# Soliton Controllers 0.5, 1 , 2



## Dink (Jun 3, 2010)

You have the 1.0 now, and have discussed other sizes of the 1.0. Will you be building a 0.5 Soliton? 12 to 300+ volts at 500amp cont. would be great in my opinion.(water cooled) Half a Soliton 1 would be a rock solid in town car. I live close to Seattle so you have some times of agressive driving. That is not my want. I have an ICE 1/4 mile car. That is fun, but not the build fun. I can make it faster easy, but where is the fun. So enough. I would love to see a 500amp cont.(water cooled)0.5 at 300+ volts. It should serve most any duty one would desire.(short of racing). Series/parallel switching would be over the top.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

Yes, we are working on the 500A "Soliton 0.5" now (not really sure what it will be called just yet) and it will have all of the features as the existing Soliton1, just a 500A continuous current rating rather than 1000A. So, same voltage range, same fan and water cooling, etc. 

Series/Parallel shifting will be added to the code eventually, but not in the first release (deciding when to shift from s to p is easy; deciding when to shift back is quite a bit harder).

There will be some minor hardware changes to the main control board, mainly to better comply with European noise-emission regulations. Not real sexy, I know, but sooner or later controllers that don't comply with these regs won't be allowed into Europe and we'd rather not find that out the hard way (and neither, I'm sure, would any of our European customers!)

You didn't ask, but the TARGET retail price for the 0.5 is less than $2000. How much less is still to be determined. After we build the prototypes in the next two weeks we'll have a better idea of the actual times and costs involved.

The bigger, badder version of the Soliton1 - which will likely be rated for much higher voltage as well as current, the goal being to reach 1MW - is such a boutique product that it's difficult for us to take it seriously. We certainly won't be wasting any engineering time trying to optimize it for cost! Our feeling is that if you want 1MW of DC power then by definition you are not price sensitive. Expect this beast to come in well north of twice what a Soliton1 costs now, simply because the IGBT modules will be rated for 1200V and massive amounts of current. We will be aiming for 500V nominal and 2000A. Maybe as much as 2500A, though that will have to be a time-limited peak since this will demand extracting as much as 10kW in losses from the modules.

Now how's that sound?


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Tesseract said:


> ...We will be aiming for 500V nominal and 2000A. Maybe as much as 2500A, though that will have to be a time-limited peak since this will demand extracting as much as 10kW in losses from the modules.
> 
> Now how's that sound?


My heart rate has increased, my hands are twitching, I'm ready to go run a hard mile, chop down a tree, or fire a couple thousand rounds at the range, until I can get my right foot connected to one!!!!! That's how it sounds to me!!


----------



## 280z1975 (Oct 2, 2008)

are there motors that can handle 1MW out there? or would it be several motors in tandem being driven by one unit?


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> My heart rate has increased...


Yeah, we thought you, especially, would like that! 



280z1975 said:


> are there motors that can handle 1MW out there? or would it be several motors in tandem being driven by one unit?


Probably not, to be perfectly honest, but racing is all about finding out what breaks first and our only goal is to make sure it ain't us


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Tesseract said:


> Yeah, we thought you, especially, would like that!


 Still twitching. 





280z1975 said:


> are there motors that can handle 1MW out there? or would it be several motors in tandem being driven by one unit?





Tesseract said:


> Probably not, to be perfectly honest, but racing is all about finding out what breaks first and our only goal is to make sure it ain't us


We'll find out. If this one motor I have keeps popping, I put a coupe of 'em together and see how close they come to 1MW before they pop.

And, breaking stuff is really a by-product.  The real goal is finding the limits of man and machine. Breaking stuff is just a necessary evil in that process. I say necessary evil because when it breaks you aren't going as fast as you would like to, but you can't be sure of (and raise) the limits until you're sure you've found them.

All this talk of racing and breaking stuff is making me more twitchy. Maybe I need to start playing video games...


