New Mamba software (beta) posted today

[ANGRY-ALIEN]

Originally Posted by Pdelcast

Hmmmm... I'd like to see your MMM personally.

I'll have Christy send you a new one today. Please return yours to my attention: Attention: Patrick del Castillo

Can you send me your personal info in a PM?

Thanx!

Hi Patrick... the ESC was sent off... you should have it in hand Monday morning.

Alien

[nuz69]

I tried the 1.28beta Castle just developed and the fan problem is solved.
But I still have my punch control problem : the motor acts like if there isn't any punch control although I set it on 80%. A little confusing ...

[scarletboa]

I put the latest firmware (as of yesterday afternoon) and I have noticed that it sounds a little different at low speed and it cogs more. Reverse is also rougher. I haven't changed any settings, only the firmware.

[sikeston34m]

This new firmware upgrade has me wondering some things:

#1. Since Torque is being controlled, will the amp spikes be tamed in proportion to the Torque Setting?

#2. Will there be an efficiency gain by running higher Voltage and taming the setting for how the motor is controlled?

Example:

Castle Neu 2200kv on 6S versus Castle Neu 2200kv on 4S

The 6S setup is "tamed" with torque control and throttle limiting to mimic the performance of the 4S setup. But the 4S setup is set to "all out" performance. Both setups geared the same in.......ummmm........let's say an E Revo.

The switching of the fet's on the powerboard will still conduct the full pack voltage, only the "off" time will be longer than the "on" time with 6S, compared to the 4S setup.

#3. I'm also wondering if these "tame it down" settings would allow using higher kv motors on higher than rated voltage?

Temperatures being the overall guide, of course.

[phatmonk]

Should I stay away from this update for my MMM and MMP?

[sikeston34m]

Originally Posted by phatmonk

Should I stay away from this update for my MMM and MMP?

I just tried the latest firmware update on my Mamba Max Pro.

IMO, this won't be the final update. I believe there are still some things they are working on to refine these new settings.

Stay Tuned. I'm sure we will all know when this is perfected.

[BrianG]

I like the idea of torque control (although I still don't see how it could truly accomplish it without a current sensor), but after seeing people say the startup and low speed running is not as smooth, I think I'll wait...

I have installed it on my MMP and have not noticed any change in startup or any cogging at all. reverse is working fine. I have NOT yet tried the new features and i am running sensored motors. so for what it's worth.. no issues on MMP with sensored motor.

[BrianG]

That does make sense though since the startup algorithm is completely different in sensored vs sensorless...

I thought so too, and nobody had mentioned sensored motors.. so I did.

[brushlessboy16]

Originally Posted by BrianG

That does make sense though since the startup algorithm is completely different in sensored vs sensorless...

:LOL: i thought that too

[SpEEdyBL]

Question:

Is the amount of torque control also based on throttle? So if you apply 50% vs. 100% throttle from a slow speed you get different amounts of torque instead of it being the same (assuming <50% throttle would normally trigger the torque control otherwise)
. If not, it's just a thought. Haven't actually tried the software yet.

[BrianG]

Originally Posted by SpEEdyBL

Question:

Is the amount of torque control also based on throttle? So if you apply 50% vs. 100% throttle from a slow speed you get different amounts of torque instead of it being the same (assuming <50% throttle would normally trigger the torque control otherwise)
. If not, it's just a thought. Haven't actually tried the software yet.

It would be really nice to know exactly how this torque control feature works behind the scenes. There are sooo many questions that could probably be answered by more people here if we knew the nuts and bolts of it...

[sikeston34m]

Originally Posted by BrianG

I like the idea of torque control (although I still don't see how it could truly accomplish it without a current sensor), but after seeing people say the startup and low speed running is not as smooth, I think I'll wait...

Torque Control without a current sensor?

This is where we get into how they are doing it. LOL

Could this be accomplished with a built-in lag time for motor rpm increase?

I'm picturing a X-Y Graph, where "ON" time FET switching is only allowed to increase as RPM increases.

How linear this is, is controlled by the torque setting.

Always before, As soon as emf stated the rotor was in position for the next phase, the next phase was switched on.

Picture, miliseconds worth of "lag time" being inserted here. The amount of the lag time, along with actual rpm increase, controlling the rate of FET switching increase.

Thoughts?

[BrianG]

The lag time increase sounds a lot like how punch control works, except instead of integrating throttle input, they are making it a function of sensed rpm. Interesting.