# 1000 amps on the loose!!! OPEN soucre!!



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

yall aint cited bout dis??


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2010)

Did not see the new updates yet! Sure would be great for a 1k amp controller for a decent price and you know what goes into it. Is it mosfet or IGBT? 

Hard to be cited bout something you can't see. Site looks the same as before. An I L ready have a troller. 

I'd like to try my hand at one for a mower conversion. Maybe one that is like 400 amps and 48 volts. 

Pete


----------



## Anaerin (Feb 4, 2009)

At the moment, the stuff on the site is only for the finished products. The Sync Rec "build" is in the way alpha stage, and you can find details of it on the endless-sphere fora.


----------



## Tesseract (Sep 27, 2008)

Georgia Tech said:


> Hey Paul is at it again!! He is workin on the syncronous 1000 amp version of the Open soucre controller!!


Synchronous Rectification? That makes sense when you are converting a low voltage at high current into an even lower voltage at an even higher current (e.g. - 5V to 1.8V); not so much for a 144V (or higher) motor controller. I mean, say the drop across the freewheeling diode is 1.2V at 1000A; changing to a much more complicated SR design might lower that drop to 0.5V. Sounds like a real win, huh? Well, not really. If a 144V/1000A controller is operating at 50% duty cycle then the power output is 72kW (72V at 1000A output). The FWD losses are (1-duty)*Vf*I= 600W in this case, or 0.83% loss. Converting to a SR design might lower that loss to (1-0.5)*0.5*1000=250W, or 0.35%. Ignoring the loss of the switch (which will be the same for both designs), we had to double the number of controlled switches, and added a vastly increased risk of cross-conduction failure, to improve the efficiency from 99.17% to 99.65%.

Sorry - I'm not trying to denigrate Paul's efforts, but someone with practical experience in power electronics design wouldn't even consider a SR controller here because the extra risk and complexity don't remotely justify the meager improvement in efficiency.


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

Here is the link...

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthre...cheap-diy-144v-motor-controller-6404-368.html

Hey is ordering the boards now.. and will start on the Power section... I would like to get involved my self in the cause.
Anyone like to make a donation to the cause? Like I said it's Open source which will make things BETER...Like I have said seems as iff open source turns out better than commercial... look at Linux..

Like I said it would be good if we would support with donations!


----------



## Qer (May 7, 2008)

Georgia Tech said:


> look at Linux..


That's a bit like apples and oranges, really. And Linux, and open source, isn't always dandy so implying that open source equals eternal happiness and blossom flowers for everyone is to simplify things a bit. There's, for example, no sanity check in some projects so they'll gladly spin off in a wild, uncontrollable fashion adding features and cool design without any frame work for testing or code clean up routine.

From my ~15 years professional experience of Linux I must say that it's been years since the average Linux desktop worked so outright bad as it does right now and that it annoys me big time that in their effort to compete with Windows they've not only managed to make the desktop behave similar, they've also managed to make it equally confusing and buggy. Way to go. The temptation to buy a Mac has never been bigger...

Still, it'll be interesting to see what Paul's up to and how well it'll work even though it doesn't really automatically get me into girly-bouncing yay-chirping mode. So far it seems the controllers are quite reliable, something that can't be said about some of the alternatives.


----------



## jackbauer (Jan 12, 2008)

I'll be honest my interest in this is to use it as a basis for a sepex controller.


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

Qer said:


> That's a bit like apples and oranges, really. And Linux, and open source, isn't always dandy so implying that open source equals eternal happiness and blossom flowers for everyone is to simplify things a bit. There's, for example, no sanity check in some projects so they'll gladly spin off in a wild, uncontrollable fashion adding features and cool design without any frame work for testing or code clean up routine.
> 
> From my ~15 years professional experience of Linux I must say that it's been years since the average Linux desktop worked so outright bad as it does right now and that it annoys me big time that in their effort to compete with Windows they've not only managed to make the desktop behave similar, they've also managed to make it equally confusing and buggy. Way to go. The temptation to buy a Mac has never been bigger...
> 
> Still, it'll be interesting to see what Paul's up to and how well it'll work even though it doesn't really automatically get me into girly-bouncing yay-chirping mode. So far it seems the controllers are quite reliable, something that can't be said about some of the alternatives.


 
Well to each his on this will be one of those aurguments like politics...We use Linux at work and it is in EVERY embedded project that I can think of at work. Linux lead the way in how Microsoft need to be improved.. and Mac well let me tell you there are equally as many people who are ready to throw the dang things out of the window! They are hating they paid of 2500 bucks for the thing! 

