Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road
Motor/ESC experts please chime in: Motor vs ESC Timing, which is better? >

Motor/ESC experts please chime in: Motor vs ESC Timing, which is better?

Motor/ESC experts please chime in: Motor vs ESC Timing, which is better?

Old 02-22-2015, 08:56 AM
  #1  
Tech Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
theclutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 356
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Red face Motor/ESC experts please chime in: Motor vs ESC Timing, which is better?

I searched and didn't come up with an answer to my question in the onroad and offroad threads. I've always wondered, if you wanted 20 degrees of timing (or whatever), is it better to do it in the motor itself or do it through the ESC?

What I'm wondering is if one is more efficient than the other, if one way yields more rpm or torque than the other, etc. Or do they provide EXACTLY the same results?

Thanks in advance for your comments.
theclutch is offline  
Old 02-22-2015, 01:05 PM
  #2  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 394
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

If the 20 deg was a true 20 deg then they would be the same but in practice ESC timing is better, as you loose can timing as rpm increases.
DamianW is offline  
Old 02-22-2015, 06:09 PM
  #3  
Tech Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
theclutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 356
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DamianW
If the 20 deg was a true 20 deg then they would be the same but in practice ESC timing is better, as you loose can timing as rpm increases.
Wow, I didn't know that the motor loses timing with rpm...this is great info! Are there any articles, per chance, that you can point me out to this? I've been searching and although I've come across great motor OR ESC articles, I haven't really found anything talking about timing.
theclutch is offline  
Old 02-22-2015, 06:14 PM
  #4  
Tech Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
theclutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 356
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

By the way, I found this Novak article, but it doesn't really answer my question...

http://teamnovak.com/tech_info/view_article/20
theclutch is offline  
Old 02-22-2015, 06:51 PM
  #5  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (37)
 
howardcano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 3,784
Trader Rating: 37 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by theclutch
Wow, I didn't know that the motor loses timing with rpm...
It doesn't. Fixed timing on the endbell is exactly that: fixed.

ESCs have the advantage that they can vary the timing with motor speed; the faster the speed, the more the timing is advanced. That's called, depending on the manufacturer, "dynamic timing", "boost timing", or "ramping". The result is a wider motor powerband than fixed timing gives.
howardcano is offline  
Old 02-22-2015, 11:59 PM
  #6  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 394
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by howardcano
It doesn't. Fixed timing on the endbell is exactly that: fixed.
Senor delay results in loss of timing as rpm increases.
DamianW is offline  
Old 02-23-2015, 03:08 AM
  #7  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (37)
 
howardcano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 3,784
Trader Rating: 37 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DamianW
Senor delay results in loss of timing as rpm increases.
Yes, if it were substantial it would. The delay is too short to affect operation.
howardcano is offline  
Old 02-23-2015, 04:46 AM
  #8  
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 370
Default

Originally Posted by DamianW
If the 20 deg was a true 20 deg then they would be the same but in practice ESC timing is better, as you loose can timing as rpm increases.
You can't separate the two for a sensored motor in sensored operation mode.

1) Mechanical Endbell" timing" is always present (be it zero or wherever).
2) For a sensored motor ESC "timing" is always present (be it at zero, or wherever) and triggered from the sensors. (unless the ESC switches to sensorles).

Last edited by ic-racer; 02-23-2015 at 05:00 AM.
ic-racer is offline  
Old 02-23-2015, 07:05 AM
  #9  
Tech Master
iTrader: (10)
 
tbrymer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,555
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

I'd have to go with esc.
tbrymer is offline  
Old 02-23-2015, 09:11 AM
  #10  
Tech Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
theclutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 356
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

So no one's really answered my question... If I just want fixed timing across all RPMs, is ESC or can timing better AND WHY?
theclutch is offline  
Old 02-23-2015, 09:25 AM
  #11  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (37)
 
howardcano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 3,784
Trader Rating: 37 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by theclutch
So no one's really answered my question... If I just want fixed timing across all RPMs, is ESC or can timing better AND WHY?
If the ESC timing and motor timing are both fixed, then by definition they will have the same behavior; neither is "better". So do whatever you prefer, or is most convenient.
howardcano is offline  
Old 02-23-2015, 09:27 AM
  #12  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
locked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,758
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by theclutch
So no one's really answered my question... If I just want fixed timing across all RPMs, is ESC or can timing better AND WHY?
To make ESC timing react the exact same way as motor can timing, you would have to set the ESC timing to all happen at once, at the very bottom of the RPM range.

There is an ideal point when each motor phase is fired in relation to the rotor position. This ideal moment changes as RPM increases, so dynamic ESC timing is more efficient than static timing.

If you set your ESC to apply all the timing at 0 RPM, as if it was static timing like it would be if it was set from the endbell, they should, in theory, perform the same, but only can timing is allowed for spec class racing.
locked is offline  
Old 02-24-2015, 01:13 AM
  #13  
Tech Addict
 
chasingthepack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: hanworth uk
Posts: 728
Default

if you only want 20 d then go with the motor timing as the brakes will be better,tbf 20d isnt a lot unless your running a low wind mod motor
chasingthepack is offline  
Old 02-24-2015, 09:46 AM
  #14  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (5)
 
WheelNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 3,211
Trader Rating: 5 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DamianW
Senor delay results in loss of timing as rpm increases.
Consider this quote from the Novak website:

"The time required to attain the rotor position from the Hall Effect sensor is on the order of a few micro seconds. If a motor's rotor is turning at 80,000 RPM, that would be 1333 revolutions per second, or 1.33mS per revolution. Compared to a microprocessor running at 20MHz (or 26,600 clock cycles @ 50 nanoseconds per cycle), that is a very long time, which means that the microprocessor is capable of executing many instructions during that time frame."
Source: http://teamnovak.com/tech_info/view_article/24

Theoretically there should be no loss in timing with RPM increases. The example provided by Novak considers a motor at 80,000rpm, which in North America is very uncommon since we mostly all run some type of stock motor . A 17.5t spins about 17,000rpm +/- 2000.
WheelNut is offline  
Old 02-24-2015, 11:49 AM
  #15  
Tech Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
theclutch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 356
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by WheelNut
Consider this quote from the Novak website:

"The time required to attain the rotor position from the Hall Effect sensor is on the order of a few micro seconds. If a motor's rotor is turning at 80,000 RPM, that would be 1333 revolutions per second, or 1.33mS per revolution. Compared to a microprocessor running at 20MHz (or 26,600 clock cycles @ 50 nanoseconds per cycle), that is a very long time, which means that the microprocessor is capable of executing many instructions during that time frame."
Source: http://teamnovak.com/tech_info/view_article/24

Theoretically there should be no loss in timing with RPM increases. The example provided by Novak considers a motor at 80,000rpm, which in North America is very uncommon since we mostly all run some type of stock motor . A 17.5t spins about 17,000rpm +/- 2000.
So does that mean motor can timing is better assuming I want the same timing throughout the rpm range?
theclutch 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.