GNG, 1000W 48V BB-drive, $400

christerljung said:
spinningmagnets said:
Actually the idea was to use the wide spread 11-34 cassette with a derailleur and that small 9 tooth sprocket pulling a 8-speed HG-chain.

It seems to me that when we are pushing belt and chain systems to the limits of what they can handle, and beyond, that the highest possible tooth count is a good thing. The more teeth engaged, the less stress per individual tooth at a given power level. In the systems that I'm designing I'm pushing the tooth counts as high as availability of sprockets/pulleys and physical space will permit.

One of the interesting considerations you run into is that typically larger pitch belts and chains are stronger. HTD8 will handle more torque than HTD5. #35 chain will handle more power than #25 chain. With a pitch of 8mm HTD8 takes up more than 50% more space for the same tooth count as compared to HTD5. A 14T HTD5 pulley is 22mm in diameter. A 14T HTD8 is 36mm. What I have not seen is the strength of HTD8 compared to HTD5 by physical size instead of tooth count. We are concerned with how much space something takes up relative to it's strength, not the strength per tooth.

One of the rare win/wins is #25 chain compared to bicycle chain. It's about half the pitch size and stronger. I can't help but wonder if you could design a derailleur around #25 or even #35. I know there is a lot of Black Magic involved in the derailleur shifting process. The chain has to both side flex and twist in order to jump from one cog to the next. Maybe a strong chain would defeat that process. If e-bikes are going to evolve and realize their potential derailleurs need to get stronger and better.
 
LightningRods said:
It seems to me that when we are pushing belt and chain systems to the limits of what they can handle, and beyond, that the highest possible tooth count is a good thing. The more teeth engaged, the less stress per individual tooth at a given power level. In the systems that I'm designing I'm pushing the tooth counts as high as availability of sprockets/pulleys and physical space will permit.

This is correct, from an efficiency, reliability, and wear standpoint.

One of the rare win/wins is #25 chain compared to bicycle chain. It's about half the pitch size and stronger.

ANSI #25 chain is exactly half the pitch size as bicycle chain, but not even close to the same strength. How could it be as strong? Everything about it is smaller-- pins, cross-sectional area of sideplates, projected area of bushings-- just everything about it. Bike chain is closest to ANSI #41, but thinner. ANSI #25 doesn't even have rollers.

Bicycle racers and engineers have been going to radical lengths to shave off tiny amounts of weight for many decades. If smaller chain could possibly be stronger, why would they not have plucked this low-hanging fruit of bicycle weight loss and performance enhancement? Do you think you could be the first person to have explored this possibility?

Shimano marketed a 10mm pitch chain and corresponding parts that never caught on,despite some real (and a few hypothetical) advantages.

ANSI #35 chain is stronger than bicycle chain, but also heavier. Every chain that is stronger than bicycle chain is also heavier than bicycle chain. Most roller chains are not designed to derail.

I can't help but wonder if you could design a derailleur around #25 or even #35.

You could, but then it would shift even more poorly than 1930s bike chains did when asked to shift. The changes from industrial drive chain to bicycle chain have not been arbitrary. They are the result of many generations of continuous development.

If e-bikes are going to evolve and realize their potential derailleurs need to get stronger and better.

If you want to feed superhuman power through bicycle-style derailleurs reliably, the chains will have to scale up. A bicycle type chain at 5/8" pitch should be good for quite a bit more power than 1/2" pitch chain before problems occur. That's why high powered motorcycles use bigger chains and sprockets than low powered motorcycles.

Wider chains can carry more power and withstand more wear than narrower chains, but making them wider in proportion to their pitch makes them harder to derail and shift.
 
If smaller chain could possibly be stronger, why would they not have plucked this low-hanging fruit of bicycle weight loss and performance enhancement?
I dunno. Complacency. Rigid thinking. What the phuck? Excuse me for asking.

Do you think you could be the first person to have explored this possibility?

Careful. There's that snotty, condescending tone that makes people hate you coming out again. A funny hat doesn't make you that much more tolerable.
 
