Naaaah nah, very different 
Those dual escape heat sinks are just 
Greeting!
I am interested about your products for building an e-bike.
May I know if following items are still available ?
- PCB only - 3€
- Semi-assembled PCB without ICs - 9.50€
- Fully assembled PCB without cables and BT - 55€
TIA
@JantySVK
Greeting!
I am interested to buy your products for building an e-bike.
May I know if following items are still available ?
- PCB only - 3€
- Semi-assembled PCB without ICs - 9.50€
- Fully assembled PCB without cables and BT - 55€
TIA
Hey Janty.
Which firmware is sultable for your design?
Im interested in some my own esc bulid and your schematic seems is a nice starting point!
Probably custom, but mostly static values are changed so not too hard to figure out what you need to change if you can read code.
DRVless design, different shunts and maybe he tossed around a few pins on the MCU.
@edward_su Yes, I can sell you older version 6.4 which is fully tested, or you can wait for 6.5 which is in development.
@hbozyq @linsus My ESC is fully compatible with original VESC 6, withoud need for any firmware modifications. Using discrete drivers instead of DRV8301 does not require new firmware. I used same parts as Vedder´s VESC 6 design:
0.0005R current shunts
Current shunt amplifiers with voltage gain of 20
Same 39k/2k2 voltage dividers
No swapped pins
I wanted this design to be user upgradable in the future withoud need for my support.
Here are new board files, PDF schematics and gerbers. I added MPU9250 for people, who want to build onewheels. I will fully test it this week
B3 ESC 6.5.brd (379.8 KB) B3 ESC 6.5.pdf (82.7 KB) B3 ESC 6.5.sch (1.6 MB) B3 ESC 6.5_2021-05-17.zip (426.1 KB)
Thats good to hear!
What we need tho, is testbench results! When does it throttle on temp?
If you’re missing some gear to do it, send me one and I’ll do a destruction test. I can load it with up to 30kW in the lab on my job. (Openloop test in vesctool should do fine tho, all u need is a motor, a tub of water and a decent battery)
Also I’ve had a closer look on the mosfet layout and I might have an idea to improve it a little if you want som input 
@JantySVK
Thank you very much for replying my request.
I want buy one piece of version 6.4 as my DIY e-bike’s motor driver board was broken sometimes ago. I want to recover it now. Send the board from Czech to Taiwan by Parcel service is fine for me.
Please advise how to make payment to you by PM to edward.su809@yahoo.com .
Thanks & Best Regards,
WOW, thats awesome.
This is something Im looking for.
More precisely, which hardware should I choose? For example in your design?
I mean those hw variants in vesctool.
I am not familiar with it yet.
Potentially dumb question but isn’t that a very close tolerance for a bypass cap that might see much bigger inductive spikes? I need to have a better look at the design though and if it has passed testing then great
@mr.shiteside 63v is a pretty commonly chosen voltage rating for alum radial caps on a 12S ESC. We spec’d a similar radial for the TORQUE6.
With electrolytic capacitors, you generally want to keep the capacitor voltage spec pretty close to your operating voltage max. Capacitance scales with the voltage, so too high voltage spec and the capacitance potential drops. neeeewp, I got my capacitor material/dialectric constant properties mixed up here, my bad! Thanks @linsus
In my own personal experience, transients seem to have more impact on the DRV and TVS across VIN. I’m yet to have personally encountered blown caps on an ESC, not sure how widespread of an issue it is these days with better manufacturers & sourcing.
Grand yeah I’m familiarwth this part:
but not that it is already common for a 12S system or that it’s generally not a limiting factor, cheers
Nah, not sure I fully agree there, must be a very specific electrolytic you bumped into, generally you want atleast 25% headroom from your top voltage, and in AC applications, (like 230VAC), most specc for ~100% headroom.
Best option is to look at the voltage vs. capacitance graph provided by the manufacturer tho
Graphs like this are very common;
IIRC, tantalum and electrolytic caps do not suffer from DC bias and you do not need to derate their capacitance as the operating voltage rises. You only need to do this for ceramic caps (your graph is for an X7R dielectric ceramic cap).
Electrolytics are very sensitive to sustained overvoltage and ripple current heating though and both of those things need to be carefully examined before selecting an electrolytic cap.
Tantalum is a different topic entirelty, this was a discussion about electrolytics.
Good rule of thumb for tantals is 3.5xintended voltage.
I’m aware the chart is for ceramics, the characterictics remain to some degree however.
Last ac/dc converter I examined had 400V electrolytics for a 230V AC input. output was 67.5Vdc and the lytes were rated 100V.
But yes, it depends on the cap more then the general rule. Some keep capacitance better over voltage than others.
Yes, the discussion was about electrolytics. Admonishing me for a mention of tantalum caps after you posted a ceramic cap graph seems rather ironic though, doesn’t it? 
My two word tantalum mention was merely to say that they typically also do not have a DC bias issue of concern. The info can be ignored. Others read these posts though and any additional relevant info (another type of cap w/o DC voltage bias) can help others.
It’s the same type of thing as you mentioning we should heavily derate tantalum caps…more irony?
I agree though that we should derate the heck out of tantalum caps as the failure modes are rather…umm…exciting.
It’s only the high dielectric constant caps, like ceramics, that suffer from DC bias to a point where we need to account for it. While the effect might exist to a small degree in some electrolytics it’s not of concern.
Using a 400V cap on a 230VAC line has nothing to do with DC bias. The peak voltage of a 230VAC line is about 325V. Add on the inevitable surges and spikes and 400V is a bare minimum cap rating for that application IMO for reliable operation.
Using a 100V rated electrolytic cap on a 67.5VDC output is also not related to a DC voltage bias derating. These caps are more susceptible to voltage damage as the temperature rises so derating, especially in PSU applications where ripple current heating exists, is always recommended.
A manufacturer can also stock just one voltage rated cap for multiple PSU models. Even though their output voltages might be different the use of one board and many identical components can save money even if a more expensive, higher voltage rated, component is used.
So I agree with your original derating comment but it’s not for DC voltage bias reasons.
Yes, I’m not saying you’re wrong just that the parametrics of headroom still apply even tho you explained it thru a more sientific approach. And I agree that temperature plays a major role, especially in switching applications. If you ask me, electrolytics rated for 85 celcius is the spawn of satan, berly half the lifetime of a 125+ one. (atleast in normal consumer electronic applications)
Yeah, I’m just passing along the knowledge I’ve aquired from more senior collegues that also work with PCB design and usually without diving to deep into parametrics and requirements, these rule of thumbs usually land you in a good place regardless if they’re absolutly needed or not.
Granted, if one is chasing BoM costs, diggin more into minimum requirement and not “over designing” plays a major role.
Previously I worked alot as a consultant so “shooting from the hip” was a common strategy just to cut cost on time when designing stuff. I’m currently at a product company tho so I’m changing my mindset abit since cutting material cost brings more profit in the long haul.