R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-24-2003, 02:24 AM   #61
Tech Elite
 
Cole Trickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark / Europe
Posts: 2,571
Default

Hmmm, I think the point are obvious....

In those touring cars, we got several rotating components: 2 diffs, an armature and 4 wheels. The gyroscopic effect of each of those compononents are way larger than the gyroscopic effect of a spur gear.

Reducing the size of the spur gear by 10 teeths, will theoretically have an effect. However, compared to the other rotating components, the effect are almost invisible....

The motor represent approx. 10% of the total running weight. So I have absolutely no doubt: Lowering the motor and thus the CG, are much more important.
__________________
Schumacher Mi5 - Sanwa MT-4 / RX-462 / KO Propo PDS-2123 - Nosram 5600 X-treme Saddle Pack - LRP SPX Zero/X12 17,5 - Nosram Stealth Touch Evolution - MAAS SPS 9250
Cole Trickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2003, 03:41 AM   #62
Tech Adept
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Grimsby, UK
Posts: 212
Default

cole,

your getting confused between gyroscopic forces and moments of inertia.

moment of inertia is a measure of how much energy you need to give an object to get it rotating.

gyroscopic forces are those which resist turning. This is how your pushbike stays upright, the gyroscopic forces hold the thing upright.

Do you seriously think lowering your motor mount is going to give you more punch?

it won't. might give you better handling but thats dependent on your car, my Yok, TC3's etc have the motor in the same place so in that respect using a smaller spur gear is more efficient.

sanj
schumacher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2003, 03:57 AM   #63
Tech Elite
 
Cole Trickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark / Europe
Posts: 2,571
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by schumacher
your getting confused between gyroscopic forces and moments of inertia.

Do you seriously think lowering your motor mount is going to give you more punch?
True, I mixed it up. I meant moments of inertia. But it changes nothing. The advantage of lowering inertia by using a smaller spur, are still extremely small, compared to the moments of inertia in the other parts I mentioned.

I've never said that lowering the motor will give more punch. But it improves handling, and that are much more important than a theoretical lower moment of inertia.
__________________
Schumacher Mi5 - Sanwa MT-4 / RX-462 / KO Propo PDS-2123 - Nosram 5600 X-treme Saddle Pack - LRP SPX Zero/X12 17,5 - Nosram Stealth Touch Evolution - MAAS SPS 9250
Cole Trickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2003, 04:21 AM   #64
Tech Elite
 
Cole Trickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark / Europe
Posts: 2,571
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by schumacher
... might give you better handling but thats dependent on your car, my Yok, TC3's etc have the motor in the same place so in that respect using a smaller spur gear is more efficient.
You're right about that the CG only are affected on some cars (I've already mentioned that earlier). The motor always change position, when gear mesh are adjusted, only the direction differs. On a TC3, the motor gets closer to the center, when using a smaller spur, so in this case you'll get the advantage of weight more centralized. If I'm right about the Yoke, the motor will move in the front/rear direction, thus again affect the handling.
__________________
Schumacher Mi5 - Sanwa MT-4 / RX-462 / KO Propo PDS-2123 - Nosram 5600 X-treme Saddle Pack - LRP SPX Zero/X12 17,5 - Nosram Stealth Touch Evolution - MAAS SPS 9250
Cole Trickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2003, 11:07 AM   #65
Tech Elite
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,777
Trader Rating: 27 (100%+)
Send a message via AIM to John Stranahan
Default

The efficiency of a spur pinion gear is affected some by the angle at which the teeth make contact. This loss from angles that don't act exactly on the circumference as well as frictional losses produce a 3-5% efficiency loss with each set of gears. This is why pan cars are faster accelerating than cars with a transmission. There is probably a good balance between the efficiency losses which are higher with a smaller spur and increased rotational inertia which are higher with a bigger spur. Manufactures don't use tiny spurs for this reason.

