Like Tree302Likes

R1 Wurks brushless motors

Old 07-13-2017, 04:37 PM
  #376  
R/C Tech Elite Member
iTrader: (28)
 
hanulec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: @ the post office
Posts: 10,262
Trader Rating: 28 (100%+)
Default

I remember when I tuned myself out of relevance with a motor dyno. Don't do it man! Lap times are all that matter.
RBLove and TOM MAR like this.
hanulec is offline  
Old 07-13-2017, 07:04 PM
  #377  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (7)
 
tandman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: airdrie
Posts: 3,029
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

Yes!!! I agree. Motor analyzers and dynos for setting motors only goes so far..... but a nicely setup and tuned motor can make a huge difference.
tandman is offline  
Old 07-13-2017, 08:06 PM
  #378  
ASM
Tech Elite
iTrader: (30)
 
ASM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Palm Bay, FL
Posts: 2,015
Trader Rating: 30 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by hanulec
I remember when I tuned myself out of relevance with a motor dyno. Don't do it man! Lap times are all that matter.
What are you finding with the V16? I had seen your previous post about trying lots of timing. Thanks in advance.
ASM is offline  
Old 07-14-2017, 03:00 AM
  #379  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (14)
 
Jorge T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: At a chemical plant in TX
Posts: 584
Trader Rating: 14 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Johnny Wishbone
I went back and did some additional dyno runs at the lower timing settings. I started at 20* and went up in 1* increments, this particular motor showed normal expected progression numbers as the timing was increased. It was interesting to find the motor took a big dip in performance numbers at 27* but took a decent jump at 28*. I redid these settings a couple times just to confirm the distinct changes and this was confirmed, not sure why the big dip but its there.

Regardless, I ran the motor at both the preferred timing settings of 28* and 41*,taking the average readings thru the entire load settings and found the following. At 28* the motor averaged 3% more efficiency, 1 watt higher and .7 higher torque. The motor set at 41* had 8% higher rpm.

At the track, I ran the car at the 28* timing and adjusted the gearing. The car now had a lot lower temps, in the range of 120 to 140. I still have not been able to get close to the lap times that I can when the motor is set at 41*. At 28* the motor just has a different feel to it, I can't describe it, but it feels flat, or at least not the punch that I was expecting. The gearing difference between the 2 settings is 5 teeth bigger when running 28*.

So Jorge, I'd say I'm seeing the same sort of results as you're seeing, and yes the motor seems to have more of a flat curve performance wise. And also seeing the jump at that lower timing setting, just can't seem to hit the performance on the track with that setting. I'll have to do more on track testing.
Thanks Gary. I'm not crazy then. Just wanted to see if it was an anomaly but it seems the power is there. Although it may be not practical to use.



Mike, I agree; the same principle applies when using 1:1 race car dynos.
Dyno to zero in on motor timing settings and/or boost in case of turbo engines.
The final tune is done at the track.

Last edited by Jorge T; 07-14-2017 at 03:46 AM.
Jorge T is offline  
Old 07-14-2017, 09:33 AM
  #380  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (6)
 
Johnny Wishbone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,755
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Jorge T
Thanks Gary. I'm not crazy then. Just wanted to see if it was an anomaly but it seems the power is there. Although it may be not practical to use.



Mike, I agree; the same principle applies when using 1:1 race car dynos.
Dyno to zero in on motor timing settings and/or boost in case of turbo engines.
The final tune is done at the track.
Nope not crazy at all, definitely see that jump at the lower timing setting, and it should in all thoughts work, I'm just not able to take advantage of it on my track.

I think, and I'm not confident enough to use all the information off the MD2 dyno, but, the number that seems consistent is the time to peak RPM. So, moving the timing around just shortens or lengthens the acceleration time. In my case, having such a short straight, wants that quicker acceleration to peak RPM. For example, and I don't have the info broken down to small timing increments, but at 30* timing peak RPM took 1.38 seconds, and at 45* timing it took 1.18 seconds. But with this reading, it probably should be sampled several times and then averaged out. It is interesting to see that the time to reach peak torque always stays about the same, which for electric motors, makes sense.

Regardless, always good to compare notes and info.
Johnny Wishbone is offline  
Old 07-19-2017, 05:12 AM
  #381  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (13)
 
romeo_charlie33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Queensland, 4680, Australia
Posts: 711
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Is the V16-1S 13.5 able to be run on 2S lipo?
Or is there a 2S version in the 2018 V16 range?
romeo_charlie33 is offline  
Old 07-19-2017, 05:18 AM
  #382  
Tech Adept
iTrader: (3)
 
1AGOFST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 124
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by romeo_charlie33
Is the V16-1S 13.5 able to be run on 2S lipo?
Or is there a 2S version in the 2018 V16 range?
Yes, the "1S" is a designation for short stack stators, having nothing to do with number of battery cells. 2S Lipo's are good to go!
romeo_charlie33 likes this.
1AGOFST is offline  
Old 07-21-2017, 03:52 AM
  #383  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (14)
 
Jorge T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: At a chemical plant in TX
Posts: 584
Trader Rating: 14 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Johnny Wishbone
Nope not crazy at all, definitely see that jump at the lower timing setting, and it should in all thoughts work, I'm just not able to take advantage of it on my track.

