e-go
- Thread starter mygrumpy
- Start date
Never used and don't know anyone who has John, but that 360 watt peak output is very low for a 36 volt system by today's standards. Bound to be like that though, with only 4" diameter. They do offer it in three gearings to compensate, so could power a trike at low speeds with the low geared option.
I agree 360W peak output seems low and since it occurs at a disproportionately high speed in comparison with the crystalyte(?) motor of the torq/quando(?) etc I guess it would also affect overall performance for better/worse in different respects... but it also means the motor's efficiency at this power level is relatively good, over 75% from the graphs.
Though clearly lower powered than the Torq etc. motor, I'm interested to know how the nano compares in overall power delivery i.e. the actual peak output power/speed/efficiency and the resulting performance differences... Anyone know the model no. of the torq motor, or a similar model e.g. the 408 on the ebikes.ca crystalyte motor simulator seems to have similarities to the torq motor - correct me if i'm wrong
- though the 408 seems to have peak power in/out of 660/400W ish - barely 60% efficiency at peak, though as said, at lower speed proportional to the nano's torque graph...
I hope this info helps you too, john, and good luck with your trike
P.S. the source of the nano motor seems to be here:CHINA HANGZHOU ZHEDA TONGXIN ELECTRIC CO,. LTD. (jingly website alert! - turn your sound down before you click this link if jingly website sounds offend!)
Stuart.
Though clearly lower powered than the Torq etc. motor, I'm interested to know how the nano compares in overall power delivery i.e. the actual peak output power/speed/efficiency and the resulting performance differences... Anyone know the model no. of the torq motor, or a similar model e.g. the 408 on the ebikes.ca crystalyte motor simulator seems to have similarities to the torq motor - correct me if i'm wrong
- though the 408 seems to have peak power in/out of 660/400W ish - barely 60% efficiency at peak, though as said, at lower speed proportional to the nano's torque graph...I hope this info helps you too, john, and good luck with your trike
P.S. the source of the nano motor seems to be here:CHINA HANGZHOU ZHEDA TONGXIN ELECTRIC CO,. LTD. (jingly website alert! - turn your sound down before you click this link if jingly website sounds offend!)
Stuart.
This is my favourite sentence: " It sets a whole new world of decelerating structure."
It's a sensorless design (no Hall effect feedback), which should be ok for a geared hub motor.
Last edited:
nice one
Hehehe! nice pick Miles, that is quite a sentence! - but also quite a clever play on words in the translation going on there, when you consider that "Its structure is a development of Planet decelerating with single layer" (both referring I think to a single-stage epicyclic/planetary geared reduction, or deceleration structure as they put it) - do you get it? World? planet? oh well...!
To be honest I didn't read too much from that site (though its nice to know that others do follow up links!) except for the motor specs: mostly I read from the uk nano motor system site.
It does seem that some of the translation requires considerable interpretation, if not re-translation! "SUPER MINI - beyond everything, SUPER LIGHT - beyond evident" ... I don't like the sound of "running on a slopping road" either! hahaha! its a goldmine of quotes!
But seriously, it seems a very cleverly designed motor (within "single gear" hub motor constraints) for use in flat to moderately hilly aswell as urban terrain - with 75% efficient power supply at peak demand required for economy of power use when accelerating or hill climbing - and, vitally for my bike conversion project, it fits standard front or rear dropouts without bending the frame.
In addition, as I posted in the discussion of hub motor freewheel drag in the http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/228-giant-new-twist-3.html#post2627 thread "Freewheeling and light weight make it easy to pedal without electric power" - it seems the freewheel drag of this motor is very low, indeed it would appear to me (from what i hear) to be negligible compared to an ordinary bike wheel, so pedalling without motor power would not mean overcoming any resistance due to friction within the motor itself and (presumably?) only the added weight of the motor in the wheel hub would affect slightly the normal (non-electric) cycling experience (ok, aswell as added battery weight, if attached to bike )
Stuart.
Hehehe! nice pick Miles, that is quite a sentence! - but also quite a clever play on words in the translation going on there, when you consider that "Its structure is a development of Planet decelerating with single layer" (both referring I think to a single-stage epicyclic/planetary geared reduction, or deceleration structure as they put it) - do you get it? World? planet?
oh well...!To be honest I didn't read too much from that site (though its nice to know that others do follow up links!
) except for the motor specs: mostly I read from the uk nano motor system site. It does seem that some of the translation requires considerable interpretation, if not re-translation! "SUPER MINI - beyond everything, SUPER LIGHT - beyond evident" ...
I don't like the sound of "running on a slopping road" either! hahaha! its a goldmine of quotes!But seriously, it seems a very cleverly designed motor (within "single gear" hub motor constraints) for use in flat to moderately hilly aswell as urban terrain - with 75% efficient power supply at peak demand required for economy of power use when accelerating or hill climbing - and, vitally for my bike conversion project, it fits standard front or rear dropouts without bending the frame.
