Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BBSO2 programming for Recumbent trikes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    BBSO2 programming for Recumbent trikes

    I have a BBSO2 750 watts on a Recumbent fat tire trike. Has anyone programmed their trike for a balance of speed (13-20 mph for 9 levels) with saving battery for better mileage?

    #2
    How is that goal (better mileage) possible without extensive trial and error testing of different programming over the same route? And even if you found a set of parameters that gave a measurable and reproduceable better mileage on a given route, would that set of parameters give better mileage over a route that had more hills, steeper/shallower hills, different asphalt finish, more/fewer stops and starts, different prevailing wind speed/direction? I tried various programming parameters and got nowhere with it but maybe my methodology for determining which parameters improve mileage and which don't was lacking. I'm open to suggestions.

    Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying better mileage isn't a worthy goal. It is the holy grail in the e-vehicle world. It's just that when combined with pedal assist it's almost impossible to measure and attribute to programming alone. There are just too many variables and precious few tools to quantify and account for all of them.

    IMHO, if you want better mileage then reduce drag and pedal harder. Drag is caused by wind resistance and friction between road and tire so consider adding a lightweight front fairing. Side fairings can help too. Spinning spokes through the air consumes significant energy so consider replacing your standard round spokes with more aerodynamic spokes. Consider harder, narrower rubber because it rolls with less friction. Yes, your fat tires may look cool and give a softer ride but they don't roll as easy as a hard narrow tire and you can actually measure that. Case in point... ever see a bike/trike with fat tires win a road race?

    I think programability is little more than a sales gimmick, something riders can brag about when engaged in games of brinksmanship. Beyond that it serves little purpose.

    Comment


      #3
      I agree that there is a lot of variable involved and has taken a lot of testing over many routes. I have found settings that allow me to pedal at my comfort level with any other rider and still go beyond my batteries rated miles. Not always consistent and some times less but at the speed I want to ride.
      I find the programming very useful. The programming that came with the motor was way too fast and not comfortable. By using the program I was able to reduce the parameters to my style of riding and not something someone else thinks I should have.
      Yes I am looking for that "sweet spot" and have at time s found it. It is not perfect but to me it is fun in trying to get what I want even though I know it will not work for all conditions, all trails and even how I feel that day!
      I have achieved up to 5-10 miles more on one battery with some settings. I watch my watts and try to stay within the 125-250 range. The settings help me do that with a comfortable cadence and resistance. Shifting to a different gear and power level when ever the situation calls for it.
      Not perfect but fun for those long rides. I ride 20-50 miles a day usually over varied routes and terrain.
      It may be a little more than a sales gimmick ( never was told this was a feature) but it does allow one to change things to suit their style of riding. To me this make riding more fun and comfortable.
      Enjoy!

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by AltaBrad View Post
        I think programability is little more than a sales gimmick, something riders can brag about when engaged in games of brinksmanship. Beyond that it serves little purpose.
        I would disagree with this. I have several ebikes with only one being fully programmable (BBHSD) and it makes a huge difference. I've detailed the way I like to program for "cruise control" elsewhere in this forum. I'm assuming you have not used a programmable controller or else your opinion would be different.

        Since you still adhere to the old thought of fat tires are slow tires you should read up on the latest empirical testing done between the two. There is almost no difference in rolling resistance.
        Last edited by Diggs Ut; 02-07-2022, 05:57 AM.

        Comment


        • AZguy
          AZguy commented
          Editing a comment
          When off-road, fat tires will have _lower_ rolling resistance... they are somewhat worse on smooth hard surface but the rider experience with them just about anywhere is better and who cares about a little extra rolling resistance when you have a big box of 'trons on the bike?

          And who cares about the ideal conditions anyway - most of the time in the real world wind or slope will have far greater effects on mileage than stuff like rolling resistance

        • Diggs Ut
          Diggs Ut commented
          Editing a comment
          It was this post here that changed my thoughts on fat vs. narrow tires -

          https://electricbike.com/forum/forum...row-tires-fast

        • AZguy
          AZguy commented
          Editing a comment
          I'm with ya - ever since going to fat tires I'm a believer and will likely never go back

          A year or so ago I read a long set of information from schwalbe on all sorts of tire related things and they pretty much echoed the same - the only place that all other things being equal where skinny tires have lower resistance is on smooth hard surface and that off-road fatter tires had lower resistance

          But they did point out that lower pressures increase the resistance too and that most fat tires are running much lower pressures which likely has more effect than the tire width so if you take that into account they suffer even more on the hard surface... but I don't care really... they just bring so much to the table it's worth it for me... If I didn't ride off-road a lot and didn't have electric I might air them up more... but I don't worry about those "if's" =]

        #5
        Riding technique is very important when it comes to mileage

        My BBSHD out of the box didn't do very well mileage-wise, typically in the 20's of Wh/mi... I was also chewing up 11t cogs on the cassette

        I got a battery management system that logged the current/voltage/power and the stock settings had the current/power going all over the place

        Eventually I ended up setting the controller for unlimited speed (100% in all PAS) and set the current with an exponential progression:

        Click image for larger version

Name:	PASlevels.png
Views:	176
Size:	13.1 KB
ID:	147465

        There are no more large fluctuations in power/current, it's flat, constant at whatever PAS I select. I change the PAS level as I ride vaguely like shifting but not as often and it's different timing.. I usually just carry enough power to go the speed I want for the terrain I'm on

        My mileage is much better, now often in the 10-15Wh/mi and I haven't taken out any cassette cogs since the retune

        It would be a mistake to think it's all the tune however it was really important - the large fluctuations in current/power jut plain aren't efficient - but it's a lot about riding technique, selecting the right amount of power, etc. However the original tune wouldn't really allow better technique - the new tune does and it works really well for me. I've put this or similar in other peoples' bikes and they all have preferred it over the original tunes they got with their BBSHD's. Some prefer a different start of the current levels but still set with the exponential progression which to me makes a ton more sense than the more typical linear tunes they come out-of-box with.


