Semi-Recumbent Recycled-Parts Cargo eBike: "CrazyBike2"

[SpeedEBikes]

Do you know if your controller was supposed to do current limiting and if so what the limit was? I put fuses on my packs usually sized at about 5 to 10 amps greater than the current limit of the controller. Once in a great while I blow a fuse, but I don't know if the fuses are actually saving the controller.

[amberwolf]

Do you know if your controller was supposed to do current limiting and if so what the limit was? I put fuses on my packs usually sized at about 5 to 10 amps greater than the current limit of the controller. Once in a great while I blow a fuse, but I don't know if the fuses are actually saving the controller.

Yes; it's self-limiting (based on the RDSon of whatever MOSFET is installed) but it takes time for the limit to "kick in", as it is allowable for short overcurrent spikes for it. However, this massive spike was too fast for it to do anything about. Even my 100A circuit breaker never popped.

The only reason I do not have a fuse as well as the circuit breaker is because I did not want to have to keep replacing them as I experimented with the bike, or be stuck on the road without a fuse to replace it with if I blew more than I carried as spares. (Sure, I could wire around the fuse, but that would defeat the purpose of *having* a fuse).

So I stuck to the large CB instead, and I know that it does pop after a couple of seconds of current that's close to 100A. It just wasn't fast enough to deal with this problem.

I only have 4 100A fuses around here; then two 130A fuses, after that it goes down to 20A and 30A breakers, and little 1A fuses. The little breakers won't even let me startup from a stop even pedalling my legs off in lower gear. With the older motor they were sufficient to let the motor do the startup with only my usual pedalling help, but it wasn't nearly as powerful as this one is, which can do the startup by itself but draws a lot more current to do so. After I'm out of those fuses, well, I'm out, and then unprotected again cuz I'd have to wire around it.

So I'm looking into some ways to get the 2QD to actively limit current instantaneously, which will also let me "program" it via analog electronics to whatever limit I wish; essentially what the CA does.

[amberwolf]

Since I have had so very little time to work on anything recently, I haven't finished my controller or the physical repairs to the bike. I started repairs and found the major problems were just the power output section, and one minor problem that kept anything from working right was a 9.1V zener diode that was only allowing 1.45V!

Fixed that and got the main section working again, and now just need to finish the power section. I have wanted to use a different case for a while, so now is my chance. I have a couple of posts about it on my Electricle blog, with photos, but basically I'm cutting the power section off the 2QD, mounting the MOSFETs on the inside sides of the extruded aluminum case off an old Jensen 300W AC inverter for cigarette lighter jacks, replacing the tiny cap I had with three larger capacity ones off an old UPS, and mounting it all inside that Jensen case, to seal it up against weather and still give it a way to get rid of heat.

Since it is taking a while to make the holders for the FETs to line them up and keep them tightly against the case inside, and to polish the aluminum and the FETs for flatness and smoothness (for better heat transfer, since I have to use thermally conductive / electrically insulative pads, too), I decided to take a quick look again at the Curtis 1204-410 I have had for a few months with little time to troubleshoot.

I let it sit on the bench powered on (but not doing anything as it doesn't respond to input), for a while, and suddenly it started working, the motor attached to it began slowly spinning (the throtle was just a regular pot set to barely on). Apparently once it got warm enough (from me having the oven on to warm up the room), a connection was made well enough to start working.

There are six interconnect wires between the Curtis logic board and it's power board, two carry B+ and two ground, and the other two carry signals. One is the PWM output to the FETs, and the other looks like a feedback from the FETs as it is time-shifted just a tiny bit late (which I can barely see at all with my old 531A), but identical to the PWM waveform.

The solder joints on them must've been flexed or vibrated enough to crack them, so they would only make connections good enough to work when warm or hot. Over 85F, anyway. Under that, they might work and might not. I reflowed the solder and now they always work.

Since it's a 36-48V 225A controller for brushed PMDC motors, it can be used in place of the 2QD, so for now I put it on CrazyBike2 and verified it works with the bike. I can use it until I finish the 2QD rehousing.

Now I need to build a new rear wheel, move the chain and some shifters and stuff from one of the spare bikes I got for parts from someone for Christmas, and finalize the new throttle control setup, and CB2 will be ready to ride more than just for tests.

[amberwolf]

First up is a wheel relacing, to replace the badly damaged (destroyed, really) wheel currently on CB2. It's a standard wheel build, except that it is using thicker stainless ones donated to me that are for a wheelchair wheel.

It required a bit of creative relacing that may affect wheel strength as a whole, as these spokes are for a 540 rim, where mine is a 507, I think. I had to install them as crossed pairs where normally they'd be parallel pairs, in the typical 2-cross pattern, so that they would not be so long as to poke thru the tube.

It still gives parallel pairs, just not the same ones as the originals--basically works out as if you went backwards for lacing, going *across* the hub instead of out from it. If that makes sense.

The rim and hub were from the previous CB2 rear wheel, which had a bent axle and a slightly bent rim. I fixed the rim with some working of tension on the original spokes and rebending of the rim, and then I used the axle and bearings from the rear wheel of the Magna 26" I just got as a parts bike a few posts back. I used the Shimano 6-speed cassette from the other (Huffy) parts bike, as it has the shifting-ease type edges to teeth and whatnot, where the Falcon 6-speed cassette on the Magna is all flat edges and plain teeth.

I still have to pull the tire/tube/protection strip off the damaged wheel and put it on this one.


While I was at it, I also decided to do something about having to pedal too fast for comfort or to be able to assist the motor, with the motor at full speed, due to the nearly 1:1 pedal to drivetrain system. I swapped out the single-ring crank I had on the front, and installed the 3-ring from the Magna, which gives me the outer large ring that is one and a half full chain links larger than the single (which also gives me the ability to make a properly tensioned chain, instead of one with a lot of sag).

