Yes, push all vendors to do the right thing and stay with the open source spirit if they are using/selling open source projects. If it is their own development not based on an open source project they are welcome to do whatever.
2 Likes
Exactly, that is the purpose of Creative commons license.
Can’t really fault you on that 
Im not an expert when it comes to a Vesc but have some history with creative commons license. It is not essentialy needed of you to openly advert every change you made. Only the changes that increased stability, power or anything that is measurable. If we run the same current through both vescs (ollin & Enertion) the same thing happens. If we hoock it up to the computer we see the same thing. As long as its not a mecanical difference or a measurable permofance enhacement its fair play. As long as its minor improvements (you could even call it your style or your preference).
Let me put it this way. If you use the exact same components but you are more carefull with its placement, the pins, double up on safety, its basically improved ye but not by design but by effort which is totally ok.
Every change I have made has been relayed to Benjamin. He has chosen not to update the BOM due to the higher cost of the parts we use. Does anyone honestly believe Jason is going to spend more money on components when he wont even pay for a few extra jst ports?
What did we change? We use higher rated capacitors, better manufacturing processes and the VESC’s are built by people who actually care about and are involved in the sport. The VESC is a wonderful piece of engineering and we given thousands of euros to Vedder to help him in his development. We also encourage others to send him small tokens of appreciation.
Jason on the other hand has done his best to give Vedder and the Vesc a bad reputation with his poor manufacturing and business practices. He has even gone as far as bad mouthing the VESC when things are not working out for him.
enertionboards Actually the vesc design kinda sux… there is no easy way to manufacture this…so stay tuned for our soon to be released custom vesc without the bulk cap board.
This creative commons argument continues to come up but nobody seems to remember the dual VESC design @onloop failed to launch. If he cares so much about the open source community he would have uploaded the gerber files.
When I updated Vedder/Fetcher anti-spark switch and made it usable for heavy current did I keep it to myself? No, I shared my OshPark files so others could simply order the pcb’s.
Please remember this all stems from @onloop lashing out at others when the quality of his VESC’s were under attack. He was shown proof that we do indeed use higher rated components and he chose to change course and continue to lash out instead of apologizing for his slanderous behavior. And now his very own repair agent is showing proof that they are using our VESC’s to perform repairs on raptors…
28 Likes
You my good Sir are a true scholar and gentleman. I extend my apologies to you and rest my case.
To clarify, I don’t give 2 f&^* about any of that shop vs shop thing nonetheless I do care a lot about open source and will always pull people up to release their changes and as you have relayed them to Benjamin you did that part. He didn’t think it worth releasing, that’s his call. Its his baby…
9 Likes
Wrong.
It is sad however see @onloop and @chaka throwing shit at each other. Marketing is such marketing.
2 Likes
No. I do not use Ollin VESCs to repair raptors. I use them in my builds and i use them when somebody sends me their raptor outside of Enertion support to do non-warranty custom work for which i charge money. I’ve done this twice now, and both times the customer supplied the Ollin VESC and i supplied only labor and testing.
When i repair a Raptor i order ALL of the parts directly from Enertion. I don’t pay for the parts, the customer doesn’t pay for the parts, and Jason certainly is not going to pay for Ollin VESCs to replace shorted or fried Enertion VESCs when he’s got Enertion VESCs basically on tap now.
Everyone needs to calm the fuck down before i start calling thier moms and telling them they babies actin a fool.
One big reason I haven’t had my own motors and mounts made is because i want to support the community and the businesses it has spawned. The sharing in this community can and should be benign. We can grow together. We can all profit. We can all benefit from everything we all learn everyday. That’s how it should be. That’s how i want to do business. Right now Enertion has the sickest belt drives around, and Ollin has the best VESCs. And unfortunately Maytech has my favorite remote at the moment but maybe one day i can do my own based on a similar design because frankly i don’t like their lack of community involvement. Let your service, products, and thier quality speak for themselves. They speak to me every day.
Is it too early to start drinking?
14 Likes
I actually repaired the same VESC 2 or 3 times, I also told him I would continue to repair VESC’s for him once he fixed his mounting design. He was mounting the VESC in such a way as to short the vesc to a metal plate.