Most RC cars that I have run will not tolerate a ten tooth change in the 48 pitch spur due to lack of adjustablility in the motor support or lack of availability of the small spur.
John Stranahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2005, 11:58 AM   #66
Tech Elite
 
Cole Trickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark / Europe
Posts: 2,571
Default Stock versus drive frequency

Hi there

Some new thoughts on this...

Racing in stock, with plenty of capasity, is there any reason to NOT use the lowest possible frequency, to gain as much punch as possibly? Im' thinking of 244 Hz...

Some have mentioned comm wear. If I usually use approx. 4 kHz and are happy with cutting the comm every 10-15 runs, how many runs would I be able to do with 244 Hz?

Thanks.
__________________
Schumacher Mi5 - Sanwa MT-4 / RX-462 / KO Propo PDS-2123 - Nosram 5600 X-treme Saddle Pack - LRP SPX Zero/X12 17,5 - Nosram Stealth Touch Evolution - MAAS SPS 9250
Cole Trickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2005, 02:06 PM   #67
Tech Master
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,204
Default Ok first of all I haven't read all of the posts after this one but.....

Quote:
Originally posted by Cole Trickle
The motor itself generates gyroscopic forces itself - the armature are pretty heavy compared to a spur gear.....
No matter the acceleration advantages/theories etc about this issue surely the main advantage of a smaller spur/pinion to obtain the same ratio is not in the get up and go department but in the OMG I need to stop department.
Mabuchi540 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2005, 04:34 PM   #68
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 902
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

I see this is quite an old thread (2003!) things have moved on with competition ESC designs.

The new ESC I'm involved with developing has what we call a 'Dual Active' response where the drive frequency is actively adjusted along with the throttle response according to the throttle input and the current draw of the motor. The result is improved performance without significant additional comm wear!
Terry_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2005, 09:35 PM   #69
Tech Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,154
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Yea dosn't the quantum 2 have a similar set up(reactive software or something)........From what Iv'e seen ,I still perfer an adjustable one, with whats out there now anyway........
__________________
1/8 Scale: Tekno EB-48.2... Tekin RX-8 GEN-2 W/2050kv... Airtronix M11-X Radio... HiTec HS-7954SH Servo...

1/10 Scale: Associated B-5(rear motor)...Tekin RSX Gen-2 W/8.5t... Savox SC-1258-TG Servo
Joe B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2005, 01:03 AM   #70
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 902
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

The Quantum2 is one of a few ESC's that adjust the drive frequency. It's usually a 'stepped' change in frequency (quite large steps) or a fixed programmed frequency change (preset or user defined) according to the throttle position. Rather crude and limited in the performance advantage gained.

The best solution I would suggest is the option to select a fixed but adjustable drive frequency or an 'active' frequency or various other user programmable options.

The proof in the end is the performance on-track, in the end nothing else matters.
Terry_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2005, 01:06 AM   #71
Tech Elite
 
Cole Trickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark / Europe
Posts: 2,571
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Terry_S
I see this is quite an old thread (2003!) things have moved on with competition ESC designs.

The new ESC I'm involved with developing has what we call a 'Dual Active' response where the drive frequency is actively adjusted along with the throttle response according to the throttle input and the current draw of the motor. The result is improved performance without significant additional comm wear!
Well, actually the CS Rocket MAX was avaible when this thread was started. And it also have auto variable drive frequency.
__________________
Schumacher Mi5 - Sanwa MT-4 / RX-462 / KO Propo PDS-2123 - Nosram 5600 X-treme Saddle Pack - LRP SPX Zero/X12 17,5 - Nosram Stealth Touch Evolution - MAAS SPS 9250
Cole Trickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2005, 02:20 AM   #72
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 902
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Cole Trickle
Well, actually the CS Rocket MAX was avaible when this thread was started. And it also have auto variable drive frequency.
Yes variable frequency and auto variable frequency have been around for a while now, however that's only a part of the operation of an ESC there is also the throttle response to consider and how it works with the varying frequency. The Q2 varies the frequency in response to the load on the motor, that's useful but it's how effectively it does this that's important and effects the performance you get on the track.
Terry_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2005, 02:32 AM   #73
Tech Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 902
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default Re: Stock versus drive frequency

Quote:
Originally posted by Cole Trickle
How much difference do the drive frequency make in the real world? Is it more about feel of the car, or can a lower drive freq. actually make a noticably difference in acceleration?