However, this larger ring is leftward just far enough to cause interference with the motor chain. So I have to move the motor chain leftward, too. The only way to do that is to move the receiver rings on the jackshaft leftward, so I pulled the slightly longer BB axle (crankshaft) off the Magna and replaced the one already on CB2's jackshaft with it. That moves the whole receiver ring set leftward about 1 cm or so.

Then I had to take off the motor's drive ring hub, so I can install spacers on the shaft that push it leftward the same amount. I have not yet done this part yet, as I was too worn out by then.

Once that's done, I can reassemble the drivetrain and have spacing that should allow all the chains to clear each other and remain taut, and in line, removing one more problem that has plagued me since the beginning in one fashion or another. I'm apparently terrible at making good chainlines.


Then I have to look into one more problem:

The last time I started doing a chainline test before the chainline modifications, using the motor to drive the chains at a slow speed so I could watch them pass and move, I heard a clicking noise, and whenever I heard it, the motors' gearbox output shaft stopped for an instant.

It is possible that there is something wrong in the gearbox and something is slipping, but I doubt it as there is no sign of it in other noises I would expect to hear from a wear problem like that, and there is no problem at all when there is no load.

However, it does seem possible that the coupler between motor and gearbox could be at fault. It is made so that both the gearbox and the motor have shafts that are slotted all the way thru, in the center, for about 1/4" or deeper. Into these slots fit a steel tab about 1.5" or so long, which fit together to form a + sign. They are cast into a rubber disc, which is itself enclosed in a pair of metal "cups" with a hole in the center just large enough for the shafts to fit thru from each side.

This makes a flexible coupler that can transmit power but isolate vibration and shocks from the motor shaft, but it is possible for this coupler to fail. I have not yet taken off the motor to examine the coupler's current condition, but I suspect I will find enough wear or damage to cause a problem, probably caused by that last disaster which I am repairing. It did not show a problem in the inital tests of the motor with the Curtis, but all I did was some "bench tests" and then some riding around the block slowly.

If the coupler is bad, I do have another one somewhere around here, if I can find it. I might be able to make one, too, as it is a simple construction.



Again, while I am at it, I also intend to add a fourth battery to the system, which for now will be clamped down inside the rightside rear cargo pod, at the front inside corner. Later when I have more time, I will try moving it plus the third (rearmost center area) battery up to the front in that dual-battery case over the top tube just behind the front headstock.

That will give me 48V. I don't need the speed this could give, but it will mean I don't have to use full travel on the throttle pot to get my original full speed (simplifying setting up the new throttle pot and arm lever), and can "lock out" the higher throttle speeds with a physical adjustment or set screw.

It will also give me more range, since I can use higher voltage to lower the current draw from the batteries for the same power output, decreasing the Peukert effect on them, as well as the additional power from simply having one more battery.


One more benefit is that it will allow me to install both 24V chargers on the bike for opportunity charging, each one wired across two of the 4 x 12V series 48V pack.


Yet another benefit is that I will no longer need the laptop adapter wired in series with the CFL/battery hookup just to start them, so I can leave it off if I choose, or leave it on for even brighter lights.

As bright as the taillight already is, I think I will have to wire the laptop adapter only to the headlight, and take it off the taillight.

[amberwolf]

Well, stuff as usual did not work out as planned:
http://electricle.blogspot.com/2010/01/ ... -evil.html
I am way too tired to try posting it here with pics, too, but it's all at that link.

[JohnH]

First let me say: your ability to fabricate and adapt really amazes me. I read the full post on your linked blog, and I do have one observation that may be of some use to you. I own a recumbent bike that uses a mid-drive, and on it (and others I know of) two chains are never allowed to occupy adjacent chainrings or cogs, because they *will* rub. One solution would be to use a relatively large "granny" ring and run one chain there, and the other to the big ring (you could use a "middle" ring in the big ring location if it makes your ratios better). Another, if you really need the granny left free, is to use a set of thin (maybe 2mm?) chainring spacers between the big ring and the spider. These spacers are expensive for what they are, but cheap relative to other things - maybe $10 - $15 for a set of 5. You may even me able to figure a way to use washers or some other scrap bits to substitute, to meet your "repurpose" ethic. I don't think you'd want to give up the chain guides you fabricated, but you would certainly cut down on chain-chain interference if you could get the rings a few more mm apart.

Hope this helps,

[amberwolf]

First let me say: your ability to fabricate and adapt really amazes me.

Thanks--it's kind of out of necessity, since I don't normally have any money to spend on it at all. When I started the project, I *did* have some money but that was quickly corrected by our worsening job market, which got way worse for me this past summer, along with other things.

That said, it's also quite a bit of fun figuring out ways to repurpose things, and it's almost a kind of game now to see how many things I can mis-use to do something I want to do. Sometimes I may even use something repurposed even when I have something actually designed for it.

I read the full post on your linked blog, and I do have one observation that may be of some use to you. I own a recumbent bike that uses a mid-drive, and on it (and others I know of) two chains are never allowed to occupy adjacent chainrings or cogs, because they *will* rub.

Yes; if I had regular removable rings and spiders, or enough three-ring sets, I would have been able to keep them apart.

I *did* have them separated by a whole chainring once, but due to gearing needs had to move the triple to the right side to get a granny ring there, and a smaller second gear, for when I need to pedal or go up hills.

Then the double ring (whose inner gear is about the same size the outer gear on the triple!) was moved to the left side, and thus began my clearance issues (though the were never a real problem until this last disaster, which was due to my own lack of ability to align the chainlines properly).

One solution would be to use a relatively large "granny" ring and run one chain there, and the other to the big ring (you could use a "middle" ring in the big ring location if it makes your ratios better).

If I had regular removable rings and spiders, this would be fairly easy to do. But only one of my cranks even *has* (as designed) removable rings, and it is the double that was just damaged. The rest are all built as swaged-on and bolted-together rings.

