Split PWM ("PPM") settings

I’m currently building 3rd and 4th builds with split ppm, my question is, if running (2) 6364 75kv hub motors, what would be a safe setting in vesc tool for individual motor setup in (max amps), (battery regen) etc. my batteries for these builds are 10s3p 236W

30Q cells?

1 Like

i have SAMSUNG 25R 18650 20A FLAT TOP 2500MAH BATTERY.

Split ppm will cause ground loops. Depending in the ESC, that will kill your voltage regulators.

1 Like

Incorrect, people have been doing it for years.


The very moment you interconnect the ppm ports, a ground loop is established. Depending on hardware, that will cause issues. That is FAKT by design. Some voltage regulator circuits are less prone to fry, others are more prone. The 4.12 was relativley robust to handle that for a while, but now we see so many different HW versions, that it is not advisable to use split ppm! Secondary devices, connected to the VESC should not loop back to GND, or GND of other secondary devices. GND loops are to be avoided at any time.

1 Like

And if you cut the poss and neg on one esc and just leave the signal?


I have ppm on my 2nd board with dual 6374 motors for about a yr now, no issues, these builds are with hub motors, thats why im asking about the settings.

Marketing hype again? If the circuit had been designed correctly loosing the can connection when powered wouldn’t kill the vesc, which is why people frequently used split ppm.


Oh come on now Mike, there is no marketing hype here.


Lol I use splitted ppm for more then a year.

The only thing you need to do is connect the ppm, gnd and 5v from one vesc to the receiver. And from the other only ppm to the receiver.


There is. He’s acting like the trampa vesc is the only vesc out there and creating fear over over a practice that had been in use for years, for the purpose of making trampa vescs seem better than the rest which they are not.


Why split PPM is not a good idea has been explained by Vedder.
As far as I know there are many VESC4 based designs that currently don’t suffer from the CAN disconnect as well as all of the VESC6 based ones.
So I fail to see how, at least in this particular case, this is marketing hype.


I explained that here

You have to come up with something better than that.
I can list a lot of things people have been doing for years that are a bad idea.

1 Like

How about “people have doing it for years successfully?”

The fact is it’s as it more dangerous to the electronics to use can bus than to use split ppm as evidenced by hundreds of builds having dinner so and 1 instance of split ppm causing an issue. Marketing.

Mike, you know I love you but you are seeing ghosts in this case.

I disagree, that is still allowed?

Of course not. Everyone is allowed an opinion, as long as it agrees with mine.


People have killed plenty of ESCs without knowing why… splitt ppm will always make your regulators fight with another. On some designs the regulators are tolerent enough, on other not. The more different HW exists, the more likely you will have people running into troubles. Another thing you don’t know : Does every batch uses the the same regulators? Sometimes parts are low in stock and manufacturers use a different regulator to avoid delays. Same ESC model, different components on PCB.

Cutting wires is also no option to avoid the loop. The loop is established as soon as PPM is shared.

CAN is very reliable, especially if it’s 60V tolerant.