In addition, as I posted in the discussion of hub motor freewheel drag in the http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/electric-bicycles/228-giant-new-twist-3.html#post2627 thread "Freewheeling and light weight make it easy to pedal without electric power" - it seems the freewheel drag of this motor is very low, indeed it would appear to me (from what i hear) to be negligible compared to an ordinary bike wheel, so pedalling without motor power would not mean overcoming any resistance due to friction within the motor itself and (presumably?) only the added weight of the motor in the wheel hub would affect slightly the normal (non-electric) cycling experience (ok, aswell as added battery weight, if attached to bike
)Stuart.
Hi Stuart,
On the Chinese website, it gives a peak efficiency for the motor of 78% (though, this figure is the same for 24V and 36V versions???). You certainly won't get close to this figure at peak power output.
I wonder if we could get Tony Castles to participate in this forum?
On the Chinese website, it gives a peak efficiency for the motor of 78% (though, this figure is the same for 24V and 36V versions???). You certainly won't get close to this figure at peak power output.
I wonder if we could get Tony Castles to participate in this forum?
Last edited:
some more info
Just some small points to add:
If power is an issue, then I think that the 36V motor's power output can be increased by using a controller which has 13-15A current limit rather than the normal 10-12A, giving peak power in/out of around 540/405W, though the speed at which this occurs, performance on hills/acceleration/headwinds, and max speed with motor only will depend on the internal geared reduction: if my sums are correct, the lowest gearing option 160rpm should give max speed of about 15mph with this current limit - higher gearings would give higher max speed but lower hill climbing ability, at a given speed, than lower gearing...
It seems this site ISLAND EARTH HUB MOTOR KIT SUPPLIER contact used to sell the "tongxin" motor (see the customer pics link), and there's some useful info re: crystalyte motors & DIY ebike kits in general.
Stuart.
Just some small points to add:
If power is an issue, then I think that the 36V motor's power output can be increased by using a controller which has 13-15A current limit rather than the normal 10-12A, giving peak power in/out of around 540/405W, though the speed at which this occurs, performance on hills/acceleration/headwinds, and max speed with motor only will depend on the internal geared reduction: if my sums are correct, the lowest gearing option 160rpm should give max speed of about 15mph with this current limit - higher gearings would give higher max speed but lower hill climbing ability, at a given speed, than lower gearing...
It seems this site ISLAND EARTH HUB MOTOR KIT SUPPLIER contact used to sell the "tongxin" motor (see the customer pics link), and there's some useful info re: crystalyte motors & DIY ebike kits in general.
Stuart.
Hi Miles
Sorry, I somehow missed your post (not used to such a responsive forum!) - my last post was not a response to yours, but just some more info thrown in for good measure...
Yes, I find those figures on the chinese site somewhat confusing too; the torque curve (under product/parameter on that site) only shows up to 20 Nm, and may be a little on the "optimistic" side (seems to show peak efficiency at just over 80%) but the efficiency at peak power reads as actually a little over 75% - if this is a true and accurate figure, or even close to one, could it not be accounted for by virtue of the peak power being fed to the motor at close to its optimum speed (which, from the same curve, seems to occur at a disproportionately high speed compared to e.g. crystalyte as I said - 180rpm on a motor rated at 190prm, or in 26" wheel 13.4mph approx when motor limit is about 14-15mph) or by an efficiency due to the high gear-reduction, or a combination of both?
I found some posts, seemingly from the makers of these motors, on a partially recovered visforvoltage thread (you get the picture...!) which read:
"Power and Torque are direct proportion relation.So more power means more torque.But there is another important variant----time. Time and Torque are inverse relation.
And that's why we say our motor is very powerful.It is decelerated from the very hign speed of 3000 round and with a very high proportion of 12.5:1.
12.5:1 is the top proportion in China engines(as I don't know much about other high speed motor all over the world).This quite short time makes motor getting a big torque in a split second.
And we should observe the curve to find how it works when you need a big torque.Please find the curve on our website.You can find on the loading of 20N.m,the efficiency of tongxin motor is still in 75%.And another data,tongxin moto will stop working when it loaded with 35N.m. In short,the high efficiency keep you feeling comfortable when you need a big torque like big loading or going uphills.
This small shape is not just for looking."
From the said torque curve on their website, the peak power occurs at just below 20Nm torque (about 18-19Nm) and so at a higher efficiency and speed, so if its accurate that efficiency is 75% at 20Nm, then it must be>75% at peak power???!!!