Any hoot, what paul is doing will be reveltionary for the field! At this point in the industry we need more passion like this, its what makes things better..right now I am Giddy about it. WOOOOO HOOOOO!!


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

jackbauer said:


> I'll be honest my interest in this is to use it as a basis for a sepex controller.


 
Are you not using a SepEx Motor on your vehicel now?? I have been studing your videos on your Commutation issue I have lots of questions about what your doing....
What volatge are you running at?
Did you get your issue solv by just advanceing the timing?


----------



## jackbauer (Jan 12, 2008)

Its a compound wound motor not sepex but I would very much like the ability to adjust the shunt field on the fly. right now its fed via fixed resistors. Yeh the brush advance and com turn improved the motor no end. Its pulls 400 plus amps now with no problems.


----------



## Qer (May 7, 2008)

Georgia Tech said:


> Well to each his on this will be one of those aurguments like politics...We use Linux at work and it is in EVERY embedded project that I can think of at work. Linux lead the way in how Microsoft need to be improved.. and Mac well let me tell you there are equally as many people who are ready to throw the dang things out of the window! They are hating they paid of 2500 bucks for the thing!


Yep. Linux in embedded software works fairly well, I've used it for that at several jobs since -99 or so. Linux on servers usually does it's job (at least if you avoid LVM, I've heard a few stories about that one acting up to trust it) and I've been running that continuously since about -96. But on the desktop?

Sometimes even my old XP (that I use for games mainly) behaves better nowadays. That wasn't the case 2-3 years ago and we can all thank PulseAudio and Gnome for that, but I guess flashiness and insane features most people never use were more important than stability and reliability... 

So the kernel and most daemons are pretty sane and stable, but the toys on top aren't much better than the crap M$ uses. It used to be a lot cleaner, but, well, that was back in the good ol' days when Linux was more of a traditional UNIX.

One of the main arguments for open source that's often repeated as a mantra is that the code can be verified by others, and that does work for code that's small enough for it to be practical to be checked, like in the open source controller. It isn't, however, that easy for bigger projects and I doubt that many of the typical desktop applications are as properly checked that the linux kernel is, thus they're prone to bug.

So, anyway, I'm definitely not trying to backtalk Paul or insinuate anything here, merely pointing out that open source isn't necessarily superior source. In the end it all boils down to if the dude behind the keyboard knows the shit they're tampering with and no matter licensing model there's always geniuses and morons.

I've met both kinds, both in the commercial and the open source world.


----------



## JRoque (Mar 9, 2010)

Hi. I agree with Tesseract on the merits (or lack thereof) of using SR in this application. I haven't seen the schematics but, are they really using SR or calling it that after paralleling a bunch of fets?

At the proposed amperage ratings, things like current loops that were not noticeable before become serious issues. What was a small difference in currents between the individual MOSFETs is now at least twice as large. Very careful PCB layout is crucial to ensure current sharing between the switches - simply adding more of them in a row might not achieve the expected results.

I'm sure every precaution has been taken but keep in mind that you, and possibly a loved one, will be riding on a car with this 1K amp controller driving it. If all works, great. If not, that's 1,000A of of contactor-welding power that could be difficult to disengage. Hopefully there will be upgrade safety going together with the higher output.

For a new version, rather than amperage, I would have increased the voltage handling capabilities where more efficiencies can be had.

JR


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

Qer said:


> Yep. Linux in embedded software works fairly well, I've used it for that at several jobs since -99 or so. Linux on servers usually does it's job (at least if you avoid LVM, I've heard a few stories about that one acting up to trust it) and I've been running that continuously since about -96. But on the desktop?
> 
> Sometimes even my old XP (that I use for games mainly) behaves better nowadays. That wasn't the case 2-3 years ago and we can all thank PulseAudio and Gnome for that, but I guess flashiness and insane features most people never use were more important than stability and reliability...
> 
> ...


 
What I have found with open source is that it is done with passion and " the love for the game" than rather than trying to make a buck or two...try to make money at it does not neccary mean good or at least the BESt product... Here again look at Microsoft in the 80's... you think They got the job creating the OS for IBM because Gates had supprior OS software capablities? PUUUULEES.. He was a good business man...plenty of UNIX based designs out there that were better than MS-DOS back , (Linux did not exsist back then). Then Linus trovoldus said "enough of this M$ crap, time someone wrote an OS the right way, and write it because they love it not becues they have some monoply. Same with intel, their segmented architecture is still crippeling today, I can't complain because this is whatI leanred on, still a crappy architecture.....Lets look atthe 500 amp open source controller VS a Curtis...It looking to me that the Open source 500 amp controller is trumping Curtis....or at least equal to Curtis. 
I think this is a VERY well worth while project and think if it turns out to be a big success, and cost around as much as the 500 amp version, MAN LOOK OUT!!!


