![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
i run this motor on 6 cell an wowowo to fast:gasp:never pass 155f on 14/68 and for the feature i would like to deasable the BEEEEEPPP song...and the auto timing mode... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks for the technical response. Are you a sparkie in real life? I am but just dont get into this part of it. I do realize that these things run better at full voltage, but thats about 50mph on everyones vehicles. I would assume less then 5 percent of someones run is always at full voltage. There just isnt enough street or track to keep them at WOT all the time. So sounds like it would be a simple programming change for the controller, but chaning epa on radio might be easier. I have never played with that feature, I guess I need to look. What about an extrenal transformer between the batts and the controller? Maybe something like the Castle BEC with variable voltage output, but on a much greater scale? SAy 200A of handling power instead of 4A This would be a great feature for the new E-revo as a user could dial his power output based on experience. I highly doubt the new traxxas 2.4 gig radio is going to have an epa setting. |
From the CC FAQ:
1. I bought the Monster Max system and it's way too fast! How do I "tone it down"?So, they are suggesting you don't use the EPA to tone it down. Is there any chance it would affect the warranty if you did? |
I don't they could void a warranty for running at a limited EPA. After all, doing that is like running with the trigger not fully engaged. And they don't say not to run slower speeds, just that it's not efficient to do that all the time.
Quote:
|
I understand all this, and the limits set up in the radio are fine, but setting an ABSOLUTE LIMIT to Duty Cycle - enforced in firmware - would reduce the possibility that the receiver (or, in my case, robotic brain) would send the model, uncontrolled, in to a concrete wall.
Because, if the MMM glitches out, chances are the model will just freeze. If my robot controller glitches out, then there is a GOOD possibility that the model WILL fly. A PWM Duty Cycle limit would be very useful for me, efficiency be dammed. Not to mention, if you have kids and you want them to try out your pimp ride, wouldn't it be nice to just limit the high end to kid safe speeds? Quote:
|
What we need is (basically) an adjustable, compound PWM output to the motor. The three-phase pulses themselves being the carrier PWM signal, then each individual pulse made from its own PWM signal. That is how you would control maximum motor current during the entire run.
|
So are you saying the existing pulses would be further chopped? Isn't that the same as simply increasing the frequency of the pulses to get a finer resolution? Motor inductance would become an issue I would think...
|
Quote:
This method would put a MUCH larger strain on the FETs since as the carrier pulse increases in frequency as motor speed increases, the carried pulses would need to increase in frequency as well to maintain the set duty cycle at a resolution suitable enough not to affect the efficiency of the system. ......Did I just say that?? :surprised: |
Yeah, motor inductance might be a problem since those carried pulses would need to run almost into the MHz range at higher motor speeds.
|
But I think efficiency would fall. Not only would you probably get into a frequency the motor inductance wouldn't "like", but you are increasing the on-off cycles, which multiplies slew-rate losses (the v-drop while the voltage ramps up/down).
|
Wouldn't the MMM "superFETs" have fewer of these slew-rate losses due to the very small (comparably) Rdson and Idt values?
|
Those two values really have nothing to do with slew rate. Slew rate is how quickly the voltage can change over time. Obviously, higher is better - looks more like a square-wave instead of a "trapezoid-wave". :smile: IIRC, the SR has to do more with the gate capacitance.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:04 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.