04-04-2008, 12:13 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,515
Thanks: 4,062
Thanked 6,960 Times in 3,604 Posts
|
Another thought, Tom:
Since the PWM controller isn't 100% efficient, another means of obtaining yet more speed (if you frequenly drive with your foot on the floor) would be a controller bypass. Based on controller efficiency figures I've seen tossed around on the EVDL, I think you'd see at least another 10% speed increase. Plus you could still use field weakening on top of a bypass circuit.
The challenge would be setting it up in such a way that didn't damage the controller from back EMF on switching the controller back into the circuit.
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
04-09-2008, 11:00 PM
|
#12 (permalink)
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,515
Thanks: 4,062
Thanked 6,960 Times in 3,604 Posts
|
Thinking more about this Tom - I think I can see a field weakening experiment in my future. Not predicting when, but it's a far easier thing to set up & manage than a controller bypass.
|
|
|
04-10-2008, 03:53 PM
|
#13 (permalink)
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,515
Thanks: 4,062
Thanked 6,960 Times in 3,604 Posts
|
FYI, Tom:
One of the EVDL Yodas has outlined possible hazards of using field weakening in concert with a PWM controller (potential for damage), and recommended several safeguards:
http://www.evdl.org/archive/index.ht...86%7Ca16615747
|
|
|
|