There is an interresting difference between bicyclechains made for a 7-8 speed cassette and those for a 9+ speed casette. 7-8 speeds are a little wider, which would make them stronger? How much? which connecting method is strongest? shimano pin-style or sram quicklink?
The standard mtb-drivetrain seem to withstand enormous amount of power when its´new and perfectly setup. The smallest 11 tooth cog goes down pretty quick at +3kw, but you really dont need to use the 11th. Shimano HG40 chain comes for 9$ at crc. That makes it possible to always have a perfect chain. I never broke a chain so far. (only when it jumped).
 
Is the concern with the bike's OEM drivetrain to do with chain strength or derailleur lifespan?

I'm using a SRAM X7 9 speed at the moment and am pretty happy with the spread of gears from a Shimano mountain cassette - I'm using all but the bigger rings at the moment.
I'd certainly consider a Shimano Alfine if it was going to be a lot stronger, but at ~ $500ish I'll wait for the X7 to decide it no longer wants to play first.

I guess the benefit of an Alfine is a straight /consistent chainline than the (occasionally) crossed up line you'll get with a derailleur in the "easier" gears.
I had the chain drop off the inside of the front ring the other day (while starting out in an easier gear) and it was fairly tricky to get back on due to the limited clearance between the inner chain ring and the heads of the bolts on the motor case. Not the end of the world but something I'd rather avoid in the future and a straighter chainline would probably do that.
 
Sorry if this has been covered- I tried to search (promise!) and read about 30 pages, but how has it worked out for people who have ordered just the motor? I sent an email to GNG via their web form, and got an email back from Jon Chan saying that it would cost $118 plus shipping. I replied with my location and I received a Paypal invoice requesting $196 total, from Li Hung Pan, referencing the 48V 450 watt brushless motor.

So- this is just a little different from the communication that I'm used to from dealing with people strictly in the US. Does this all sound legit?

Also, THANKS to everyone who's posted their experiences, designs, pictures, and advice! Great forum!
 
GNG is a packager and re-seller. It sounds like Li Hung Pan is the 450W motor supplier to GNG. You might have to order a larger quantity from Li before he gave you a price discount from the agreed GNG replacement cost.

Is it legit? Probably as legit as anything that's ordered direct from China. Please post what the results are. I suspect Li has many more motor selections than just the GNG 450W brushless.

Li Hung Pan's order desk is run by Wun Lump Sum, and his motor-builder is Sum Yung Giy. The lady who answers the phone is his wife Yu May Not.
 
Well... I did recently get a new job that pays a lot better than the old one- might as well take a gamble! This time it won't be like the time I got burned on a direct shipped power supply that did less than half it's rated power before letting the smoke out, right? :roll:
 
Tinto said:
Is the concern with the bike's OEM drivetrain to do with chain strength or derailleur lifespan?

Tinto- The discussion that is going on right now is about getting more reduction in the primary and secondary drive so that it's possible to pedal along with the motor at higher voltages and throttle settings. The stock GNG reduction is just under 20:1 overall. Ideal at 48V is around 40:1 to turn the motor's 3,200 rpm into 80 rpm, a comfortable pedaling cadence.

My point is that smaller pitch chains will allow higher tooth counts and more reduction. IF #25 chain is strong enough to work in the secondary reduction drive instead of 1/2" bicycle chain you can fit 2x the tooth count into the same space and so potentially twice the reduction. Switching to #25 chain would make it possible to get the reduction down to 40:1 without using huge sprockets that interfere with ground clearance, etc. Plus #25 is cheap. If #25 turns out to be too weak to handle the strain of a torque multiplied secondary drive, there is #219 and #219H ("H" for heavy duty).

Spinning Magnets has started an excellent and informative thread on roller chains and sprockets on E-S. You can find it here http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=46630.