All this assumes, as I say, the accuracy of the given torque curve, but it seems plausible/possible to my, perhaps somewhat naive, sense of mechanics
And yes, Tony Castles would, as far as I know, be the best person to answer questions on the nano motor - unless others have similar experience of them.
My aim is to try to understand how these different hub motors compare in all areas of performance - speed,torque,peak power output and at what speed etc. and so make a fully informed choice on a motor/bike suited to my needs & pocket
Sorry, I somehow missed your post (not used to such a responsive forum!
) - my last post was not a response to yours, but just some more info thrown in for good measure...Yes, I find those figures on the chinese site somewhat confusing too; the torque curve (under product/parameter on that site) only shows up to 20 Nm, and may be a little on the "optimistic" side (seems to show peak efficiency at just over 80%) but the efficiency at peak power reads as actually a little over 75% - if this is a true and accurate figure, or even close to one, could it not be accounted for by virtue of the peak power being fed to the motor at close to its optimum speed (which, from the same curve, seems to occur at a disproportionately high speed compared to e.g. crystalyte as I said - 180rpm on a motor rated at 190prm, or in 26" wheel 13.4mph approx when motor limit is about 14-15mph) or by an efficiency due to the high gear-reduction, or a combination of both?
I found some posts, seemingly from the makers of these motors, on a partially recovered visforvoltage thread (you get the picture...!) which read:
"Power and Torque are direct proportion relation.So more power means more torque.But there is another important variant----time. Time and Torque are inverse relation.
And that's why we say our motor is very powerful.It is decelerated from the very hign speed of 3000 round and with a very high proportion of 12.5:1.
12.5:1 is the top proportion in China engines(as I don't know much about other high speed motor all over the world).This quite short time makes motor getting a big torque in a split second.
And we should observe the curve to find how it works when you need a big torque.Please find the curve on our website.You can find on the loading of 20N.m,the efficiency of tongxin motor is still in 75%.And another data,tongxin moto will stop working when it loaded with 35N.m. In short,the high efficiency keep you feeling comfortable when you need a big torque like big loading or going uphills.
This small shape is not just for looking."
From the said torque curve on their website, the peak power occurs at just below 20Nm torque (about 18-19Nm) and so at a higher efficiency and speed, so if its accurate that efficiency is 75% at 20Nm, then it must be>75% at peak power???!!!
All this assumes, as I say, the accuracy of the given torque curve, but it seems plausible/possible to my, perhaps somewhat naive, sense of mechanics
And yes, Tony Castles would, as far as I know, be the best person to answer questions on the nano motor - unless others have similar experience of them.
My aim is to try to understand how these different hub motors compare in all areas of performance - speed,torque,peak power output and at what speed etc. and so make a fully informed choice on a motor/bike suited to my needs & pocket
Hi Miles
Yes, remarkably flat indeed, and interesting, given that it is accurate though as I said, the higher efficiency at peak power seems to me to be at least partly assisted by the relatively high speed at which it occurs - very close to the optimum for the motor.
I suppose a fair human-power analogue would be pedalling a bit harder at a slightly sub-optimal cadence in a gear slightly too high in order to regain speed & so be back to optimum for the gear & speed & cadence for your particular output style, no?
While this gives a quick,efficient way to maintain "cruising speed" e.g. 14-15mph and also seems quite economical for gentle slopes, having the peak power at a fairly high speed would compromise a bit hill-climbing at steeper gradients which can be tackled more "easily" the lower the speed at which peak power output occurs, but also increasingly less efficiently by the single-speed hub motor the slower the speed at which it occurs...
This to me is an interesting difference between this motor and others I've seen torque graphs of - including crystalyte - which give lower speed (about half of max speed) peak power good for hills, though some, the 408 for instance, seem to have slightly higher maximum efficiency levels to begin with - around 80-83% or more I've seen, but that probably only gives a very small improvement to power economy in those motors.
Another thing, the power curve for this motor is incomplete - only goes up to just below peak power at 20Nm torque. I don't think this is meant to conceal anything, but is probably just to emphasise the flatness of the upper, low torque, part of the curve. I think they are saying in my last post, that the motor does not stall before 35Nm of torque is applied.
P.S. I guess my previous post could have been briefer i.e. have a look at this graph...
P.P.S Flecc has posted a rather detailed analysis of how the freewheel mechanism I mentioned may work in the Giant new twist thread (about pg 3 or 4?), linked to earlier in this thread, if anyone would like to know
Take care
Stuart.
Yes, remarkably flat indeed, and interesting, given that it is accurate
though as I said, the higher efficiency at peak power seems to me to be at least partly assisted by the relatively high speed at which it occurs - very close to the optimum for the motor.I suppose a fair human-power analogue would be pedalling a bit harder at a slightly sub-optimal cadence in a gear slightly too high in order to regain speed & so be back to optimum for the gear & speed & cadence for your particular output style, no?