If I had a triple with a large enough motor-end ring (52t) I would have used it there, and used a smaller pedal ring to run to the granny, but none of my square-taper triples are that large.

I am currently working out what will be needed for the trike being designed to replace CB2, so when I know what I'll have left over, I will be redoing the gearing on CB2 with a different setup entirely, which should fix the problems, I hope.

It basically involves doing the above, using a smaller triple on the left side just as on the right, and using the granny for the pedals and the large outer for the motor, but will need a smaller gear at the motor itself to get the right drivetrain speeds out of the smaller outer on the triple.

Another, if you really need the granny left free, is to use a set of thin (maybe 2mm?) chainring spacers between the big ring and the spider. These spacers are expensive for what they are, but cheap relative to other things - maybe $10 - $15 for a set of 5. You may even me able to figure a way to use washers or some other scrap bits to substitute, to meet your "repurpose" ethic. I don't think you'd want to give up the chain guides you fabricated, but you would certainly cut down on chain-chain interference if you could get the rings a few more mm apart.

It definitely would. I had originally wanted to space the chainrings apart more, but nothing I have available here would work to do it in a way that would handle the torque loads, so I left it alone and just tried to improve the clearance with the guides. Would probably have worked if I had had the motor chain aligned, which it obviously was not.


I definitely appreciate the feedback, even though the stuff I have (and my lack of budget) doesn't allow me to use the ideas yet.

What I *really* wanted to do when I started this whole thing was to fabricate a small metal piece to entirely replace the crank/triple on the left side, and just thread a pair of single-speed freewheels on there, with spacer rings as needed to align with the pedal and motor chains.

All it is is a cylinder about 3" long at most, threaded for freewheels along it's entire outer length. The right end would be milled out for square-taper cranks, and the left end milled out round and threaded inside for the standard crank-removal tool to thread in to remove it if needed, and for a socket wrench to reach the nut or bolt that secures it to the crankshaft (just as in a crank).

A pair of locknuts from other bottom brackets, along with spacer rings if needed, would be used to jam the leftmost freewheel in place, keeping it from unthreading itself as it is used. Thus, no southpaw freewheels are required, and it could be used for *any* regular singlespeed freewheels, as many as you needed to fit onto it up to it's full length.

I could lathe the main cylinder, and probably even file out the square-taper part by hand. But I cannot thread either part, as I don't have the tools for that. So the idea goes unused, until someday I can afford the taps and dies for the purpose, or pay someone to make it.

[amberwolf]

Today while helping a friend move stuff, I scored a couple of nice but very beat up bikes that happen to have square taper cranks with...bolt-on spider/chainrings!

One is a larger triple than the other, and I think it is aluminum or some alloy for the rings (as well as the spider/crank. I can actually wiggle it side to side between spider legs.

DSC02379 sakae sx triple with spider.JPG (113.62 KiB) Viewed 5196 times

The other triple is much harder, does not wiggle, and has that darker brownish tinge of titanium, although I am sure it is just plated or anodized to that color rather than actually being made of titanium. I sure wish it was, as I doubt I could break it if it was. The crank/spider is still aluminum/alloy, which is fine. It's a lot smaller rings though, so I'll need to use the smaller ring on the motor, maybe even cut it off and replace with an even smaller one.

DSC02373 Shimano triple with spider.JPG (104.29 KiB) Viewed 5197 times

There are a number of other nifty parts on the bikes, too, including even the frames, which appear to be nice cromoly, and are light enough I can pick them up onehanded even with the whole bike together, though I can't carry them far (I'm a wimp and my knees and joints hurt a lot).

One has Shimano trigger shifters, but they don't seem to be working. If they require tension on the cables to work, then that's why, as the nuts on the derailers are loosened and not holding the cables in place, plus the cable housings are not in good shape. The trigger shifters are part of the brake lever mounts, too. The cap on one is missing; hopefully it is only a cover and not a functional part.

DSC02370 Shimano trigger shifter right.JPG (68.38 KiB) Viewed 5197 times

These may end up being perfect shifters for the trike, since I will not have my hands in my field of vision with the tank style underseat steering, so I also can't see what gear things are in or what position the shifter lever is in. A trigger shifter always returns back to "home" after each shift, so it would be easier to shift with "blind". In theory. I've never used one.

The other has Deore lever shifters for a 6-speed rear cassette and a front triple, which is what I have on the CrazyBike2 right now. The Deore shifter I have on CB2 is for an 8-speed and thus doesn't shift properly due to differnet ring spacing (I dont' have anything with an 8-speed cassette).

DSC02375 shimano deore 6-speed shifter .JPG (61.16 KiB) Viewed 5195 times

One uses vbrakes, one uses side-pull linears with the noodle. The vbrakes appear to be almost new pads, the others have some medium wear on them.

DSC02377 shimano v-brakes near new pads.JPG (154.83 KiB) Viewed 5196 times

There is only one good tire on there, a Kenda something-or-other. The others are typical knobby stuff, though one of them is much less so than the others.

The Schwinn is a non-suspension bike, and the Trek is a hardtail with front shock forks that don't appear to work. They are labeled Skareb (I think--parts of the lettering are worn off), and appear to be hydraulic rather than spring. There is a lever on the top of one of them that probably was supposed to adjust the ride/travel, but that is missing on the other one. I would guess that if I can rebuild them they'd be nice shocks.

DSC02372 Skareb shocks (not working).JPG (126.16 KiB) Viewed 5195 times

One bike has wide-flanged hubs, which could come in handy for bolting diskc brakes to via adapters, but neither has any disk brake mounting holes on the hubs. The shock fork above has the mounting for the brake calipers, though. They're all 26" wheels with aluminum rims and hubs. Don't know if the spokes are good ones or not. I'd bet they are better than the cheap junk on most of the wheels I have.