----------



## JRoque (Mar 9, 2010)

Hey GT.



> the Open source 500 amp controller is trumping Curtis....or at least equal to Curtis.


What do you mean, price wise maybe? Curtis sells thousands of their controllers and have done so for years.

I'm all for open source. I've been involved with Linux to some extent since it's inception and fully subscribe to the concept. But very often these days many "open source" projects start as such, recruiting help from everyone...until the principals realize they may have a commercial product in their hands and split off to close it and make a profit for themselves leaving everyone else hanging. Electronic projects, especially, are notorious for doing this.

As far as I'm concerned, a true open source project is when people contribute their time and talent to further the cause and don't expect compensation in return. Paul's is, so far, a great example of this.

JR


----------



## Anaerin (Feb 4, 2009)

From my cursory look at their discussions so far, it looks like they're making a buck/boost controller with SyncRec to handle driving motors from pretty much any battery voltage to any motor voltage, and potentially have the capability for regen on Shunt-wound motors (If done correctly).

It would also make it a reasonably simple step to go from DC SyncRec to BLDC or AC Induction (Just a matter of changing the power section).


----------



## Qer (May 7, 2008)

Georgia Tech said:


> What I have found with open source is that it is done with passion and " the love for the game" than rather than trying to make a buck or two...


Oh my.

You're mixing up ambition with quality while at the same time back talking those that tries to make a living while having fun, like most EV-business that try to make a buck out of their passion. Like all those selling conversion kits, controllers, batteries, running conversion shops etc.

You're also completely ignoring the fact that much of the open source community today is powered completely or partly by companies like IBM, Apple, Motorola, Sun, Intel, RedHat, SUSE etc.

Apparently you're also not aware of the history of one of the most stable OS:es in the history that were developed by a very dedicated and passionate gang of programmers. VMS is very proprietary and about as far away from Open Source than anything I know of, yet I've never heard about another OS that on several occasions managed to reach an uptime of over a decade! It's a bitch to use, but it's damn rock solid. Sometimes I even miss that bastard... 



Georgia Tech said:


> Then Linus trovoldus said "enough of this M$ crap, time someone wrote an OS the right way, and write it because they love it not becues they have some monoply.


Um.

To begin with, it's Linus Torvalds, and he didn't write Linux to stab Microsoft where it hurts but because he wanted a UNIX to play with but the available option, Minix, wasn't good enough according to his opinion. Read for yourself.

If he really wanted to break Microsofts monopoly it'd be really dumb basing it on UNIX since the process model in Windows and UNIX are completely different. Early Windows (the DOS-based ones) is a hopeless mish-mash that mainly work out of old habit and later Windows (NT, XP, Vista, W7 etc) are based on a kernel that's evolved from VMS (see above).

The first Windows version with the VMS-evolved kernel, Windows NT 3.xx, were a rock stable beast with a shaky GUI so when the GUI went BSOD on you the kernel kept working, so at my work back then we simply let the servers BSOD if they decided to and then simply remote administrated them since all the services, file and printer sharing etc, kept running fine despite the broken down Windows GUI. Later versions, NT4 and so on, changed that because Microsoft started to break the border between kernel and user space, for example to accelerate 3D graphics, and that's when we got the BSOD:s of today that lock up the kernel.

But I'm rambling a bit here.

Anyway, you should probably read up on your computer history. Most companies has a history of being born out of passion and genuine computer love, others, like IBM, contain a lot of that despite computers being a late addition to the portfolio. Microsoft is probably one of the few exceptions, but then Bill Gates were more of a bean counter than a genuine hacker so that company were pretty much lost from the start.

A good book to read: Tracy Kidder - The soul of a new machine.


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

Qer said:


> Oh my.
> 
> You're mixing up ambition with quality while at the same time back talking those that tries to make a living while having fun, like most EV-business that try to make a buck out of their passion. Like all those selling conversion kits, controllers, batteries, running conversion shops etc.
> 
> ...


Here again, this is no different than polotics...this is very opinionatde. I have been in the Embedded field for over 2 decades and take a very different view... the people who are Pssionate about this industry have always done the best... I don't care if it is developing Hard ware or software. Yes some make a career out of it.. But remeber the days on VX works and Wind revier doing their own OS. Its just like a MAc person augiung that a Linux box is useless or a PC user saying MAC is overpriced.....