----------



## Mesuge (Mar 6, 2008)

Tesseract said:


> Series/Parallel shifting will be added to the code eventually, but not in the first release (deciding when to shift from s to p is easy; deciding when to shift back is quite a bit harder).


With the possibility of pricing bellow $2k per unit, what about implementing for these: Soliton-2-Soliton comm interface/bus, basically one acel. pedal and other standard I/Os feeding in sync two controller-motor combos. Specifically, it could be used for *permanent awd setups (4x4 trucks, offroads, SUVs, crossovers). Lets imagine 2x ~75kW peak application via 1:4-6 ratio second hand sourced differentials (bmw, toyota) directly on each axle, thus no gearbox and stuff, the combined torques and ~150kW output will make it run nicely..

*Yes, permanent awd mode predictably tends to eat more juice (especially on city streets), but for some applications it doesn't matter, having 4x4 is the most important feature there..


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

Mesuge said:


> ...what about implementing for these: Soliton-2-Soliton comm interface/bus, basically one acel. pedal and other standard I/Os feeding in sync two controller-motor combos.
> ...


Somethign might be lost in translation here, Mesuge, but I think you can do what you are proposing by just feeding the signal from one throttle to each controller. If you have other features activated like brake, reverse, etc. then you can also feed those in to each controller as well. The only things that get messy to handle in this manner are the outputs and logger/web interface, since the IP address is hard-coded into the controller. We have tossed around the idea of putting master/slave setting in the web interface to change the IP address but hadn't thought much beyond that point.


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Wouldn't it be better, in that case, to just run them as series/parallel with one controller; but not as conjoined twins? They would pull better down low, and make the whole setup a lot less complicated.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> Wouldn't it be better, in that case, to just run them as series/parallel with one controller; but not as conjoined twins? They would pull better down low, and make the whole setup a lot less complicated.



It would if the two motors were rigidly joined, but in this case - unless I misunderstood - one motor drives the front wheels and the other drives the rear... both through non-locking (I presume) differentials.

I don't see too many advantages in this compared to the amount of work involved, but hey - it sells two controllers instead of one so who am I to argue?


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Tesseract said:


> It would if the two motors were rigidly joined...


So the shafts have to be joined, or one, to do the series/parallel deal? What would happen if they weren't. Again, I'm just trying to learn - no plans to do this...  I just need one ridiculous (read 500v/2500amp - that just makes me ) controller to beat my motor like an ugly stepchild with!  (not that there's anything wrong with ugly stepchildren)





Tesseract said:


> It would if the two motors were rigidly joined, but in this case - unless I misunderstood - one motor drives the front wheels and the other drives the rear... both through non-locking (I presume) differentials.
> 
> I don't see too many advantages in this compared to the amount of work involved, but hey - it sells two controllers instead of one so who am I to argue?


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

toddshotrods said:


> So the shafts have to be joined, or one, to do the series/parallel deal? What would happen if they weren't.


Yep - it's unsafe to drive two motors in series that don't have conjoined shafts. Consider first the situation where the two motors are driven in series with their shafts conjoined. Let's say that the controller is delivering 100V at 1000A to the pair, so each motor sees ~50V and 1000A. They have to spin at the same RPM, of course, but nothing says they have to be providing the same torque (despite the current being exactly the same). Indeed, it is almost certain they won't be providing the same torque because of minor variations in winding resistance, field strength, magnetic path, etc... Let's say Motor A generates 195 lb-ft of torque at 1000A while Motor B generates 205 lb-ft, a reasonable, if somewhat exaggerated, mismatch. Now, if you separate the motors so that one drives the front wheels and the other drives the rear, but still have them wired in series, the road itself will act as the join between the two shafts so ong as both front and rear wheels maintain contact with the ground, that is. If you hit a bump hard enough for a wheel to bounce that motor will instantly shoot up in RPM, taking up all 100V which will cause the other motor to stall out. 

