General Poll, response appreciated

[Philip]

What happens is the electric motor spins up the rear wheel very quickly after it leaves the ground. This raises the front and lowers the rear, causing the rear to slam into the next whoop. I have written software to mitigate this and given it to Stark Future about a year ago. I don't know if they have released it to users or plan to do so.

This was obvious back in ~2018 when Josh Hill battled Ricky Carmichael in Paris. Josh's bike went teeter-totter in the whoops, every single lap. I later experienced this myself. My Alta could never do the whoops well. It was much easier to jump the whoops than to skim them.

The reason, I think, ICE bikes skim the whoops better is because they have a bigger flywheel. So... wouldn't a dumb fix like a big enough "virtual flywheel" make electric bikes perform nearly equally?

what if I wanted to do the same thing without having the skills: do you think that it could be done using a kind of wheelie control which prevents the rider from raising the front end too much and flip back?

In theory, if the controller is fast enough, and the motor is powerful enough, and the inertia of the rotating motor and wheels is large enough, then yes. In practice though, if the system runs into the limitations of any of the above, then it may not be able to sustain that whoop-skimming-wheelie. In other words: at low speeds - yes, at high speeds - not likely.

 

[Marko_Flux]

If you guys cut ties with Stark, we could be interested in playing around together. Balkan bros? LMK

 

[fsfs]

I have been doing a bit more thinking about this and have decided to move forward with it. IMO, using a twist throttle as the only input is not the way to go. Quite a while ago I did a bit of physics/math to implement a clutch. The main aim is to be able to keep the bike in a relatively low power setting but be able to use the clutch to loft the front end. Also it can be used to get rid of engine braking when desired. However, attaching a clutch lever interferes with with the hand brake (for people who chose that option). Would a thumb brake make sense? Or perhaps a thumb clutch?

 

[Theo]

Or perhaps a thumb clutch?

Another option is a control like this thumb activated throttle:

Edit: I mean that it's a variation to the typical design of throttle controls which lets the rider keep the thumb in a more natural position.

 

[fsfs]

Another option is a control like this thumb activated throttle:

Yes, i know about those. That is really an interesting in combination with a twist throttle. You could set the twist throttle for lets say 40HP, then use the thumb for the full 80HP beans. That would be another way to loft the front end while keeping the bike controllable with the twist throttle. BTW, I am not really a fan of throttle curve "shapes". If you make it less sensitive in one area, it becomes more sensitive in another area -- gain somewhere, lose elsewhere.

Any gut feeling which would be better for lofting the front? E-Clutch with algorithm to simulate a mechanical clutch (with some virtual engine RPM feedback) or thumb throttle?

 

[Beagle]

However, attaching a clutch lever interferes with with the hand brake (for people who chose that option).

I think Flux moto are working on that, aren't they? If I remember right the left lever ("virtual clutch") is supposed to act either like a clutch or a rear brake depending on an algorithm fed by multiple inputs like throttle position, front brake, wheel speed and so on?

Interesting that Josh Hill just mentioned in his latest video that he asked Stark if they could work on some kind of clutch. I was thinking it would be needed more for off-road than MX but maybe not?

 

[fsfs]

I think Flux moto are working on that, aren't they? If I remember right the left lever ("virtual clutch") is supposed to act either like a clutch or a rear brake depending on an algorithm fed by multiple inputs like throttle position, front brake, wheel speed and so on?

Interesting that Josh Hill just mentioned in his latest video that he asked Stark if they could work on some kind of clutch. I was thinking it would be needed more for off-road than MX but maybe not?

I have had a clutch on Varg for a long time. The ideas behind it are somewhat different than with Flux (at least as what I know about Flux).

The electronics do have inputs where a clutch can be connected, it is just that having a clutch is against the leaderships vision. However, that didn't/doesn't keep me (and others here in Croatia) from experimenting on our own; but we don't make videos and put them up on the internet.

 

[fsfs]

1) no, I consider it taking advantage of electric technology. Screw the haters
2) sure!
3) maybe if the benefits were high

Question though. What's wrong with the method you used with Alta? Define acceleration limits, preventing the rear tire from spinning up faster than a set value. Just having that parameter available in the app would be amazing. Adjusting it on the Alta had pretty awesome effects. I was able to ride in mud with max power with very little tire spin.

OK, it has been decided. The project is now on.

I would like to thank the people here for talking with me and helping guide me towards a decision. The conclusions are basically these two:

1) The more powerful the bike the better for making the algorithms as good as we can.
2) Once we are happy with the algorithms they can be applied to any appropriate bike.

We have a pair of Vargs; they will be used for development and to showcase what we have done. What bikes will that be applied to later? Who knows. I think it is a "build it and they will come" type of thing.

