm not sure what you actually mean by gyro here, some kind of a flywheel? To my knowledge, the "gyros" in the wheels are 6-axis electronic IMUs (inertial measurement units , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_measurement_unit ), that contain both 3-axis gyroscope (detecting rotational rate) and 3-axis accelerometers (detecting linear acceleration), similar to what smartphones have. I think at least some older wheels may have used for example MPU6050's ( https://www.invensense.com/products/motion-tracking/6-axis/mpu-6050/ ), probably newer wheels use a similar 6-axis IMU, but different manufacturers / models. Both are used in detecting the "lean" of the wheel, as the combined information ("sensor fusion") is more accurate and can be used to overcome the "drift" in both. The information is then used by the CPU of the microcontroller of the wheel with probably in some form of a PD- or PID-loop to control the motor acceleration/deceleration.

[UniVehje]

V10F app shows the conceptions, current, per ride and all time. You can always check that and compare. There's no indication that V10F has higher consumption than other wheels on same rider, road and speed. They are all quite similar. My fast and aggressive riding on trails usually consumes around 14 Wh / km, normal riding on roads 12-12,5 Wh/km. 

[Fastmike]

2 hours ago, quixfz said:

not quite. there could still be differences on the pcb, even if they look similar. they could use better spec'd/quality components (less resitance mosfets, better drivers, less ESR caps, more/bigger caps, etc.)

but it could also be the absolutely same board with same components. if they are advertising some new features, it could be also done in software. 

At least mosfet are the same TO220 as V8, one of the main reason why the V10F is so 'easy' to overheat compare to other wheels. They have to be more 'conservative' because they have no choice, not for safety reason...

[Harold Farrenkopf]

43 minutes ago, Fastmike said:

At least mosfet are the same TO220 as V8, one of the main reason why the V10F is so 'easy' to overheat compare to other wheels. They have to be more 'conservative' because they have no choice, not for safety reason...

Yes, this is very disappointing to see. We bought a "V8 fast" as the thread title says..... LOL  LOL     LOL

[Harold Farrenkopf]

The Z10 looks like it is the better engineered and manufactured wheel.  

[US69]

1 hour ago, Harold Farrenkopf said:

The Z10 looks like it is the better engineered and manufactured wheel.  

What definitly can be said is that the Inmotion boards for the V10(f) are a bit "underdimensioned" for such a lot power....

That also Shows up in the Feedback of the users getting overpower Messages (which are in fact overheating). As the (relative small) Mosfets sit on the side of the (small) heatsink… i doubt that those overpower Problems are fixable by any Firmware Upgrades. KS had the same Problem as they had thrown their first 1200W 18inch Wheel on the market...the first Version of KS18 2,5 -3 years ago!

To small Mosfets...to thin heatsink...no real air reaching the heatsink. It Was Always overheating on hills…..The only way this was fixable was by DIY from the users, installing fans and some other Troubleshooting. Ninebot with the One P had some similar problems….So Seams all EUC Producers have to learn this lesson that a more powerfull Wheel needs new board Hardware...not only a more powerfull Motor!

[phatmike]

The board of the V10 looks exactly the same of the V8!

[meepmeepmayer]

6 hours ago, Zeno74 said:

As far as I understand the functioning of our devices, I cannot believe that the motor alone can do the job to balance us with gyros only working as sensors, it is only my assumption (I work as engineer in the field of vehicle automation), that's why I'm asking you if you have any specific document saying that on our wheels the motor alone is doing this job.

So, I might be wrong because it's only an assumption, but 100% of the physic of our wheels is leading me to make this assumption, are you doing an assumption yourself as well or do you actually know for sure what you are writing?

If you know for sure can you please share this with us? ;-)

All you need to do is open up a wheel and see. The only gyro-something there is the tilt sensor (which is essentially the same tilt sensor you find in smartphones, as @esaj said). The only thing ever acting as a stabilizing gyroscope (= something spinning) is the part of the motor-tire-assembly that spins when riding (which is the tire, the outer rim of the motor, and the side cover plates of the motor). But that only stabilizes in the sideways direction (left-right), not the front-back direction the motor controls.

Also, I don't see what a real gyroscope would be stabilizing? A EUC is always in a dynamic state around an equillibrium, and any stabilization would be counter-productive then, wouldn't it? There's never really a final, stable state a gyro could stabilize, any state will have to be modified very soon and the gyro would mean it's more work to do that. It essentially would defeat itself, as I understand it.

Here's the inside of my ACM (the other side only has the second battery pack). As you can see, just a board (with one of the chips being the gyro sensor, measuring the tilt) on a heatsink, some cables to the motor and battery (and lights and switch and speaker and whatnot), and no other (gyroscopic) parts. Same as with every other electric unicycle or self-balancing device you can buy There isn't anything hidden inside the motors, too.