Ok, I'm kind of exaggerating here, but you get the idea. The series windings but separated shafts thing is clearly awful because it is unstable. The operating point curve is a hump, rather than a dip, so that a disturbance tends to cause the operating point to move even farther from equilibrium rather than return to it.

There are many other ways to abuse this setup, though, and while I know there are problems with connecting the two motors in parallel I confess I haven't given any of this much thought until now.

Maybe ol' crabby maj will jump in here and save me??? 



toddshotrods said:


> I just need one ridiculous (read 500v/2500amp - that just makes me ) controller to beat my motor like an ugly stepchild with!...


You have a single 13" GE, right? Is it just like the one that fellow member batterypoweredtoad gave me a while back? Has a S2:60 (1 hour) rating of 453A? If so, it should be able to take 2000-2500A for a reasonable period, but I have no idea how high the voltage can go at that current! Maybe no more than 100V, but absent any good data that's strictly a WAG on my part...


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Thanks for the lesson! Makes sense. 



Tesseract said:


> ...You have a single 13" GE, right? Is it just like the one that fellow member batterypoweredtoad gave me a while back? Has a S2:60 (1 hour) rating of 453A? If so, it should be able to take 2000-2500A for a reasonable period, but I have no idea how high the voltage can go at that current! Maybe no more than 100V, but absent any good data that's strictly a WAG on my part...


Close, I have the 11" version. Ampeater also has one like yours (13") and one like mine (11"). Both of his motors have the same output shaft as mine, and he purchased two adapters from me for them. I'm wondering what else they have in common. There were at least two different diameter armatures used in the 11s, I have the bigger one. The one that Jim converted had the smaller armature, and Major helped him with a plan for bigger field coils using two stacked to make up the difference.

Sorry, I'm babbling again - I have the 11" one.


----------



## major (Apr 4, 2008)

Tesseract said:


> Yep - it's unsafe to drive two motors in series that don't have conjoined shafts..... If you hit a bump hard enough for a wheel to bounce that motor will instantly shoot up in RPM, taking up all 100V which will cause the other motor to stall out.
> ............Maybe ol' crabby maj will jump in here and save me???


Yeah Tess,

That would be about as unsafe as using a mechanical differential 

Grumpy major


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

major said:


> Yeah Tess,
> 
> That would be about as unsafe as using a mechanical differential
> 
> Grumpy major


Sounds more like an open diff. A posi or locker would send more power to the one that's still hooked up. The conjoined twins more like a spool - both get the same no matter what.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

Tesseract said:


> ...I confess I haven't given any of this much thought until now.





major said:


> Yeah Tess,
> 
> That would be about as unsafe as using a mechanical differential
> 
> Grumpy major


My defense is to see above!

Seriously, though... I had a tough time visualizing how this would actually play out in my head and it's not something I've really thought about before. I'd like to have a better understanding of the consequences of separating the motor shafts and then driving them (electrically) in either series or parallel.


----------



## major (Apr 4, 2008)

Tesseract said:


> ...a better understanding of the consequences of separating the motor shafts and then driving them (electrically) in either series or parallel.


Speakin' of series wound motors. My experience has been 2 motors, one on each of 2 drive wheels. Most often, 2 controllers are used, or a dual controller. But a single controller can be used and have the motors in series with each other. Then current is equal (actually the same) in both motors and voltage splits according to the Eg (meaning the motor's respective RPM, which can be different). And the current is dependent on the motor load (as always), but in this case is determined by the motor with the lowest load. So it acts like a mechanical differential. Does nicely when turning and wheels have different speeds. Motors have equal torque. However, when one wheel loses traction and spins freely, trouble occurs similar to the mech diff. The motor on the loose wheel has little to no torque, so does the other. And worse, the motor driving the stuck wheel stalls, zero RPM, zero Eg, just resistive drop, so the freewheeling motor sees about twice voltage and little to no load, so overspeeds. Unless the controller nerds have built in a speed detect circuit 

Two motors in parallel from a single controller, one motor per wheel, avoids this problem. But can be hard to handle because the slower motor when turning will draw more current, produce more torque and try to straighten out the vehicle.