 

[Philip]

Now that you decided not to do a Surron, we can be your test riders!

 

[Philip]

On the Varg this does not involve any hardware modification. It uses the existing inverter. There is no way to "deliver" this to Varg owners. It is only for us to learn and develop the algorithms. What happens from that point is anybody's guess.

This is a bummer!

 

[fsfs]

Now that you decided not to do a Surron, we can be your test riders!

OK, no where near traction control yet (perhaps better called traction management) but here is what has already been done or very close to being done:

1) A second map switch has been added on the right side of the bars sitting between the brake lever and throttle. It is wired into existing VCU inputs.
2) E-clutch has been added. The clutch is proportional (not on/off switch but analog like an e-throttle). The length of the "clutch engagement zone" is adjustable. It is wired into existing VCU inputs.

3) Bluetooth audio support has been added to the VCU -- it can now pair with an Bluetooth speaker/headphones.

Added functionality is a follows.

A) Enhanced crawler mode:

When in forward crawler mode the right side map switch functions as follows:
Pushing the UP button allows the bike to be freely pushed forward.
The bike will not roll backward unless the clutch is pulled in.
Throttle moves bike forward as before.
Pushing the DOWN button reverts to old behavior (cannot push bike in either direction).

Reverse crawler mode works in the same way.
Question -- should the DOWN button allow the bike to be freely pushed backward? Or should we use the UP button for this? Which is more intuitive/natural?

B) Normal riding mode:

The right side map switch UP and DOWN buttons now select which flywheel to use.
LED off - no flywheel
LED red - flywheel #1
LED yellow - flyheel #2
LED green - flyheel #3
LED cyan - flyheel #4
LED blue - flyheel #5
LED magenta - flyheel #6

Each flywheel has adjustable "acceleration mass" and "deceleration mass"

Each "map" has a hill hold on/off option. The bike will ride normally but will not roll backwards. To roll backwards pull in the clutch (or use map without hill hold).

Pulling in the clutch during regenerative (engine) braking will cause the bike to roll freely.

C) Clutch popping mode:

The front can be lofted even in 20HP mode; pull in the clutch and open the throttle. The virtual engine will rev up. When the clutch is popped the bike will be in 80HP mode for a fraction of a second -- the length of time being proportional to how much the virtual engine has been "revved up". If a BlueTooth audio device has been paired, the amount of engine rev will be heard as a combination of loudness and frequency.

D) Docking station "delete":

I know some riders don't like to have the Varg phone in the docking station, particularly for trail riding where a lost phone can be a big PITA. Pressing the red/power button on the right side map switch causes the bike to speak (just in English for now) the battery percentage and any warning message to the paired BlueTooth audio device.

Is having BlueTooth audio in your helmet a viable option? Or is what we have done just plain dumb?

Any thoughts or input?

 

[Beagle]

OK, no where near traction control yet (perhaps better called traction management) but here is what has already been done or very close to being done:

1) A second map switch has been added on the right side of the bars sitting between the brake lever and throttle. It is wired into existing VCU inputs.
2) E-clutch has been added. The clutch is proportional (not on/off switch but analog like an e-throttle). The length of the "clutch engagement zone" is adjustable. It is wired into existing VCU inputs.
View attachment 12396
3) Bluetooth audio support has been added to the VCU -- it can now pair with an Bluetooth speaker/headphones.

Added functionality is a follows.

A) Enhanced crawler mode:

When in forward crawler mode the right side map switch functions as follows:
Pushing the UP button allows the bike to be freely pushed forward.
The bike will not roll backward unless the clutch is pulled in.
Throttle moves bike forward as before.
Pushing the DOWN button reverts to old behavior (cannot push bike in either direction).

Reverse crawler mode works in the same way.
Question -- should the DOWN button allow the bike to be freely pushed backward? Or should we use the UP button for this? Which is more intuitive/natural?

B) Normal riding mode:

The right side map switch UP and DOWN buttons now select which flywheel to use.
LED off - no flywheel
LED red - flywheel #1
LED yellow - flyheel #2
LED green - flyheel #3
LED cyan - flyheel #4
LED blue - flyheel #5
LED magenta - flyheel #6

Each flywheel has adjustable "acceleration mass" and "deceleration mass"

Each "map" has a hill hold on/off option. The bike will ride normally but will not roll backwards. To roll backwards pull in the clutch (or use map without hill hold).

Pulling in the clutch during regenerative (engine) braking will cause the bike to roll freely.

