*SCAM ALERT* neoBOX open source Focbox variant (HW 4 and HW6 Design)

[olsyke]

shouldnt there be some guideline to testing esc established by the community in that case ?

only people that agree to follow it should be allowed to test

i have no clue what a valuable procedure would look like, but i would definetly be interested in finding out

[DJ4se]

I agree a simple guideline from @jeffwuneo should sort out everything required for testing.

[xsynatic]

I still can’t decide if i should opt for the 4.12 or 6…

[b264]

I still can’t decide if i should opt for the 4.12 or 6

6​

[xsynatic]

y tho? Gimme reasons

[b264]

Gimme reasons

​

Focbox Unity issues

Typical issue of ESCs with two shunts only, like VESC 4.xx and Focboxes, Unity etc.
These can’t sample the current far away from the switching cycle. In consequence the ESC does not respond linear to throttle inputs. They jump from 80% to full throttle and there is nothing you can do software wise to compensate. On powerful, torque rich, heavily geared boards that is very noticeable and can cause trouble like you described.

There was a reason why Benjamin Vedder went for three shunt designs after the VESC 4.12.

https://www.vesc-project.com/node/403

In practice it helps quite a lot, as it enables sampling the current far away from the switching cycles even at high speed. This can be noted on HW4 where a commanded constant current will give a non-linear acceleration: it will be linear to around 60% of full speed, then it will decrease for a bit up to around 80 % and then it will increase from 80% to 100%. If you give full throttle and pay attention to this, the effect is very obvious. I spent a lot of time trying to work around this, but it is not easy as it depends on many things and behaves differently on different motors and voltages. The current simply becomes noisy and gets aliasing at certain motor phase angles at high speed when using two shunts. Analog filtering is also not possible in the same way as with three shunts as the rise time has to be very fast at high modulation for two shunts to work. The VESC6 has a smooth linear acceleration from 0 to full speed, and this is mostly because it uses three shunts.

Two phase shunts are slightly better than two low side shunts, but three shunts are still the best. I would prefer three low side shunts over two phase shunts in general, if that is a choise to be taken in a design (e.g. when making hardware that supports 100+ volts).

[DerelictRobot]

There’s nothing worse than “I tested the esc today and it was great, thanks”

Fucking useless.

How’s your OSRR beta testing coming along sweetheart?

[BillGordon]

shouldnt there be some guideline to testing esc established by the community in that case

Yes, I’ve been wanting something like this for a while now. Not a lab setting, but just a breakdown of:

This vesc-compatible is rated at XXXXX.
To test this, I’m using XXXXX.
My test conditions consist of XXXXX.
Here’s what happened when it was pushed hard but within reasonable limits: XXXXX
Then, if you want, go nuts and push it until it fails once all the reasonable limits have been explored.

[xsynatic]

Focbox Unity issues

This can be noted on HW4 where a commanded constant current will give a non-linear acceleration: it will be linear to around 60% of full speed, then it will decrease for a bit up to around 80 % and then it will increase from 80% to 100%. If you give full throttle and pay attention to this, the effect is very obvious.

So is that the reason why i get a sudden jump in acceleration? Its smooth as it should until a certain point where is increases instantly. (like shifting gears?)

[olsyke]

ok this still sounds quite simple and makes me wonder why its not allready happening,

i was more under the impression that something like “daily” logs are important, where the manufacturer can see all the relevant parameters, so its also possible to see what happened incase of a fault

id be interested in what @jeffwuneo would consider optimal here

[BillGordon]

i was more under the impression that something like “daily” logs are important

Oh, they would be for sure. Didn’t mean for that to seem like a purposeful omission. Any and all feedback would be great if it all contributes to a fair appraisal of the gear.

id be interested in what @jeffwuneo would consider optimal here

Yes, I would like to know this as well. It’s rare that the person making the unit is this much of a collaborative voice.

[jeffwuneo]

I make testing template for thing to checking and share in next day.

[olsyke]

make them testers do their homework, its time for the community to return all the ambition you have shown so far

[b264]

It’s also more about finding the folks that are in the right spot and can test now, and won’t be waiting on other parts for 6 months before they can assemble it.

[olsyke]

maybe the old dogs here can help compile a list of people ?

[DJ4se]

I was going to throw myself in the running but like you said, won’t be a quality test as I’m just about to finish up my first build. I wouldn’t be much help in testing as I don’t know what’s quality yet. We should make sure that veterans are testing this properly and completely so that people like me can have data to rely on.

[olsyke]

yea same here, i offered myself lightheartedly, but this project here deserves better

[BillGordon]

You know, we really should have some sort of tester form in situations like this.

1: What number of miles/hours can you commit to in the next two weeks (or whatever)
2: What build/specs will you be testing it with

Etc.

[b264]

Not only veterans, but certain veterans who are about to install an ESC this week and just install this new one instead and tell us your experience

[Trampa]

To keep it short: YES