In other words: Is it worth to sell my LRP v7.1 (3.140 Hz) and get another ESC? I'm driving stock class on very small and technically tracks so I need all the acceleration that I can get....

Maybe someone with a Novak Dually (or similar) can tell - that would be the ultimate test (same car, batteries, motor, track...)
I say yes a lower drive frequency makes a difference and it could be worth looking at other ESC's. Maybe users of KO and Keyence ESC's could also help you with their findings?


Quote:
Originally posted by Cole Trickle
Hi there

Some new thoughts on this...

Racing in stock, with plenty of capasity, is there any reason to NOT use the lowest possible frequency, to gain as much punch as possibly? Im' thinking of 244 Hz...

Some have mentioned comm wear. If I usually use approx. 4 kHz and are happy with cutting the comm every 10-15 runs, how many runs would I be able to do with 244 Hz?

Thanks.
Less runs than 10-15 I'd say, most likely a lot less.
Terry_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2005, 03:52 AM   #74
Tech Champion
 
asw7576's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,792
Default

When we race modified 8T last year, my friend can't get full 5 minutes. His car crawled over 4 minutes..... the battery was depleted.

After thorough inspection, he forgot to re-program drive frequency from stock to modified, or something like 2 KHz to 16 KHz ( don't know exact number in his ESC ).

After reprogramming the battery could last nicely just close to 5 minutes..... slightly crawl though.

Some says, lower drive freq. gives the most punch, but I can't hardly notice it at higher freq.
__________________
On Road : Xray NT1 , RX8 , T4 || Mugen Seiki MRX4-R , MTX4 , MTX3 prospec || Tamiya M03 , M04 || Top Racing Sabre FD2
Off Road : Xray XT8 || Hobao Hyper 8
Radio : Futaba 3PKS || KO propo EX-10 eurus
asw7576 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2005, 07:20 AM   #75
Tech Elite
 
Cole Trickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark / Europe
Posts: 2,571
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Terry_S
Yes variable frequency and auto variable frequency have been around for a while now, however that's only a part of the operation of an ESC there is also the throttle response to consider and how it works with the varying frequency. The Q2 varies the frequency in response to the load on the motor, that's useful but it's how effectively it does this that's important and effects the performance you get on the track.
Thanks, I've always wondered by what principle the QC2 worked with. The Rocket Max reacts based upon how fast you move thr trigger - fast movement translates into acceleration, thus low frequency, while slow movements translates into high freq., smoothnes. But perhaps you already know that

I'm wondering about LRP IPC SR and v7.1; Both are operating at 3140 Hz, but the SR is supposed to have more punch (for stock) than the 7.1. Can someone explain how this happens?
__________________
Schumacher Mi5 - Sanwa MT-4 / RX-462 / KO Propo PDS-2123 - Nosram 5600 X-treme Saddle Pack - LRP SPX Zero/X12 17,5 - Nosram Stealth Touch Evolution - MAAS SPS 9250
Cole Trickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Heli/plane frequency conflict with car frequency? azmin Malaysian R/C Racers 5 09-24-2007 11:36 PM
Importance of Fresh Fuel and Shipping to Higher Elevation? SlamMan Nitro On-Road 3 07-07-2007 11:26 AM
ESC Drive Frequency? _pilot_ Electric On-Road 1 06-23-2007 01:35 AM
Importance of battery brand? SSJChar Electric On-Road 4 06-21-2006 10:19 PM
Belt drive versus shaft drive...pros and cons of each? AttackDonut Rookie Zone 21 01-02-2005 05:23 PM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 04:33 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net