Or 
Its like all the doom and gloom people makeing these comments on how the markets are going to crash and go into deflation....last year they were screaming inflation...Augue how they want the proof of the puding is in the eating.. the Market is going up...

Most of the computing world uses the Open source Linux as their base development wheather its BIG servers or small embededd applications dosn't matter they are using a Linux Kernel of some sort. Open source aint perfect nothing will be until Jesus comes back. But like capitalism hey is there anything out there better? Open sourec is very powerfull and the world will find they can not only make more money with Open source and capitalism, but they can make things better with open source..


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

Georgia Tech said:


> Here again, this is no different than polotics...this is very opinionatde. I have been in the Embedded field for over 2 decades and take a very different view... the people who are Pssionate about this industry have always done the best... I don't care if it is developing Hard ware or software. Yes some make a career out of it.. But remeber the days on VX works and Wind revier doing their own OS. Its just like a MAc person augiung that a Linux box is useless or a PC user saying MAC is overpriced.....
> 
> Or
> Its like all the doom and gloom people makeing these comments on how the markets are going to crash and go into deflation....last year they were screaming inflation...Augue how they want the proof of the puding is in the eating.. the Market is going up...
> ...


Maybe instead of calling it Linux mayne i sould call it GNU Linux!!


----------



## MPaulHolmes (Feb 23, 2008)

I'm just trying something. It's not meant to be the end-all be-all of anything. It wasn't that expensive to order a few control boards and just try it out. I think to really do high power, the clear best way to go is how Tesseract went. But Jackbauer was telling me how he had 2 coils, and I had 2 pwm channels! It was a match made in heaven! hahaha. And the dsPIC30F4011 I am using had complementary outputs with programmable dead time, so I figured why not try it out? In trying to keep with a similar layout as before, the freewheel diodes were the weak current carrying link. I didn't want to go much over 10 mosfets/diodes in parallel, and the best diodes I had found were rated at 60amps per device. Well, there were others with slightly higher current ratings, but the to-247 diode legs were pretty puny.

The Gigamos 200v 7.5mOhm rdsOn mosfets I'm trying are rated for 230 amps, and their legs are rated for 160 amps (to-247+ and to-264 packages), so I just wanted to see what would happen if I replaced the 60amp freewheel diodes with those "freewheel mosfets". I'm not really trying to make it generate less heat by using the freewheel mosfets. I just thought it would be better to at least try to switch the mosfets on instead of just depending on their intrinsic diode to act as a freewheel diode. However, since the parts are rated at 200v, and Joe and I measured voltage spikes at 500amps of around 13v, 1000amp would have around 30v spikes I suppose, which means it may not be all that safe to run it at 144v. Although the voltage sag happens at just the right time on lead acid, right when the voltage spike is highest.

If the current loops turn out to be a problem, I was going to try an idea of Fran's. Several pseudo-isolated supplies using some capacitors and little inductors.


----------



## Georgia Tech (Dec 5, 2008)

MPaulHolmes said:


> I'm just trying something. It's not meant to be the end-all be-all of anything. It wasn't that expensive to order a few control boards and just try it out. I think to really do high power, the clear best way to go is how Tesseract went. But Jackbauer was telling me how he had 2 coils, and I had 2 pwm channels! It was a match made in heaven! hahaha. And the dsPIC30F4011 I am using had complementary outputs with programmable dead time, so I figured why not try it out? In trying to keep with a similar layout as before, the freewheel diodes were the weak current carrying link. I didn't want to go much over 10 mosfets/diodes in parallel, and the best diodes I had found were rated at 60amps per device. Well, there were others with slightly higher current ratings, but the to-247 diode legs were pretty puny.
> 
> The Gigamos 200v 7.5mOhm rdsOn mosfets I'm trying are rated for 230 amps, and their legs are rated for 160 amps (to-247+ and to-264 packages), so I just wanted to see what would happen if I replaced the 60amp freewheel diodes with those "freewheel mosfets". I'm not really trying to make it generate less heat by using the freewheel mosfets. I just thought it would be better to at least try to switch the mosfets on instead of just depending on their intrinsic diode to act as a freewheel diode. However, since the parts are rated at 200v, and Joe and I measured voltage spikes at 500amps of around 13v, 1000amp would have around 30v spikes I suppose, which means it may not be all that safe to run it at 144v. Although the voltage sag happens at just the right time on lead acid, right when the voltage spike is highest.
> 
> If the current loops turn out to be a problem, I was going to try an idea of Fran's. Several pseudo-isolated supplies using some capacitors and little inductors.


Paul your fine man, don't worry about it there are too many people who believe in you!! this will be probebly the best controller on the market for the money! I'm sold... I will support the effort


----------