C) Clutch popping mode:

The front can be lofted even in 20HP mode; pull in the clutch and open the throttle. The virtual engine will rev up. When the clutch is popped the bike will be in 80HP mode for a fraction of a second -- the length of time being proportional to how much the virtual engine has been "revved up". If a BlueTooth audio device has been paired, the amount of engine rev will be heard as a combination of loudness and frequency.

D) Docking station "delete":

I know some riders don't like to have the Varg phone in the docking station, particularly for trail riding where a lost phone can be a big PITA. Pressing the red/power button on the right side map switch causes the bike to speak (just in English for now) the battery percentage and any warning message to the paired BlueTooth audio device.

Is having BlueTooth audio in your helmet a viable option? Or is what we have done just plain dumb?

Any thoughts or input?

All this sounds awesome, electric bikes open up so many new possibilities, aftermarket is so not dead, just different. And definitely more interesting.

 

[Philip]

I'd buy the six flywheels please. I hope virtual flywheels cost less to ship from Europe than the physical ones!

Maybe the virtual clutch with a bike-mounted speaker too. I would stay away from earbuds because they are like earplugs but with an additional noise being pumped into my head, and I have already had a problem at least once when I didn't hear a bike behind me.

 

[fsfs]

I'd buy the six flywheels please. I hope virtual flywheels cost less to ship from Europe than the physical ones!

Maybe the virtual clutch with a bike-mounted speaker too. I would stay away from earbuds because they are like earplugs but with an additional noise being pumped into my head, and I have already had a problem at least once when I didn't hear a bike behind me.

The idea is to play engine revving sound is only when accelerating the virtual engine -- clutch pulled in and throttle opened. During all other times there would be silence from BlueTooth audio.

Personally I can't stand earbuds and would just go with in helmet speakers.

However, a bike mounted BlueTooth speaker would also work. In that case we could have an options:

1) To be silent unless when pressing the info button or revving the engine in preparation to pop the clutch.

2) To make "i am coming down the trail hear me" sound like this guy did --

 

[fsfs]

OK, no where near traction control yet (perhaps better called traction management) but here is what has already been done or very close to being done:

1) A second map switch has been added on the right side of the bars sitting between the brake lever and throttle. It is wired into existing VCU inputs.
2) E-clutch has been added. The clutch is proportional (not on/off switch but analog like an e-throttle). The length of the "clutch engagement zone" is adjustable. It is wired into existing VCU inputs.
View attachment 12396
3) Bluetooth audio support has been added to the VCU -- it can now pair with an Bluetooth speaker/headphones.

Added functionality is a follows.

A) Enhanced crawler mode:

When in forward crawler mode the right side map switch functions as follows:
Pushing the UP button allows the bike to be freely pushed forward.
The bike will not roll backward unless the clutch is pulled in.
Throttle moves bike forward as before.
Pushing the DOWN button reverts to old behavior (cannot push bike in either direction).

Reverse crawler mode works in the same way.
Question -- should the DOWN button allow the bike to be freely pushed backward? Or should we use the UP button for this? Which is more intuitive/natural?

B) Normal riding mode:

The right side map switch UP and DOWN buttons now select which flywheel to use.
LED off - no flywheel
LED red - flywheel #1
LED yellow - flyheel #2
LED green - flyheel #3
LED cyan - flyheel #4
LED blue - flyheel #5
LED magenta - flyheel #6

Each flywheel has adjustable "acceleration mass" and "deceleration mass"

Each "map" has a hill hold on/off option. The bike will ride normally but will not roll backwards. To roll backwards pull in the clutch (or use map without hill hold).

Pulling in the clutch during regenerative (engine) braking will cause the bike to roll freely.

C) Clutch popping mode:

The front can be lofted even in 20HP mode; pull in the clutch and open the throttle. The virtual engine will rev up. When the clutch is popped the bike will be in 80HP mode for a fraction of a second -- the length of time being proportional to how much the virtual engine has been "revved up". If a BlueTooth audio device has been paired, the amount of engine rev will be heard as a combination of loudness and frequency.

D) Docking station "delete":

I know some riders don't like to have the Varg phone in the docking station, particularly for trail riding where a lost phone can be a big PITA. Pressing the red/power button on the right side map switch causes the bike to speak (just in English for now) the battery percentage and any warning message to the paired BlueTooth audio device.

Is having BlueTooth audio in your helmet a viable option? Or is what we have done just plain dumb?

Any thoughts or input?

Does anyone want to see this demonstrated in a parking lot in a totally unprofessional video?

 

[Theo]

Does anyone want to see this demonstrated in a parking lot in a totally unprofessional video?

I want to!!!

 

[AL_V]

Does anyone want to see this demonstrated in a parking lot in a totally unprofessional video?

Absolutely!