Edited September 11, 2018 by meepmeepmayer

[Cumulus Libre]

4 hours ago, UniVehje said:

V10F app shows the conceptions, current, per ride and all time. You can always check that and compare. There's no indication that V10F has higher consumption than other wheels on same rider, road and speed. They are all quite similar. My fast and aggressive riding on trails usually consumes around 14 Wh / km, normal riding on roads 12-12,5 Wh/km.

mine is averaging 14Wh/km over the last and first 120 km..  but I am sure mine has to work more then yours  (balancing wise I am not in your league )

[Rehab1]

1 hour ago, meepmeepmayer said:

All you need to do is open up a wheel and see. The only gyro-something there is the tilt sensor (which is essentially the same tilt sensor you find in smartphones, as @esaj said). The only thing ever acting as a stabilizing gyroscope (= something spinning) is the part of the motor-tire-assembly that spins when riding (which is the tire, the outer rim of the motor, and the side cover plates of the motor). But that only stabilizes in the sideways direction (left-right), not the front-back direction the motor controls.

Also, I don't see what a real gyroscope would be stabilizing? A EUC is always in a dynamic state around an equillibrium, and any stabilization would be counter-productive then, wouldn't it? There's never really a final, stable state a gyro could stabilize, any state will have to be modified very soon and the gyro would mean it's more work to do that. It essentially would defeat itself, as I understand it.

Here's the inside of my ACM (the other side only has the second battery pack). As you can see, just a board (with one of the chips being the gyro sensor, measuring the tilt) on a heatsink, some cables to the motor and battery (and lights and switch and speaker and whatnot), and no other (gyroscopic) parts. Same as with every other electric unicycle or self-balancing device you can buy There isn't anything hidden inside the motors, too.

I should have asked Inmotion to take some closeup interior photos of my V10F when they were performing surgery last week. 

[Harold Farrenkopf]

A gyro wants to stay in its orientation. In doing so, it is used to send sensor info on rotation ie in a plane to say it is changing direction or in a ship to also indicate bearing. A large gyro can keep an object by moving in one of its directions. There is no gyro in our wheels. There are only tilt sensors and the wheel motor is controlled to keep the pedals level. The wheel rotation will act a bit like a gyro for sideways stability like a bicycle wheel does. 

[Harold Farrenkopf]

1 hour ago, Rehab1 said:

I should have asked Inmotion to take some closeup interior photos of my V10F when they were performing surgery last week. 

I’ll take some when I get mine done myself but the two v8 board components in the pictures posted look the same. Firmware is obviously different. 

[MBIKER_SURFER]

3 hours ago, Cumulus Libre said:

mine is averaging 14Wh/km over the last and first 120 km..  but I am sure mine has to work more then yours  (balancing wise I am not in your league )

I've never had such low values. And I have no hills at all around me - just palne area. O.k. - going up the dike - about 10 m in high - that's it.

My Values are always between 16 Wh/km to 20 Wh/km. Most values are between 17,5 Wh/km to 18,5 Wh/km. Average speed is about 25 km/h. I've no idea, how riders can manage value below 16 Wh/km - my V10 F consumes therefore too much? But quite a couple of riders saying, my values are o.k.??

[UniVehje]

8 hours ago, MBIKER_SURFER said:

I've never had such low values. And I have no hills at all around me - just palne area. O.k. - going up the dike - about 10 m in high - that's it.

My Values are always between 16 Wh/km to 20 Wh/km. Most values are between 17,5 Wh/km to 18,5 Wh/km. Average speed is about 25 km/h. I've no idea, how riders can manage value below 16 Wh/km - my V10 F consumes therefore too much? But quite a couple of riders saying, my values are o.k.??

How much do you weigh? What is your tire pressure? Do you start and stop a lot with hard accelerations? What do you get on other wheels?

[MBIKER_SURFER]

My weight is about 85 kg - tire pressure is 2.8  bar. Quite often no stops for about 5 km. With my V5F min. value was 10 Wh/km - average was 12 Wh/km. So I'm pleased in terms of distance with my V5F - totally disappointed for the V10F. Riding the V10 F nevertheless is fantastic - just pure distance value and actually too many issues.

[Zeno74]

13 hours ago, meepmeepmayer said:

All you need to do is open up a wheel and see. The only gyro-something there is the tilt sensor (which is essentially the same tilt sensor you find in smartphones, as @esaj said). The only thing ever acting as a stabilizing gyroscope (= something spinning) is the part of the motor-tire-assembly that spins when riding (which is the tire, the outer rim of the motor, and the side cover plates of the motor). But that only stabilizes in the sideways direction (left-right), not the front-back direction the motor controls.

Also, I don't see what a real gyroscope would be stabilizing? A EUC is always in a dynamic state around an equillibrium, and any stabilization would be counter-productive then, wouldn't it? There's never really a final, stable state a gyro could stabilize, any state will have to be modified very soon and the gyro would mean it's more work to do that. It essentially would defeat itself, as I understand it.

Here's the inside of my ACM (the other side only has the second battery pack). As you can see, just a board (with one of the chips being the gyro sensor, measuring the tilt) on a heatsink, some cables to the motor and battery (and lights and switch and speaker and whatnot), and no other (gyroscopic) parts. Same as with every other electric unicycle or self-balancing device you can buy There isn't anything hidden inside the motors, too.