DSC02378 rear triangle wheel derailer brakes.JPG (130.14 KiB) Viewed 5194 times

I have not yet checked to see if either is a freehub or if they're freewheel cassettes. The former would be nice.

DSC02380 shimano deore 6-speed derailer.JPG (122.79 KiB) Viewed 5193 times

I was also donated some more wheelchair parts, including a lever for my throttle

DSC02354 Throttle Off.JPG (116.32 KiB) Viewed 5196 times

and some interesting actuated "gas" (probably hydraulic) springs.

DSC02361 Actuated Gas Springs.JPG (88.97 KiB) Viewed 5196 times

The springs are neat because they have a little push rod in the center of the strut, which must be pushed in before the strut can move. This is done for ride-height adjustments on the chairs they come from (using a cable and lever similar to bike brake levers but smaller), but the nice bit about this feature for me is that they would let me "disable" the spring action if the bike was too heavily loaded to work without bottoming out, simply by raising the lockout lever.

Or they could be used solely for their ride-height adjustment ability, and not as springs at all. That would let me explore different front and rear heights to see what worked out better for height for clearance of road debris, curbs, etc, vs stability in turns, before permanently building that height into the frame (if ever).

[amberwolf]

I found a manual online for that shock fork, and turns out it's both pneumatic (for the actual suspension) and hydraulic (for the damping). So I aired it up via schrader valve in the top left fork to about 100PSI based on the manual and some posts found on an MTB forum, and it now operates as a shock.

I haven't opened it up to check the oil, but I suspect it's empty or near so (or the valves are bad) as there is no damping at all, regardless of the red knob setting. That knob should set the damping level.

It appears based on the manual to be easy to disassemble to check it out and/or fix, once I have time to clear off a table to lay out all the (presumably oily) parts.



Turns out the rear hubs on both are regular freewheels, and I suspect they are not the original cassettes, either, as neither one even has much in the way of the little shifting-helper-ridges and contours on any of the sprockets--they're pretty much flat on the Trek, and just have the twisted tips on the Schwinn.

I'm pretty sure they're not the original rims on the Trek, either, as one is a VERY cheap steel rim that has a horrible welded seam, and one of the cheap steel spokes on it is broken at the hub (others look like they're close). The cones are worn badly, too, either that or there aren't any bearings on the cassette side.

The ones on the Schwinn could be original hubs/rims, they appear to be at least decent quality ones and both match. Spokes seem a lot better steel, as they don't just bend (even the loose ones) with finger pressure.

The crank rings on the Trek do appear to be very hard metal on the largest ring--it does not even have it's tooth count stamped in it as the two smaller rings (of a different color metal) do. It is stickered as a Shimano Hyperdrive C. It's a 42T, and the others are 34 and 24. There is minor damage (chipping?) on certain teeth and tips, but it is in better shape than most of the rings I already have around here.

Being a Hyperdrive C tells me more certainly that the original wheel/cassette isn't on the back, because AFAIK these were meant for an 11T rear smallest sprocket.

The rings on the Schwinn are larger, at 48T, 38T, 28T, but are definitely weaker than the Hyperdrive rings.

I am going to see if I can work out a new driveline for the motor/pedals using the Hyperglide as the receiver. Kind of a waste, as it won't be used for any shifting.

I will probably just put the old strong single-ring cranks back on the pedals.


I did a little bit of cleaning of the trigger shifters, and now they work fine. Just had dirt in there keeping the mechanism from moving the ratchet. I'll have to make a cover for the right (rear) shifter, or that will continue to be a bad problem.

[amberwolf]

I decided for now that enough of the Schwinn was intact and in good shape that I'd spend a couple of hours and fit it out as a rideable spare bike, even though it is has no suspension at all, and is a regular straight-top (men's style) bike, which is really hard for me to get my leg up and over.

DSC02390 Schwinn Sierra Fixed up side.JPG (128.52 KiB) Viewed 5162 times

But it is very light. Even with the little rack I stuck on there, which is cheap steel and about 2 or 3 pounds by itself, plus the Stanley light full of 12 AA batteries, I can still lift it with one hand (not with my backpack/helmet on there, though).

I stuck the original front Kenda road tire off of DayGlo Avenger on there, as it is a lot better than the disintegrating front tire it had, and the Kenda Krossroads off the Trek, which is slightly better than the Kenda Road. Unfortunately, this Kenda Krossroads has the same problem my other Kenda Kross tires had--the sidewalls are not made right, and they shed bits of rubber off the fibers, eventually splitting along the diagonal fiber lines and coming open far enough to let the tube bulge out. This one is going to need patching inside just like the other two do.

I like the tire *style*, but their QC and/or sidewall design sucks. I sure wouldn't buy Kenda tires new, based on my experiences with all the ones I have had so far, including the pair that came new on DayGlo Avenger when I originally got it as a new-in-box Columbia Comfort Bike back in 2005 (of which the front tire on this bike is one).

That front wheel has the Slime thorn-resistant pre-slimed tube in it, too, as the original thin tube in there had several patches already, and was sticking to the inside of the disintegrating tire such that I didn't trust it.

This is what it looks like with no flash, and it's lights on.

DSC02388 Schwinn Sierra Fixed up side lights.JPG (86.5 KiB) Viewed 5162 times

My helmet light is on, too, and it is shining at the chair's right arm. It's a very diffuse LED light, without much of a spot. Lights up stuff close fairly well, and does a decent job of lighting up reflective road signs, license plates, etc, but not the actual road.

The Stanley light *does* have a really good beam, enough so that you can clearly see it on the wall in front of the bike (only a foot away, but still)

DSC02383 Schwinn Sierra Fixed up rear.JPG (99.76 KiB) Viewed 5165 times

That spot stays a spot far enough away that I can't see enough light back from it to be useful, probably about 50 feet on road surfaces, farther on lighter-colored objects and much much farther on reflective ones.

