thanks buddy… and yeah I can clickify the change log to get the version, but would’t it be easy~peasy to say
VESC_5.01_default.bin
with the version?
2 Likes
Some filename like VESC_default.5.01.bin is a great idea for a feature request. That might be a breaking change that’d have to be included in a version 6.x release, I think. It would add a complication to the build/release process.
2 Likes
please explain your logic to a k00k… are you speaking the VESC tool complication or a esk8 build complication???
1 Like
@kook i also had some issues flashing early FW5 builds to my unity from the vesc app.
Ended up having to update from the desktop tool but used the metr app (if you have one) as tcp bridge so that i didn’t have to open my enclosure.
5 Likes
thanks Mr. Tape… great suggestion… !~!!~!
I’ve got the Unity BLE, so maybe I’ll be ok in that regard…
me n @b264 have a big gripe with mal-fucking a perfectly sound running board… but I’m game to try TCP bridge…
tanx meng!
2 Likes
Can I use the Metr Unity with the new tool (is it 2.05 now 
) and FW5. Im a noob and this is the first time EVER using the VESC tool to config the Unity.
3 Likes
look at like the last 10 posts
1 Like
shouldn’t be a problem, just make sure your metr module is up to date before you start the process. In metr app you go to settings and click the gear on the module to check its up to date.
2 Likes
Making the files that you download. Compiling the tool, and thus compiling the firmware as well.
I have new information to report about this.
It seems that any combination of 5.x firmware detects the lower L: 5.93μH values. Regardless. Firmware 4 was consistently around 9μH. Firmware 5 is consistently around 6μH.
However, when it comes to resistance, it appears to depend whether I do the detection directly, or use the wizard. I almost never use the wizard. Using the wizard very consistently finds around R: 12.2mΩ. But doing a manual detection very consistently yields around R: 14.0mΩ. This is even on the same firmware/tool version.
So that it matters whether you use the wizard or do the detection directly from the Motor Settings / FOC / General screen is a new discovery for me.
Which values are more reliable?
7 Likes
The wizard lowers the switching frequency before detection. Lower switching frequency means less dead-time distortion. So typically the wizard should be more accurate theoretically.
Vedder found a missing 2/3 scaling in the inductance detection compared against a simulated motor which is why you see the lower value now.
10 Likes
New firmware seems pretty good…
And smart reverse is better than the last version but can someone please implement “smart reverse duty cycle” (or something similar) that also applies to “current hyst reverse with brake”
Limit the negative erpm in the Motor section. But just don’t expect brakes to work while the speed is exceeded in reverse.
Yeah, that’s going to be a no from me, dawg
1 Like
Use the Profiles, set a negative speed limit.
2 Likes
i only one on the bench at the moment, but had no issues writing FW5 to it today via usb
huh? So if going too fast in reverse the brakes wont work if you set it too low? Confused by this
2 Likes
After testing for about half hour, I can say that HFI on stock settings works much better than on FW 4.02 
6 Likes
As usual i should fess up with a bug i created, the new IMU Calibrator i added won’t always work.
My initial guess is that it only wont work for any VESC with the IMU_FLIP (or whatever its name just got changed to) set in its hardware config, which i think is just the Trampa 6 variants with IMU.
Ill fix it soon 
4 Likes
Yes, exactly that
1 Like