While this gives a quick,efficient way to maintain "cruising speed" e.g. 14-15mph and also seems quite economical for gentle slopes, having the peak power at a fairly high speed would compromise a bit hill-climbing at steeper gradients which can be tackled more "easily" the lower the speed at which peak power output occurs, but also increasingly less efficiently by the single-speed hub motor the slower the speed at which it occurs...
This to me is an interesting difference between this motor and others I've seen torque graphs of - including crystalyte - which give lower speed (about half of max speed) peak power good for hills, though some, the 408 for instance, seem to have slightly higher maximum efficiency levels to begin with - around 80-83% or more I've seen, but that probably only gives a very small improvement to power economy in those motors.
Another thing, the power curve for this motor is incomplete - only goes up to just below peak power at 20Nm torque. I don't think this is meant to conceal anything, but is probably just to emphasise the flatness of the upper, low torque, part of the curve. I think they are saying in my last post, that the motor does not stall before 35Nm of torque is applied.
P.S. I guess my previous post could have been briefer i.e. have a look at this graph...
P.P.S Flecc has posted a rather detailed analysis of how the freewheel mechanism I mentioned may work in the Giant new twist thread (about pg 3 or 4?), linked to earlier in this thread, if anyone would like to know
Take care
Stuart.
What is a complete curve?
"Another thing, the power curve for this motor is incomplete - only goes up to just below peak power at 20Nm torque. I don't think this is meant to conceal anything, but is probably just to emphasise the flatness of the upper, low torque, part of the curve. I think they are saying in my last post, that the motor does not stall before 35Nm of torque is applied."
Hi,thank you... whatever
I just want to tell you this curve is from a government institution, which takes charge for testing the products and reporting. They use the stated equipments to test products according to the stated standards. So they report the motors' life like "No failures after 10000km", but they won't report the motors as "It stops running at 30000km". They won't do the test for destroying. The same as the peak power. That's why the curve only goes up at 20Nm torque------they report it at 20Nm....
"Another thing, the power curve for this motor is incomplete - only goes up to just below peak power at 20Nm torque. I don't think this is meant to conceal anything, but is probably just to emphasise the flatness of the upper, low torque, part of the curve. I think they are saying in my last post, that the motor does not stall before 35Nm of torque is applied."
Hi,thank you... whatever
I just want to tell you this curve is from a government institution, which takes charge for testing the products and reporting. They use the stated equipments to test products according to the stated standards. So they report the motors' life like "No failures after 10000km", but they won't report the motors as "It stops running at 30000km". They won't do the test for destroying. The same as the peak power. That's why the curve only goes up at 20Nm torque------they report it at 20Nm....
Hi Diana, and may I wish you a warm welcome to the forum
I really should be more careful how I put things: I didn't mean "incomplete"; as you rightly point out, it simply goes up to 20 Nm, and that's it!
My wording, if you like, was influenced by having seen what look like the actual printouts of torque curves/graphs like those you can see on the "users.bigpond" link on the 1st page of this thread, on which the curve does continue up to nearer a "stall" torque value, though stops short of actually stalling.
In addition, the fact that it seemed that the tongxin motor manufacturers were quoting performance at 35Nm while their graph "only" showed up to 20Nm appeared to me to be a missed opportunity to show the "whole picture" as it were and therefore unusual, however what you say is consistent with what I have been told - that the data shown (up to 20Nm) is the entire, complete data they have for the reason you gave .
So, I hope the reasons for my careless choice of words is clear now and that I've rescued any sleight on the reputation of this motor/company I may have made: I certainly didn't mean to cause any,or affront anyone in any way, and in case its not obvious from my other posts, I think it looks a great little motor, one which I hope to try out very soon .
Stuart.
I really should be more careful how I put things: I didn't mean "incomplete"; as you rightly point out, it simply goes up to 20 Nm, and that's it!
My wording, if you like, was influenced by having seen what look like the actual printouts of torque curves/graphs like those you can see on the "users.bigpond" link on the 1st page of this thread, on which the curve does continue up to nearer a "stall" torque value, though stops short of actually stalling.
In addition, the fact that it seemed that the tongxin motor manufacturers were quoting performance at 35Nm while their graph "only" showed up to 20Nm appeared to me to be a missed opportunity to show the "whole picture" as it were and therefore unusual, however what you say is consistent with what I have been told - that the data shown (up to 20Nm) is the entire, complete data they have for the reason you gave
.So, I hope the reasons for my careless choice of words is clear now and that I've rescued any sleight on the reputation of this motor/company I may have made: I certainly didn't mean to cause any,or affront anyone in any way, and in case its not obvious from my other posts, I think it looks a great little motor, one which I hope to try out very soon
.Stuart.
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