It's a point source light from a distance, and quite bright; I keep it pointed at the ground about 20 feet ahead most of the time on the roads. Farther on unlit trails/canals. It's clamped to the bars with 2 hose clamps, like my other flashlights have been, and like the little red one is clamped to the junction of cargo rack and rear triangle.

I had to replace the sheaths for the shifter cables, though the cables themselves were fine. I swapped out the freewheel cassette for the one off the Trek, as the one on the Schwinn was very noisy, and the one on the Trek was virtually silent. I'm sure the original would work better if I serviced it, but I wanted to try the bike out for a bit before it got too late tonight, and I was getting hungry.

I tested it out for a few miles tonight, going to the store and stuff, and it worked well. Only problem I had was that the "Primus" thick tube that was already in the Kenda tire in back blew a hole (slit, actually) too big for even Slime to save it. I had to flip the bike over, peel the tire off the rim, and patch it, about a mile into the trip. No problems after that.

The hole was about 1/3 of the way up from the inside circumference of the tube, and looked like it was from someone using a screwdriver as a tire-iron, but on these tires and rims it's not even necessary to do that. They easily roll off the rims when deflated, which makes for easy fixing if something goes wrong, like above. I didn't even have to take the wheel off. I didn't see the mark when I originally swapped this onto the Schwinn's rim, but I did not look that closely at it. My mistake.

This bike is actually a joy to ride--it is so light and is geared right that I can start up without much knee pain, as long as I am not carrying anything. Adding the backpack with toolkit, pump, etc, plus wearing longjohn bottoms & top under the jeans and tye-dye long-sleeve sweater (for warmth in the chilly evening, made worse by the breeze from riding), was enough to make it harder to ride but still better than DayGlo Avenger even without it's cargo pod and rack.

I *don't* like the lower handlebars, though, so I will have to do something about that. The stem is already most of the way up, though, so I can't get enough height from it to help. I will probably have to change the handlebars to something that reaches farther up/back.

It is quite a tall bike and is not a joy to get onto. I can barely stand astride it, with the top tube against the seam of my pants. Wouldn't wanna slip off the seat.

I also don't like the seat, which is the original Schwinn narrow hard seat. Like all of them, it doesn't fit me and it's also slippery, so I can't seem to stay on it. It's a quick-release so I will probably use my shock-post seat if it fits in this tube (it might not). That seat is wider and at least somewhat tolerable for longer rides than a couple of miles. This one is mildly painful after only about a mile and a half; I probably could not ride it longer than 5 miles even if my life depended on it.

I'm pretty sure it was actually meant to have 700C rims on there, or at least something larger than the 26" that it came to me with, as the brakes don't adjust down the rims very far--the top edges of the brakes just clear the top of the rims by a millimeter or so at their lowest adjustment, but would go at least 1/4" higher--enough to ride completely on the sidewalls of the 26" tires!

If it did have taller wheels, I would not be able to ride it, though. I would be unable to mount it without holding it sideways so far that I could not push it upright to get it going, and I would be unable to dismount at stops, forcing me to lean over on one side while staying in the saddle. I'm not sure I could startup from a stop then, as most of them are on slight uphill inclines. It certainly wouldn't be easy.

Anyway, it's a good bike.

[amberwolf]

Not much progress on CB2 itself. Seems like every time I sit down to work on it either I find a serious problem with whatever it was I was about to do to fix the chainline stuff, or something happens to pull me away from it. Or fabricating something turns out to not be possible with the tools I have (or I don't have the skill to do it yet). It's kind of depressing. At least I have the trike design in progress to get excited about.

Using that smaller chainring off the Trek is impossible. It would bring the chain itself down to the point it would cut thru the frame. Any guide I put on there to route the chain around the frame would probably break under the motor power, probably when I have it heavily loaded and am far away from home.

To keep the chainline straight on the top where the load is, I have to keep a large chainring on the receiving crankshaft. So it is back to fixing one of the previously destroyed ring sets. Maybe I can mix and match them well enough to double up thinner rings, then use BMX chain for strength. Bolt or weld the ring set together.


Considering welding a threaded section from either a BB cup or a rear hub to the motor shaft's hub end, then putting a freewheel cassete smallest sprockets I can get away with on there. That would get me a freewheel so that I would not be driving the motor when pedalling.

Also considering taking a BB cup and welding it's cup end to the right end of the threaded part of a rear hub. Then welding it's nut end to the face of a steel square-taper crank. The cup would need to be bored out enough to be able to get to the nut and crank threads, so I could still tighten or remove it later.

That would give me a long enough threaded cylinder to do what I originally set out to do for leftside chainrings, which was to put a couple of freewheels on that threaded cylinder with spacers to line up the chains as needed, and allow both motor and pedals to drive the wheel without driving each other.

Problem is, I am not sure that the welding would take the torque, or that the crankshaft itself would take it either, with the load cantilevered out that far. Originally the custom-made cylinder design would have had the motor load still over the actual crankshaft, but both of these would end up out beyond the end of the shaft, putting quite a load on the welds.

So...CB2 is stalled.

[amberwolf]

http://www.endless-sphere.com/forums/vi ... 12#p242212

[amberwolf]

Ok, I have been putting off doing the fixit stuff on CB2 for way way way too long. I think I just got discouraged from the repeated failures of stuff I was *sure* I had conquered.

I decided last month to get working on it seriously again, and started this thread
http://www.endless-sphere.com/forums/vi ... 28&t=17809
to see about ways to make the jackshaft freewheel adapter I wanted. Thud is now basically doing that whole part for me, in a way I hadn't considered, and I am not quite sure if I can say "thank you" enough.

In the meantime, I've been doing the usual monthly check and top-off of the SLA on CB2 (as well as the spares not mounted), and found that one of the mounted ones had just died. Open circuit it's ok but with a load it dies to less than a volt. Same with one of the other spares, also a Sacred Sun UPS battery. One more of those failed in a different way, it reads about 8V and drops by several volts as you watch the meter! So I had only one spare left at that point, not including the one replacing the mounted failed battery.