It's always something 

major


----------



## Dink (Jun 3, 2010)

Do you have to actualy hook the shafts together,or will a chain drive/jack shaft setup to a 9" diff be considered joined?


----------



## toddshotrods (Feb 10, 2009)

Dink said:


> Do you have to actualy hook the shafts together,or will a chain drive/jack shaft setup to a 9" diff be considered joined?


Chain is good. KillaCycle uses a chain to connect the two motors, rather than a coupler or solid shaft, because the motors aren't inline; they're tandem in the bike. Just make sure your chains match the torque. Some kind of over-rev protection is a good idea. It's worth it to set aside an hour to browse through the pics on that site.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

major said:


> ... However, when one wheel loses traction and spins freely, trouble occurs similar to the mech diff. The motor on the loose wheel has little to no torque, so does the other. And worse, the motor driving the stuck wheel stalls, zero RPM, zero Eg, just resistive drop, so the freewheeling motor sees about twice voltage and little to no load, so overspeeds.


Hey, that's basically what I wrote?!?




major said:


> Two motors in parallel from a single controller, one motor per wheel, avoids this problem. But can be hard to handle because the slower motor when turning will draw more current, produce more torque and try to straighten out the vehicle.


Yep, so I guess you can summarize both scenarios as:

1. the slower motor will hog the current when the two are connected in parallel.

2. the faster motor will hog the voltage when the two are connected in series.

An oversimplification, yes, but still a useful one?


----------



## major (Apr 4, 2008)

Tesseract said:


> Hey, that's basically what I wrote?!?


I wasn't arguing with you on that. Just taking exception to the unsafe part  With the proper precautions, the series arrangement can work well, like the mechanical differential.

maj


----------



## Batterypoweredtoad (Feb 5, 2008)

My experience with series parallel and a motor per wheel on the same axle is the same as Majors, albeit limited to powerwheels jeeps for the kids. The 2 speed trans is just a series parallel switch. When in parallel you get both wheels powered regardless of slip. When in series, if one wheel slips, the other stalls. In a car the parallel setup would be a great limited slip diff.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Tesseract

Can the Soliton be used for traction control??

I would like to set a maximum acceleration rate so that when a tire spins the torque is reduced

Even better would be to have a speed signal from the front wheels and cut torque when motor rpm is higher than road speed

I am building a direct drive sEVen type of machine so I would like to be able to limit tire slip on a drag strip


----------



## Qer (May 7, 2008)

Not Tesseract, but this is more up my alley.

No, the Soliton can't be used for traction control, really. However, it WILL cut power when the motor overspeed so the current will drop down to zero and then ramp up again according to the A/s that the user has entered (default is, if I recall correctly, 500 A/s). That would work as a rather coarse traction control, but it'd probably produce a series of tire screech since it won't cut power when the tire lose the grip but rather when the motor is spinning too fast.

See the attached graph for an example. That is, however, done in the dyno and that's why the RPM falls so drastically after power has been cut. In a car RPM would of course decrease much slower due to the mass of the car where the dyno has no mass more than the motor itself.

There is unfortunately no way the Soliton can handle two tachometers.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi Qer

So I would have to do the rpm comparisons separately 
and if the motor rpm was too high feed the result into the throttle,

Would I have to reduce the throttle demand or could I just cut it so that throttle would be an amount and a "mark space" ??

Or would the controller object and not cooperate? 

What about the motor acceleration? any way of using the rate of increase of motor rpm to modulate the current?


----------



## Qer (May 7, 2008)

Now, there's a lot of speculations and wild ideas here, and the only thing I can really answer is that the controller won't care what feeds it the throttle signal as long as it's a voltage and it's correctly calibrated. The rest I can't answer, sorry.


----------

