Explorer-1
Have bike, will travel
- Region
- USA
- City
- Boston North Shore
Just go to throttle, and forget all the damn sensors.![]()
![Face with tears of joy :joy: 😂](https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/7.0/png/unicode/64/1f602.png)
Just go to throttle, and forget all the damn sensors.![]()
Can’t comment on the marketing speak, but all I can say is that my Ride1UP CF Racer1 implementation is really smooth and efficient. Feels a lot like my traditional road bike, and with different assist levels just feels like a tailwind of different levels. Can get a lot of range, riding with motor off or lower assist levels, and higher levels rarely needed (since I like to ride e-bikes more like a regular bike)Trying to understand the advanced "current-based" (CB) cadence-sensing assist now offered on some Ride1Up models. Follow the link for their description.
Sounds like CB assist doles out power as a function of motor current, up to a fraction of max motor power set by assist level. Ride1Up claims that motor current can be tied somehow to "desired exertion" without measuring rider torque.
Question: Anyone know of an exploitable connection between desired exertion and motor current?
Your bike definitely uses the current-based assist per Ride1Up. Glad to hear how well it works.Can’t comment on the marketing speak, but all I can say is that my Ride1UP CF Racer1 implementation is really smooth and efficient. Feels a lot like my traditional road bike, and with different assist levels just feels like a tailwind of different levels. Can get a lot of range, riding with motor off or lower assist levels, and higher levels rarely needed (since I like to ride e-bikes more like a regular bike)
Maybe assist level sets a motor current level rather than max assisted speed. The cadence sensor still functions as an on-off switch for the motor, but when the motor's on, it can only draw the selected current from the controller.Our R1CBC systems operate on a current-based rather than speed-based programming. This means the PAS level changes the amount of current or wattage the motor provides, offering assistance based on your desired effort level, not your speed. This feature allows for a more natural and seamless riding experience compared to traditional speed-based systems, which can feel unresponsive, abrupt, and unnatural.
I'd love to see how this approach actually rides, but that probably won't answer my still-unanswered question. Out of an engineering interest in ebike power control, I've read everything Ride1Up has to say about current-based cadence-sensing assist and still don't know where current comes in. Neither does anyone else writing about it.Jeremy, I think you and PSm are located within the same area. Why not just see if the two of you could meet up and then you ride his CF Racer? Also there is a "explanation" of their cadence based systems on their site and also I remember a podcast about it (don't remember where). They do use a sine wave controller as opposed to a square wave. I find my Roadsters pretty natural - much like PSm gets with his Racer. And I ride the this light single speed w/o assist or in level 1, 95% of the time.
The PAS levels and are programmable, so I chose 7 levels that I set at 10%, 15, 22, 33,50,75, and 100%.
I meant to say the number of PAS levels and their percents are programmable. You can choose 3,5,7, or 9 levels. Each level is programmable 1-100% if I recall.
I have a Ride1Up 500 Series bike.
Dude... Go for a ride already!I appreciate all the info, but the original question isn't about when current-based cadence-sensing (CBCS) came on the scene, or who invented it, or how KT and Grin implement their cadence-sensing assist, or even how programmable Ride1Up's system is.
It's a technical question about how Ride1Up uses CURRENT in its CBCS. Most of the replies here don't even mention current.
I don't dismiss Ride1Up's claim about using current to control assist as pure marketing mumbo-jumbo. Some experienced riders have reported riding experiences quite different from basic cadence-sensing assist, so Ride1Up's clearly doing something different under the hood. And I want to know what it is.
We have a clue: It involves motor current. Let's ponder how that might result in the user-reported riding experiences without directly measuring either torque or RPM at the crank.
This is a very helpful data point. Your display's power reading is for electrical power to the motor. Assuming fixed input voltage, if assist level ultimately sets a fixed motor current in Ride1Up's current-based assist, it would show as a fixed power reading on your display. There would be little or no variation with torque or RPM at the crank, or with wheel speed.I also have an older Ride1Up LMTD with power based cadence. It rides to a set power level based on your PAS level setting. For instance, Level 2 outputs about 250watts to the motor no matter how much pedal effort. Your speed will vary. Go uphill and your speed will drop as you pedal at the same effort as before the hill. Pedal harder and you will go a little faster. But the motor power will remain around 250 watts. Power levels are programmable in the display.
I really like the Ride1Up cadence system. It isn't as smooth as torque. There is the cadence 'on-off' power thingy. But it feels so much more natural bike riding experience than Speed Based Cadence.
Which is pretty much what several people have already described in this thread. I think you're getting caught up in the semantics a bit. Maybe you're taking the term 'current based' literally? Think current limited vs speed limited instead - more descriptive of how they function but would never get past marketing. Hence current based and speed based.This is a very helpful data point. Your display's power reading is for electrical power to the motor. Assuming fixed input voltage, if assist level ultimately sets a fixed motor current in Ride1Up's current-based assist, it would show as a fixed power reading on your display. There would be little or no variation with torque or RPM at the crank, or with wheel speed.
I'm sure the implementation isn't as simple as that in detail. But it's a plausible heuristic.
Yes, I'm taking "current-based" literally for now cuz it's all we have to go on.Which is pretty much what several people have already described in this thread. I think you're getting caught up in the semantics a bit. Maybe you're taking the term 'current based' literally? Think current limited vs speed limited instead - more descriptive of how they function but would never get past marketing. Hence current based and speed based.
No one here wrote the programming for R1U's controller, so you're only going to get high level answers which will pretty much apply to all current based systems regardless of brand. Sure, there are probably some differences in power ramp-up/roll-off and sampling rate but ultimately assist levels are set by the controller limiting the power drawn through it by the motor.