Down the road powerful e-bikes will need purpose built final drives that are more like a motorcycle than a bicycle. The bicycle chain and current transmissions limit the amount of power that we can run unless we use a separate direct drive sprocket for the motor. That amount is well over the legal limit for road use almost anywhere, but that doesn't keep some of us from wanting it. :twisted:
 
I agree, what would really be nice is a fallbrook technology CVT hub that can handle more power than the nuvinci hub does. though I've been thinking quite a bit that I will be putting one on the next GNG build to see how long it will last at the stock power levels and beyond.

on another note, I was getting some help from the guys at the local bike shop down the street and the owner pointed out that the BB cup on the drive side is not doing its job very well. because of the plates and the lock ring the cup doesn't sit flush with the BB shell, therefore the sealed bearings are not being held properly. he gave me some spacers to put on the inside between the cup and the bearings and it went together well. so it's possible that cheap chinese steel is not the only reason many folks are having problems with the bottom bracket.

speaking of which, I installed the lightningrods mark II sheets and they are way cool. the improved quality of the steel is quite obvious, what a great mod!
 
gestalt said:
I agree, what would really be nice is a fallbrook technology CVT hub that can handle more power than the nuvinci hub does. though I've been thinking quite a bit that I will be putting one on the next GNG build to see how long it will last at the stock power levels and beyond.

The N171 (first generation) NuVinci hub is explicitly rated for 5kW continuous input power. As long as you drive it through the input sprocket and not through the disc brake mount, it could withstand a very hopped-up mid-drive.

It resists being shifted under heavy load, and tends to respond (or over-respond) to the twist shifter when torque is lightened up. At least that's my personal experience with it.
 
Chalo said:
gestalt said:
I agree, what would really be nice is a fallbrook technology CVT hub that can handle more power than the nuvinci hub does. though I've been thinking quite a bit that I will be putting one on the next GNG build to see how long it will last at the stock power levels and beyond.
The N171 (first generation) NuVinci hub is explicitly rated for 5kW continuous input power. As long as you drive it through the input sprocket and not through the disc brake mount, it could withstand a very hopped-up mid-drive.
Of greater relevance is the maximum continuous input torque rating of 65Nm....
 
For what it's worth my GNG drive with 11-92 #219 fixed chain broke the 3 M5 disc brake bolts holding the rear sproket. I calculated 200+ N/m
but that seems really high. Maybe the bolts broke from fatigue.
 
Reprint from Inside Karting Magazine
By Tod Spaude Of http://www.tsracing.com/

Tips on gear selection: Understanding chain: #35 vs. #219

Chain, as we all know, is the primary link on our karts between the engine to the rear axle sprocket in sprint racing. #35 chain has been used since karting began, and is still used today. 99.9% of four cycle racers generally use #35 chain. Two cycle racers are probably the greater users of #219 chain.
#219 chain primarily started in the European countries. The Europeans use either #219 chain or 8mm chain. Japan as well uses #219.
In two cycle racing at indoor events, you can achieve 9 more teeth in the rear by using #219 chain and still have the same outside diameter rear sprocket for ground clearance. If using a 9-81 in #35 chain, your ratio is 9 to 1; the same in #219 chain would be a 10-90, which is 9 to 1 also. Difference is the: 81 tooth #35 sprocket is 9.880" OD, while the 90 tooth #219 sprocket is 9.025" OD.
So, you have more ground clearance with #219 chain and you can add teeth if needed and not be worried about the rear sprocket hitting the ground. You could go all the way to a #219-99 tooth sprocket before you reach the same outside diameter of the 81 tooth #35 sprocket. The #219 chain gives the racer more freedom to choose gears and not worry about the ground clearance. See fig. 1 for sprocket diameters.

219vs35.gif



I also polled the major karting clutch manufacturers about #219 chain vs. #35 chain. All agreed that #219 should outperform the #35 chain in many areas. First, rotating weight of the chain: #219 chain is lighter—approximately 13% lighter in a 40" length (see fig. 2). Second, durability: #219 has more pins per inch. which results in longer chain life, as well as increased sprocket life, especially front driver gear wear.

