Vedder's VESC 6.0

OK, I wasn’t criticizing you! Sorry if my post gave that impression! I just had a feeling that this is the opinion of many users here (based on numerous posts about the VESC6), and I don’t really agree. Many were hoping for something more affordable, and are disappointed. My point was more, that they don’t need to be, because they will get it. It will just take a while.

I guess about plans for different versions we will know very soon, when the usual suspects in this community regarding electronics get their hands on the reference design, firmware, software etc! Should be a matter of weeks before we know more. Pretty excited, too… It’s going to be a good year!

cool :slight_smile: And I do see your point - a lot of grumbling here about the price in a way that makes no sense, it seems perfectly fair to charge more initially to offset R&D.

Excitement abound here too. And frankly I’m too busy (and poor) to actually get any electronics just yet anyway, every night consumed with 6 month old son & messing with printing new molds for the carbon arms and pillow blocks for the giant hub for my electrified decathlon scooter (or Frankenstein’s Scooter as I think I shall call it). Am just hoping that when (in maybe 5 years) I have made the arms fit, there will be a reliable ESC I can afford!

Machining my own heat sinks, packing in my own capacitor boards as it happens will likely be needed anyway for my machine due to the design you see, so am hoping a more ‘barebones’ product might be released by someone, but it wouldn’t’ be the end of the world if I end up paying for bits I dont need.

1 Like

And im here still waiting for someone to do a dual vesc (a real dual, not just to vescs botched together)

The problem with dual ESC has been that if one dies the other will die too.

Same goes for a DUAL DUAL :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

@kaly vescs can be repaired fairly easily, that’s not an issue. Also there’s a ton of components that are duplicated that wouldn’t be needed anymore, thus bringing the overall cost down.

If you share the components across 2 VESCs then you’re essentially doubling the amount of work, calculations, and switching the VESC has to do. You’ll need completely different components to make up for it.

I’m hoping the files are released by the fourth quarter.

I’m looking ultimately for two driven wheels, so the dualness is interesting. I was under the impression that two VESCs could be set to communicate over the CAN bus, even including such cunning as least-node-speed traction control. But I guess that not the sort of duality to which you refer?

Maybe you mean more of a hot-standby, fail over redundancy type config? I.e. both wired to the same wheel with some sort of keep-alive comms between them and the standby able to jump into action the moment the other fails. Sounds scary - if the failure mode were not a simple total death then having both wired in parallel to the phase wires could be quite nasty.

A TWIN VESC SIX… We thought about it, but It doesn’t cut a lot of cost and if you have a problem with it, you have a twin problem. Not worth it. Traces also get to long, which is not in favour of performance.

Frank

1 Like

Just wondering. but what happened to the vesc 5? all I seem to see is 4, 4.1, 4.12, 6

VESC 5 was skipped, since Benjamin and I wanted better performance. When we teamed up, BV made the decision to rewrite the software ground up, instead of tweaking BLDC-Tool further. We had that moment of - come on, lets bite the bullet… The new software/FW allowed the design of VESC 6. In consequence Vesc 5 was outdated before it even hit the market. Its all about the software!

Frank

thats a nice little story. makes me a bit happier the 6 is out instead of the 5 as well. you guys rock!

I personally think it was good to bite the bullet and boost the project to the next level. There was so much involved. Website, legal issues, communication, software, GUI, hardware prototyping, testing, finding an outstanding manufacturer etc., tons of research… 15 months of hard work. I think everyone will profit from that, not only Benjamin and us. Manufacturers will start make their own HW designs, rather than copying one design over and over. They will start to build up their own brands in future, backed by a project on solid foundations and a strong community surrounding it. We know it took time and caused delays - but in the end its worth it. You got the see the bigger picture.

Frank

Hi Franck, Why do you say that manufacturer will develop new HW with the new VESC6. If you release a reference design that is good enough (and I wish it will be since I plan to solder it myself instead of buying it), don’t you think that manufacturer will stick to it ? What make the new buisness model any different that the 4.12 one ? The changes in HW of the 4.12 from the manufacturers were quite minimal (except for the FOCBOX and the directFET from Chaka). What make you think it will be any different with the reference VESC6 ? Will the reference design be that much below the trampa one that manufacturer will be forced to develop their design to be competitive/usable on an e-sk8 ?

Hi Akira, the new FW simply allows more different HW designs. That easy. I also think that a growing project will encourage people to make products with USPs. Some will sell on price point, others on innovation and quality.

Frank

Thanks for the answer. I didn’t make the link with the FW. Looking forward to the release.

Oh shit!!! If it makes him feel better to know, I now feel better knowing I’m not the only one hobbled…I hope his recovery is speedy!!!

It’s all fine now. Plaster is off, back on two feet. I serviced his board, so in September we can do a little tour again. Titanium kingpins, titanium bones… All we need now is a titanium VESC housing.

Frank

1 Like

Ti TM… Unfortunately Texas instruments has that one I’d imagine.

Frank, will the non-beta VESC 6 be shipped when Benjamin gets back from holidays or before then?