The battery fairy found four more used but still functional 17Ah SLA and dropped them off; one pair is significantly better than the other, and possibly better than the only original pair left on CB2. I'll be doing some discharge tests on both pair to see if it's worth swapping them out.

In the meantime I am growing a fair collection of lead to recycle once I find a local place offering enough to be worth the strenuous trip.

If I can modify the BB axle I have on the pedals to be like the cyclone types and stick out farther (on the left in my case), then with Thud's jackshaft adapter I can move the whole chainline away from the batteries far enough to finally build a box around them to hide them and their ugly wiring, and give me a place to mount the breaker without using hose clamps.

I did realize that using this new adapter, I may have to rework the left rail that ties the front and rear frames together stiffly, and provides the bottom rail for the cargo pods. It'll be in the way of the adapter and/or it's chainrings where it is now. Have to move it leftward, so I will see if I can make one out of tubing that will replace the front half of the rail, bolted to the rail in back, making a sort of ? hook around the chainring area, then bolting back to the front frame again.

Another detail to finish is to affix the spring return to the throttle lever. Throttle works fine but gravity can pull the lever down and engage the motor all by itself. Not good. Idea is that i use the side and/or tip of my thumb to push down on this long lever just like I used to on my short little thumbpot knob, only this should be easier to operate with the longer lever. Less long-term stress on my thumb/hand. Until the mount pivot broke, I had this working with a metal bar fairly well. Should be better with the better lever.

Working on some stuff for getting disc brakes onto the front wheel, and maybe the rear, too. I'll probably leave the v-brakes on as well, both for backup in case of failure of disc, and for additional stopping power and/or downhill speed control.

I also have an actual motorcycle LED taillight/brakelight to add to the CFL thingamabob and 3rd brakelight bar, just for added rear-pointed lighting. If it works out I may replace the CFL entirely with it. Got one on DGA already, just have to wire it up and stuff.

[vanilla ice]

On the trigger shifter.. I got an old bike with some beat down stuck shimano triggers. Looked to be mid to high end, so I spent some time and oil on them. They were shifting fine after like an hour of elbow grease, and oil and grease. I bet you could get those back to operational condition without too much time in to it, if you wanted to. I like them.

[amberwolf]

Sounds like it is worth trying. I need to clean the dirt out of them, first.

I am finding that it is difficult to place everything on the actual bars. I am almost certainly going to wind up putting some sort of parallel bar on the HB so that I can have some stuff on those that I don't need quite as easy access to but still want within reach.

And I am probably going to make a "dashboard" to hold the switches, bike computer, watt meter, etc, partly to consolidate them and partly to give me a weatherproofing option. It doesn't rain much here but when it does, it's a doozy.

[amberwolf]

Today I helped a friend convert a Landrider autoshifting bike over to manual shift, as the person it's for doesn't like the autoshifting; it causes problems with pedalling for them.

So they didn't want the autoshifting derailer/etc, and I now have it. It is based on a simple old Falcon derailer just like bikes I have from the 70s, but with a custom-made back end that has a pulley-driven shaft with a split flyweight on it. Pulley on the wheel behind the cassette drives it.

DSC02804.JPG (28.61 KiB) Viewed 946 times

"rear" view, showing the wheel pulley, belt, and the shaft pulley circled in red.

DSC02805.JPG (19.17 KiB) Viewed 946 times

Bottom-rear view showing the flywheel held open in a fully-shifted state, with the pivoting seesaw lever that does the shifting circled in green, and that drive pulley in red.

DSC02806.JPG (34.73 KiB) Viewed 946 times

A shot from underneath showing where they once designed in a manual shifter override but didn't bore the holes or thread them. Maybe those only exist in earlier models.

DSC02807.JPG (37.6 KiB) Viewed 946 times

It would not actually work as a pull-cable anyway; it'd have to be a pushrod to work. This shifter moves backwards from the way all others I've ever had do. It starts on the lowest gear, and tension on it from the flyweights/lever pulls it to the highest.

This is the separate plastic pulley that seats between the cassette and the spokes/hub.

DSC02808.JPG (42.58 KiB) Viewed 1105 times

The other side, you can see the notches/etc for the spoke heads to fit. Luke, this is what I need to get into CAD file for those adapters. Anybody got a 3D scanner? I'd love to have this thing in aluminum, as a solid disc to use for all sorts of adapters!

DSC02810.JPG (37.82 KiB) Viewed 1105 times

A better angle; had to increase brightness/contrast to see the indentations for the spoke heads.

DSC02811.JPG (56.54 KiB) Viewed 1105 times

So the idea is that once CB2 is running, I'm going to stick this in place of the regular rear derailer. Theoretically, assuming the motor power doesn't destroy it it should shift gears automatically to keep more optimal gearing. I'll have to come up with a manual pushrod shifter for it too, in case something happens to the belt or autoshift part of the mechanism.

Since it'll be on a 24" wheel instead of a 26", I may have to play around with the 2 screws that appear to adjust the balance of the seesaw pivot. If they do what I think they do, I might get enough adjustment range to alter the rate at which gears shift vs wheel speed.



When my friend and I went to a bike shop for some parts he wanted for the Landrider/etc., we ended up at the same shop I'd bought that box of assorted parts at the swap meet of, back a couple months or more. I'd also at the same day bought a used Shimano Biopace 28/38/48 crankset that I installed to great success and comfort on DGAmII, and figured I'd probably never see another one just waiting for me on the shelf like that.

I even said as much to him as I was digging thru the used parts shelf, and guess what?

DSC02812.JPG (24.03 KiB) Viewed 946 times

Right there, another one, in even better condition!

DSC02813.JPG (30.21 KiB) Viewed 946 times

Like the other, it has both cranks, the ovoid chainrings, and a BB cup set, bearings, and crankshaft and bolts.