Figure 2
40” of #219: 11.166 ozs. #219 = 130 pins per 40”
40” of #35: 12.80 ozs. #35 = 106 pins per 40”

#35 chain is superior to #219 chain with respect to strength. Powerful 135cc rotary valve 2 cycle motors can tug on the chain with more force than #219 can tolerate. The #35 chain has thicker side plates and larger diameter pins. Yet, I’ve seen #219 chain work with much more success with the newer big 125cc reed motors. They pull through the torque curve more smoothly due to their higher engine rpms.
Tom Fehring from SMC Clutches explains, “Chain rollers and sprocket teeth do not mesh smoothly. The links of a chain wrapped around a sprocket form a polygon geometry that results in an impact between tooth and roller that wastes energy and damages parts. If we increase the sprocket diameter or decrease the chain pitch, the polygon has more facets that better approximates a circular shape. Consequently, the magnitude of the tooth/roller impact diminishes.” Consider the pitch diameter of the 9 tooth #35 sprocket vs. the pitch diameter of the 11 tooth #219 sprocket (as in fig. 3). Both are very similar in pitch diameters (within .010” of each other). The biggest advantage with #219 is that you’re meshing more teeth in the same (or similar) diameter. This is in the front sprockets as well as the rear sprocket. Notice fig. 3 again; see how many more teeth are in just half the driver sprockets. (Explanation and computer generated drawing supplied by Gary Gebhart from Horstman Manufacturing.)

TWOGEARS.GIF


Figure 3 The root diameter of the 9 tooth #35 sprocket and the 11 tooth #219 sprocket are within .010"
 
Miles said:
Chalo said:
The N171 (first generation) NuVinci hub is explicitly rated for 5kW continuous input power. As long as you drive it through the input sprocket and not through the disc brake mount, it could withstand a very hopped-up mid-drive.
Of greater relevance is the maximum continuous input torque rating of 65Nm....

I didn't know it had a continuous input torque rating. I would have thought that only momentary torque (therefore mechanical stress) and continuous power (therefore waste heat) mattered. Mine has 45/16 primary gearing and has shown no signs of distress. With my 185mm cranks and 325 pound me standing on the forward pedal, it gets about 95 Nm at the input sprocket every time I ride it. (But I don't do that continuously.)
 
spinningmagnets said:
GNG is a packager and re-seller. It sounds like Li Hung Pan is the 450W motor supplier to GNG. You might have to order a larger quantity from Li before he gave you a price discount from the agreed GNG replacement cost.

Is it legit? Probably as legit as anything that's ordered direct from China. Please post what the results are. I suspect Li has many more motor selections than just the GNG 450W brushless.

Li Hung Pan's order desk is run by Wun Lump Sum, and his motor-builder is Sum Yung Giy. The lady who answers the phone is his wife Yu May Not.

I ordered the 800w motor trougth mister tao and got a refund (money is still on my mr tao account...)
"Because the products such as liquids / powders / batteries / weapon"
Do you have a contact at Li Hung Pan? Jon at GNG does not seem to have acces to the bare motors i'm interested in.
 
Good luck with that, Joe. If those bare motors turn out to be fundamentally the same as the GNG we should look into making an E-S bulk buy and try to get a deep discount on shipping a bunch. I'd like to buy at least 10 myself. Please keep us posted as to your progress including what the shipping on this initial two turned out to be.
 
I ordered the 800w motor trougth mister tao and got a refund (money is still on my mr tao account...)
"Because the products such as liquids / powders / batteries / weapon"
Do you have a contact at Li Hung Pan? Jon at GNG does not seem to have acces to the bare motors i'm interested in.[/quote]

I ran a search on MrTao for electric motors and got "Is forbidden search term "gears". Sorry!" All of their customer service guys have American first names, which I found hilarious.

Li Hung Pan doesn't show up on US Google. We may have to find an inside man for this job.
 
Back on the derailleur thing... Looks like a job for an internal hub, as in 3, 7 or 8 speed. I remember Sheldon Brown once built a 63 speed bicycle. It was a 3 spd internal hub with a 7 speed free wheel and a three speed crank set. Crazy cool...

Surely there is a 3 speed internal hub robust enough to handle the stock GNG kit. Combine that with a strong 6 speed derailleur and primary reduction concerns fade away. Or coarse, an eight speed internal would allow the use of a stronger single speed chain and eliminate chain drop issues in the process, just use a small chain ring to drive it. Just some food for thought....
 
I forgot where I read it so I really can't link it. But the other day, I was browsing an article about IGH and they mentioned that the 3speed IGH has about the same % as their upgraded 7-11speed IGH cousins, but just with more planetary gears.
 
Back
Top