I think, and I'm not confident enough to use all the information off the MD2 dyno, but, the number that seems consistent is the time to peak RPM. So, moving the timing around just shortens or lengthens the acceleration time. In my case, having such a short straight, wants that quicker acceleration to peak RPM. For example, and I don't have the info broken down to small timing increments, but at 30* timing peak RPM took 1.38 seconds, and at 45* timing it took 1.18 seconds. But with this reading, it probably should be sampled several times and then averaged out. It is interesting to see that the time to reach peak torque always stays about the same, which for electric motors, makes sense.

Regardless, always good to compare notes and info.
From the logs I get I can see 50 samples for each channel. Throttle movement, input volts, rpm, amps and the sofware calculates amps.

17.5 start so fast that rpm will jump from 1000 to 5000 in less than 1/50 sec. And was suspicious of getting wrong data.

I cannot ramp up the motor since I have to dump the log into an excel and will not calculate correctly. I have tried many ways and best is to max out the throttle input from pc.

Another thing I ran into was each test I did had to to cool or wait for the motor to get to the same starting temperature or next run would be lower even if the next timing setting I chose would be higher.

Thanks for comparing notes
Jorge T is offline  
Old 07-21-2017, 07:55 PM
  #384  
Tech Adept
iTrader: (10)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Fruitport MI
Posts: 178
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default 13.5t

Any information on where the timing on a v16 13.5 should be set?

Last edited by wrutherf; 07-22-2017 at 06:33 AM. Reason: clarified motor v
wrutherf is offline  
Old 07-22-2017, 08:12 AM
  #385  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (7)
 
tandman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: airdrie
Posts: 3,029
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

I would start out at 41 degrees internal timing . Small adjustments from there can make a pretty big difference but that is a great starting point for tc .
tandman is offline  
Old 07-22-2017, 08:33 AM
  #386  
Tech Adept
iTrader: (10)
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Fruitport MI
Posts: 178
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by tandman
I would start out at 41 degrees internal timing . Small adjustments from there can make a pretty big difference but that is a great starting point for tc .
Thanks. I'll be running this in 4wd buggy vs TC. So you think that will make difference in timing for the motor? Or just gear accordingly?
wrutherf is offline  
Old 07-22-2017, 04:43 PM
  #387  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (7)
 
tandman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: airdrie
Posts: 3,029
Trader Rating: 7 (100%+)
Default

41 degrees timing will make optimal power-rpm x torque. If you want to soften the bottom end punch and add rpm , then turn the timing up a degree or two at a time.
tandman is offline  
Old 07-24-2017, 04:39 PM
  #388  
Tech Champion
iTrader: (2)
 
gigaplex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Posts: 6,114
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

There's been quite a bit of discussion over the new ROAR rules, mainly centred around the new IR limits. The R1 V16 21.5 was quoted a few times as a motor that may straddle the limits. That got me thinking... has the 21.5 actually passed ROAR approval yet? I'm hoping it is, as when I bought mine, it was advertised as ROAR approved, but then I saw in this forum that the 21.5 was still waiting on approval.
gigaplex is online now  
Old 07-24-2017, 05:30 PM
  #389  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (16)
 
masterhit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 481
Trader Rating: 16 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by gigaplex
There's been quite a bit of discussion over the new ROAR rules, mainly centred around the new IR limits. The R1 V16 21.5 was quoted a few times as a motor that may straddle the limits.
My random hobby shop purchased 21.5 V16 is very safe when tested on my 802.

The new Trinity Monster Max motors seem to have set the limit. My random off the shelf 17.5 max nails the lower limit and nearly matches the measurement shown in the Trinity promo picture. Doubling the 21.5 measurement shown in the same picture again just about nails the 21.5 min requirement.

Mike
Attached Thumbnails R1 Wurks brushless motors-r121-5v16.jpg   R1 Wurks brushless motors-mm21-5.jpg  
masterhit is offline  
Old 07-25-2017, 06:42 AM
  #390  
Tech Master
iTrader: (41)
 
idbdoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Above FltLevel300
Posts: 1,976
Trader Rating: 41 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by gigaplex
There's been quite a bit of discussion over the new ROAR rules, mainly centred around the new IR limits. The R1 V16 21.5 was quoted a few times as a motor that may straddle the limits. That got me thinking... has the 21.5 actually passed ROAR approval yet? I'm hoping it is, as when I bought mine, it was advertised as ROAR approved, but then I saw in this forum that the 21.5 was still waiting on approval.
yes still waiting , motor is in ROAR hands
idbdoug
idbdoug is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.