So now I have one for CB2 as well--I had figured I'd have to pull the one off DGA once I got CB2 working again--now I don't have to. Of course, with this on CB2, I have to add a tensioner for the chain, since it will not be the same all the time as it would with round chainrings.

I'll tell ya, though, if you've got bad knees, these things definitely make a difference in when the forces on them happen during cranking harder, and that makes a world of difference to the level of pain when real effort is required for any reason, like startups.

It appears to help most on the largest chainring, so despite common sense, I typically leave the front on the largest and shift down to largest in back to get lower gears, only downshifting in front when I know I can't do it with the big ring, which fortunatley is not very often here in Phoenix.

[spinningmagnets]

Hmmm...even if that particular model of auto-shifter didn't work well, that idea is interesting...

Are the chainrings you posted oval instead of round? EDIT: I see you already said "ovoid",...I thought ovoid was a brand name! I have heard of them, are they easier on old knees? (I have two of those,...old knees, I mean)

[amberwolf]

Yes, they are not exactly oval, but an eccentric ovoid shape. Weren't very popular, like most of the eccentric chainrings or odd cranks over the years. Every so often another company will try their hand at evening out the torque load on the cyclists legs and the bike drivetrain, by doing something like this that helps deliver more or less constant power.

It definitely helps my knees on the upright bike. I did not know if they would, and was skeptical, but the first set I found was like $5 or something silly and since it was, like these, complete down to the crankshaft, I couldn't resist trying them. I figured if nothing else I could resell them on CL or ebay for more than I paid.

But they did work on DGA, it's not a huge difference in actual torque but it apparently gives me more leverage at the points my knees are weakest. Might be different on CrazyBike2 since it's a different seating position and different leg angle, etc. Might require moving the cranks around one or two pegs on the spider, if they're radially symmetrical for the bolt circle.


The autoshifter is an interesting design, and while it happens to be a very cheaply made one, I could imagine Thud or someone making a much better one. Assuming the concept works for bottom bracket drives, which I guess is basically what CB2 uses.


I'm eager to try both of them out on CB2.

[amberwolf]

Another new bit for CB2: a front disc brake hub, courtesy of Papa. It's a bit of an odd one, unlike most I have seen, it requires dishing the wheel. I've seen that sort on trikes, (Steintrike?) but this has a QR axle, and I really can't imagine a QR axle as a stub axle on a trike being all that safe. So I guess it's just one of those hubs made to clear larger disc calipers.

DSC02877.JPG (30.52 KiB) Viewed 918 times

Anyhow, I started trying to lace it up tonight (as you can see in the pic above), but am going to have to work out a spoke pattern that lets me use spokes that are either normally too long or too short for this. As I expected, it has significantly larger diameter flanges than any of the other 24" wheels' hubs I have, so none of the 24" wheel spokes will fit quite right using a normal 2x lacing--they're so long I can't take up the slack.

DSC02876.JPG (28.06 KiB) Viewed 918 times

If I use a 3x lacing, they're not quite long enough even for the dished side, even dished totally flat (I can get about 15 of the 18 spokes into the nipples, but even if they're only catching 2 threads each I can't get the other three in at all).

DSC02878.JPG (62.36 KiB) Viewed 1076 times

20" wheel spokes are too short even if I radially laced them. I could probably radially lace 22" wheel spokes but I don't have any, assuming that's a size even made.

I am currently trying to work out maybe some fancy lacing pattern that will let me use some 26" wheel spokes I have from a wheelset that had a large-diameter-flange hub in it, so they're kinda short for typical 26" spokes but still long enough for perhaps a 3x pattern. If I use the ones off the rear I'll have ones short enough to make the dishing for the disc side, too.

This should be an interesting wheel build.

I wish I knew someone here in Phoenix with a spoke thread roller I could have the use of long enough to learn how to use it, and then cut/rethread some spokes.


Even after I get the wheel itself done, I still have to bolt one of AussieJester's donated discs to it, then put it all on the front fork, line up a caliper he also donated, and then make an adapter I can weld to the fork that I can bolt the caliper to.

[Papa]

AW,

You really should limit yourself to at least 3x on disc hubs - especially on front wheels. Remember, unlike rim brakes, disc brakes load the spokes just like hub motors do. This is why most disc hub manufactures' won't warranty their hubs if laced less than 3x.

Once the wheel is built, bolt on a rotor and install it on the bike. Now install and connect the lever and cable to the caliper, then align the caliper on the rotor and simply "apply the brakes" to freeze the caliper in it's proper position to the rotor. A rubber band will hold pressure on the lever. Rotate the wheel, if necessary, to position the caliper where you want it, then build your caliper mount. I use 3/16" thick stock. Make sense?

BTW, considering the laden weight of your bike, I'd strongly suggest you use at least 180mm diameter rotor - a 203mm even better.

[amberwolf]

You really should limit yourself to at least 3x on disc hubs - especially on front wheels. Remember, unlike rim brakes, disc brakes load the spokes just like hub motors do. This is why most disc hub manufactures' won't warranty their hubs if laced less than 3x.

More info I did not yet know--thanks! Based on digging thru the wheels and salvaged spokes I have, unless those short 26" spokes work, I won't have any others that I can use that will allow 3x or 4x. (well, actually that will work at all for the wheel at the moment; I'll end up with the same above problems).

Once the wheel is built, bolt on a rotor and install it on the bike. Now install and connect the lever and cable to the caliper, then align the caliper on the rotor and simply "apply the brakes" to freeze the caliper in it's proper position to the rotor. A rubber band will hold pressure on the lever. Rotate the wheel, if necessary, to position the caliper where you want it, then build your caliper mount. I use 3/16" thick stock. Make sense?

Yes, it does. I'd planned on all of that except the using caliper to hold *itself* in place, which is brilliant.