        YMMV

        Comment


          #6
          Originally posted by Diggs Ut View Post

          I would disagree with this. I have several ebikes with only one being fully programmable (BBHSD) and it makes a huge difference.
          Show me the numbers data you measured and I'll maybe believe you. No numbers = your feelings. Feelings are swayed by your mood on any given day, drugs (illicit or doctor prescribed), ehat you had for breakfast that day, etc. Feelings are not compelling evidence IMHO.

          Originally posted by Diggs Ut View Post
          I've detailed the way I like to program for "cruise control" elsewhere in this forum.
          Originally posted by Diggs Ut View Post
          I'm assuming you have not used a programmable controller or else your opinion would be different.
          Your ability to draw ridiculous conclusions from ridiculous assumptions is amusing. My opinion comes from experimenting with different parameters on my programmable controller, gathering hard data on distance travelled and charge remaining at end of ride and finding that results over the same route (never mind different routes) cannot be reproduced. No reproduceability = weak conclusions and/or a problem that is not amenable to scientific inquiry because there are just too many uncontrollable variables in the situation under investigation.

          Now I will agree that different parameters can make your ride easier, less taxing, allow you to establish your cadence, make you feel better, etc. but none of those goals are the OP's stated goal which is better mileage. Better mileage is what I responded to not how rider feels after his ride or his cadence or anything else. Just in case you didn't notice. Or in case you did notice but your feelings ran away with you because I didn't say what the manufacturer(s) prefer I should say and tell the forum programmable controllers are the greatest thing to happen to e-bikes since the advent of lithium batteries and brushless DC motors.

          Originally posted by Diggs Ut View Post
          Since you still adhere to the old thought of fat tires are slow tires you should read up on the latest empirical testing done between the two. There is almost no difference in rolling resistance.
          I have no interest in studies conducted by tire manufacturers as they are designed primarily to sell more tires at higher prices to more consumers seeking status by being the first on their block to have the latest shiny new bauble and all the attention the bauble gets for them. Same applies to reviewers/critics published in rag mags looking to boost their ad revenue from tire manufacturers.

          You should read up on how consumers lie to themselves and why and take a freshman level physics course so you understand basic concepts like friction and rolling resistance better so you don't get hosed on tire purchases and assume whacko things about what I own and what I've done with it.

          Comment


          • AZguy
            AZguy commented
            Editing a comment
            For objective observations, analysis and conclusions, I have a lot of numbers.

            I log every ride. In the log I note distance, moving time, average moving speed, begin voltage, end voltage, Ah and Wh used, which battery and the Wh/mi and Ah/mi. Every ride is also logged at 1pt/sec in a GPS that in addition to lat/lon also has pedal cadence, wheel speed, elevation, temperature, etc.(even logs heart rate from a chest strap monitor) logging and all of this data is in a database that can be queried by mapping programs (including google earth) in addition to providing raw data for analysis.

            My battery management display keeps a log of amps, volts, watts, Ah, Wh and speed although I only query this log occasionally it has been instrumental in not only showing the huge difference it makes how the controller is tuned to the energy consumed but the why some are better or worse than others...

            As I mentioned my Wh/mi has reduced more than just significantly after the controller was tuned optimally, it was more like a 30-40% reduction (or increased range if you like) for similar moving average speeds.


            Subjectively the more optimal tune gives me a much more satisfying ride experience over the "stock" tune when using it in pedal assist - granted that's subjective and you can take it with whatever grain of salt you choose from a very experienced electric bike rider... the objective is hard numbers...


            As always, YMMV

          • Diggs Ut
            Diggs Ut commented
            Editing a comment
            I'm going to save my breath as when presented with evidence and data that doesn't fit your thoughts you just ignore it anyway. You should try to be a bit more open-minded and actually read the information (cycling magazine, not Schwalbe) referenced. You may even learn something if you give yourself a chance.

          #7
          LOL @ you Diggs Ut, there you go again assuming you know what I've done and read and learned. Hilarious for a few minutes but then it just gets pathetic.

          Comment


            #8
            Originally posted by AZGuy
            For objective observations, analysis and conclusions, I have a lot of numbers.
            That's the kind of stuff that speaks to me. Now that my Franken-freighter trike is back to near new condition I'm going to look into this again, perhaps even purchase some of the devices you're using (GPS and battery management) and try some of your programming recommendations, AZGuy. My motivation to do so grows from the fact my rig is heavy, rather non-aerodynamic and we get only so many recharge cycles from our batteries then they need to be replaced. Prolonging battery life by increasing efficiency makes economic sense.

            Comment

            Working...
            X