Well I must say that this is quite a good point ;-)

I thought that in order to work without "power gyros" the acceleration ramps of the wheel should have been much higher, on the fairs of robots there are several demos of robots keeping balance and they are really much quicker in the accelerations than our wheels...but probably with our wheel this is just ok!

Can any of you then explain me why both my V8 and V10 when they receive a shock (the V8 riding over a hole on the street and the V10 walking it down the stairs) start shaking like hell?

With the V8 I also fell...I thought it was something related to the gyros loosing the angular momentum but I wouldn't know now...

 

 

10 hours ago, MBIKER_SURFER said:

I've never had such low values. And I have no hills at all around me - just palne area. O.k. - going up the dike - about 10 m in high - that's it.

My Values are always between 16 Wh/km to 20 Wh/km. Most values are between 17,5 Wh/km to 18,5 Wh/km. Average speed is about 25 km/h. I've no idea, how riders can manage value below 16 Wh/km - my V10 F consumes therefore too much? But quite a couple of riders saying, my values are o.k.??

I had 12 Wh/km with the V8 and 15 with the V10F, strange....

[Cumulus Libre]

10 hours ago, MBIKER_SURFER said:

13 hours ago, Cumulus Libre said:

mine is averaging 14Wh/km over the last and first 120 km..  but I am sure mine has to work more then yours  (balancing wise I am not in your league )

I've never had such low values. And I have no hills at all around me - just palne area. O.k. - going up the dike - about 10 m in high - that's it.

My Values are always between 16 Wh/km to 20 Wh/km. Most values are between 17,5 Wh/km to 18,5 Wh/km. Average speed is about 25 km/h. I've no idea, how riders can manage value below 16 Wh/km - my V10 F consumes therefore too much? But quite a couple of riders saying, my values are o.k.??

 

yesterday I was replying to what I remembered seeing on my V10f during one of my offroad rides, at the time my V10f was not around to verify, so today I verified to be sure and not talk mambojumbo.. 

Clearly there is an offset in what I saw in the early stage and to what it really is today, btw I have no real experience yet in the figures shown below, I just check my temp, average speed, consumption , mileage but I have in no means in depth knowledge about the figures, I am planning to investigate some more into that.. so input is welcome to a good thread with that info..

aha : my weight is 75 kg and tire pressure is around 1,5-2 bar, rather low but I love it for my knee issues..  

 

[MBIKER_SURFER]

Ha - that figure is not the real truth 

After getting a new mainboard, it says 5 Wh/km at mine!

My figures come out of my excel sheet, where all the long runs are stated!

[Cumulus Libre]

7 minutes ago, Zeno74 said:

Can any of you then explain me why both my V8 and V10 when they receive a shock (the V8 riding over a hole on the street and the V10 walking it down the stairs) start shaking like hell?

I have not such experience on my V10f I love the quality, and ride, I mainly ride offroad and it takes enough potholes and bumps when I do so.. so no shaking .. I do have to say foot placements is making quite a lot of difference in handling/whobble.. and I am still figuring out the best position, inch by inch  and when you touch the sweetspot it is a big difference, but even when they are far from well placed it is still a lovely ride.. I am playing a lot with advice from @houseofjob in asymmetric foot placements , when I am lucky i understand what he means but I am still in the learning phase to find the sweet spot..

[Cumulus Libre]

4 minutes ago, MBIKER_SURFER said:

Ha - that figure is not the real truth 

After getting a new mainboard, it says 5 Wh/km at mine!

My figures come out of my excel sheet, where all the long runs are stated!

sorry to bring "Fake News" to this forum  

my humble apologies..  

[UniVehje]

1 hour ago, MBIKER_SURFER said:

Ha - that figure is not the real truth 

After getting a new mainboard, it says 5 Wh/km at mine!

My figures come out of my excel sheet, where all the long runs are stated!

It is real number unless you have updated the firmware which resets the Wh counter but not total kilometres. That's a bug. But in his case that number should be real. 

Please remember also that your average speed is higher on V10F than on V5. It is not surprising that your average consumption is higher also. 

[MBIKER_SURFER]

40 minutes ago, UniVehje said:

Please remember also that your average speed is higher on V10F than on V5. It is not surprising that your average consumption is higher also. 

We have discussed this - yes. But it is strange, that some riders are talking of 15 Wh/km and riding fast! What am I making wrong? 

[Jpd]

1 hour ago, MBIKER_SURFER said:

We have discussed this - yes. But it is strange, that some riders are talking of 15 Wh/km and riding fast! What am I making wrong? 

When I first got my v10f the app read 28 wh consumption, this was before they started messing with the firmware. At 28 wh I would get 34 mile range, I still get the same range but the wh now reads 16. I think the app is lying and whatever inmotion did to the firmware f@&$ed it up. I don’t recall hearing about any issues early on.