I am considering putting the brake caliper on the front of the fork, so the rotation of the disc will force the axle into the dropouts rather than tend to pull it out, since it is a QR type, and I have read of a few incidents here and there of those pulling out under sudden hard braking, especially after repetitive pulsing of the brakes, which may be loosening the skewers. Another reason to use the front is that I already have a 1/4" steel plate up there for 20" dropouts on my 24" fork (for a much older bike experiment I never finished), which I could probably bolt the caliper mount to.

BTW, considering the laden weight of your bike, I'd strongly suggest you use at least 180mm diameter rotor - a 203mm even better.

I don't remember what size I have; at the moment it's just the one regular bike style from AJ, plus a smaller (pitbike?) one that might be ok for a rear but not a front (and would need modification to match mounting holes). IIRC, there will be another from Karma once the motor winding is done and the box of that and other stuff arrives here. Can't remember it's size.

Since Jason at E-BikeKit offered to send me some 9C covers (if he has any) for another project for postage, I'll also be buying a pair of the largest discs/threadon adapters he has to hopefully make it at least worth his time to do the covers; I think they are 180?

I'll probably also leave the rim brakes on, though I may not have the cable hooked up to the lever, so that I can use those if something goes wrong with my caliper mount, etc.

[docnjoj]

Hey Amberwolf
Stein does use those Bitex hubs like you have in 3x but they have no dish and the wheel is centered over the middle of the flanges. The one big problem I had was that they have very little lateral support and I think that is why my wheel failed. The flange width is only about 45 mm, too small for the front of a heavy trike. My new plastic wheels seem to be quite strong and you can prolly find some on yard and garden carts that have been either discarded or sent to goodwill. They are glass filled nylon.
otherDoc

[docnjoj]

"Are the chainrings you posted oval instead of round? EDIT: I see you already said "ovoid",...I thought ovoid was a brand name! I have heard of them, are they easier on old knees? (I have two of those,...old knees, I mean)"
spinningmagnets


I too have "old knees", S/M and I did sone research a while back on bike solutions. Biopace is not it! the data was always equivocal as to whether they actually helped, and I believe the market spoke as always. What seems to help, and I am about to try is shorter cranks. I have 175s right now and I plan to go back to 150mm like on my old trike. I never had knee problems then but I haven't ridden it in over a year. I'm gunna get those pedal shorteners that they use on tandems and make an instant 150 crank. I don't have the drill press accuracy to drill my cranks and may as well pay for my lack!
otherDoc

[Papa]

"Are the chainrings you posted oval instead of round? EDIT: I see you already said "ovoid",...I thought ovoid was a brand name! I have heard of them, are they easier on old knees? (I have two of those,...old knees, I mean)"
spinningmagnets


I too have "old knees", S/M and I did sone research a while back on bike solutions. Biopace is not it! the data was always equivocal as to whether they actually helped, and I believe the market spoke as always. What seems to help, and I am about to try is shorter cranks. I have 175s right now and I plan to go back to 150mm like on my old trike. I never had knee problems then but I haven't ridden it in over a year. I'm gunna get those pedal shorteners that they use on tandems and make an instant 150 crank. I don't have the drill press accuracy to drill my cranks and may as well pay for my lack!
otherDoc

IIRC, SR's were dubbed, "Ovaltech" and Sugino's was "Cycloid." I have a nice stash of Biopace and was using them on 152mm cranks. But lately, I've been spinning a belt. Now if I could have the CNC wizards carve me an 8mm Bio-Pulley,... i'd be in Fat City.

[amberwolf]

Stein does use those Bitex hubs like you have in 3x but they have no dish and the wheel is centered over the middle of the flanges. The one big problem I had was that they have very little lateral support and I think that is why my wheel failed. The flange width is only about 45 mm, too small for the front of a heavy trike.

That makes sense.

Mine has to be dished because there's no way to center the wheel in the fork otherwise. I mean, I could do it undished, but the tire would be something like 10mm or more closer to the right side than the left; I'm not sure how badly that would affect steering, but I'm guessing it would be noticeable. Since my steering is remote by pushrod on CB2, I could very easily adjust it so it is automatically compensated for in straight-line riding, but I dont' know what it would change in turns and such.

My new plastic wheels seem to be quite strong and you can prolly find some on yard and garden carts that have been either discarded or sent to goodwill. They are glass filled nylon.

I'll have to keep an eye out. At the moment I've got a few sets of wheels including some with sealed bearings, but they are not very wide (20" wheels, spoked). They'll likely be the first experimental ones used on ARTOO if I ever get it off the drawing board. Then start replacing them with the geared 3speed hubs driven by powerchair motors, and see what breaks.

I too have "old knees", S/M and I did sone research a while back on bike solutions. Biopace is not it! the data was always equivocal as to whether they actually helped, and I believe the market spoke as always.

On my regular bike, they do help me; I'd read lots of arguments about them and other ovoid rings, but never had the chance to try any. I figured they probably wouldn't help, but for whatever reason, they do.

On CB2, they may not help, since my legs will be at a different angle; I don't know.

What seems to help, and I am about to try is shorter cranks. I have 175s right now and I plan to go back to 150mm like on my old trike.

I have (I think) 155mm on CB2 right now. I did that mostly so I would not have to deal with as much leg extension/contraction, and keep my feet in a smaller circle. But it gives me less torque and makes it harder for me to push wihtout pain in a startup situation in which I don't have the motor helping for whatever reason. The longer ones I tried (165? 170? I forgot) get more torque with less knee pain; but my feet go in a much bigger circle and I have to watch out when I turn or I can hit my knees on the bars!

Now if I could have the CNC wizards carve me an 8mm Bio-Pulley,... i'd be in Fat City.

Hmm...now that could be interesting. You'd probably need a different tensioning method, though, as most belt setups I've seen are a fixed tensioner, rather than a self-variable one, or at least not enough variability to deal with that much change.