I don’t enjoy throwing mud and I do my best to keep my views towards Jason to myself but I have to speak up at some point when he continues to drag my name into conversations in his VESC failure threads.
11 Likes
Why does that show up as a thing I said???
Clarification:
I DID NOT SAY THAT!
I do not have this proof and I never said that. @chaka made this statement.
weird… gremlins i suppose. I updated my post.
Thank you!
1 Like
While we are on the discussion of upgraded components, here is my educated guess on what could help the vesc be more stable:
-replace all 10uF 50V caps with 4.7uf 100V caps (same package) -replace all 15uF 100V caps with 22uF 100V caps (stacked SMT 2220 pacakge), compensate for the lower capacitance on the 1206 caps and low ESL
What I’ve been wondering for a long time, and i guess I should just test it. Would adding a 50V TVS on the input of the vesc help prevent over voltage faillures, the problem with this is that the TVS would need to be huge to be able to handle the motor currents (20A+) @JTAG what do you think?
4 Likes
I’m sure, like chaka said happened here, that there’s cases were he can’t keep repairing the same vesc if you refuse to stop doing the thing that’s breaking it. He wants you to keep riding, and it’s cool that he even invests that much time into his customers to know what is going on in their build to figure out why it keeps breaking.
That was also buried inside of a build thread, I was specifically talking about you don’t see threads of people complaining like you do with enertion vescs, where the sole purpose of the thread was to complain, and share their experience with the community.
If I were to reply on someone to fix something like my vesc if they were to break, I would also try not to take a piss on their work on the forum. Even then, I’ve seen this happen and chaka still fixes their vescs. I know I’d rather pay $20 for parts instead of $100 for a new vesc.
Based on the fact that enertion can sell them for $100, whether permanently, or for some period of time, says they must be costing Jason somewhere around $60-$70, around half the costs of chakas. If the cheaper parts were just as good, do you really think chaka would spend all that extra money on his vescs? Of course not. Me and many others have bought enertion vescs, they failed, was blamed that their setup broke it, went with chaka vescs in the same setup, and had no issues since. That speaks for itself…
2 Likes
I’ve busted some of my own VESC that I hand soldered in the same fashion as everyone else, DRV failure. I did not cheap out on components and followed the posted BOM. Could it be an un-updated BOM that is the cause here?
Also i stoped busting my drv’s, less aggresive settings.
1 Like
I’m not an expert in electrical engineering (though sometimes I wish I was studying it in school), so I can’t say for sure yes. My hunch would be it is. If I’m not mistaken, I believe reading at some point on this forum that the c37 cap was linked to some drv failures. But it seems like drv failures are the most common, and thus there’s likely several things that chakas changed to try to avoid them.
It would be cool if chaka posted his updated BOM for people like you, who are interested in building their own. But I can understand if he didn’t want to do that, as his competitors would eat up all of his work. I’m sure if you messaged chaka, he would be glad to help you spit ball ideas and maybe even share his BOM with you.
C37 is a 100V cap, a massive overvoltage would cause this guy to fail, thus my questioning on having a 50V TVS on the input to help prevent overvoltages
I know from my experience studying computer science that problems like this (ones that still exist in the main design after over a year of production) are often a chain reaction, thus why they still exist. There may not be one simple one size fits all fix. By repairing his vescs, chaka has had the chance to test ideas on people who have had issues (i.e., you keep blowing you drv chip, lets see if adding x, y or z stops it). It’s a great position to be in to help further the development of the vesc. I’m actually a bit disappointed vedder hasn’t adopted more of these changes that chaka has come up with. But it’s his call as its his baby, and chaka will keep going with his mods, so it is what it is. Maybe an over-voltage causes this to fail, which in turn causes something else to fail, which ultimately cause a bigger chip to fail. I’m just speaking hypothetically, but these kinds of chains in my experience in software development are where the nasty bugs lye that stay in a product, even after its release. I can only imagine hardware has a similar possibility of having these kinds of chain reactions.
I’m not looking for Chaka’s secret sauce, that was just my educated guess. However I would like to know if adding a TVS would be good idea or just a waste of board space.