Ultra Tuning: Setting up PAS levels in the Basic Tab

[smorgasbord]

My other settings are
...

Nothing in those jumps out at me as a potential cause for your throttle problem.

But, since you're happy with the new Basic tab settings, you should also check my posts on Torque tab settings:

Ultra Tuning: Decoding the Voltage Section of Torque Tab

EDIT: This revised post corrects and updates previous information. Thanks to @ProphetZarquon for his insights! EDIT #2: See post #10 below for a How-To primer in case you don't want/need to understand but to try this out. Everyone should update their Base Voltage at least! I've undertaken yet...

electricbikereview.com

Ultra Tuning: Decoding the Torque Tab's SPD Table

This will be 2 Posts: One on the decoding procedure and results, and then a starter post on how to tune based on the revolutionary new discovery. I predict (and hope!) that this thread will get quite long as people re-evaluate their own tunings in light of the new information presented here, and...

electricbikereview.com

I concur with what others have posted on your throttle issues. And if it is in the Bafang Ultra firmware (as unfortunately seems likely), then we know that it's possible to edit and release that firmware without updating the firmware version since we both have 1.0.0.4 and are seeing different behaviors. Sigh.

 

[Armourd]

Latest for me. I have adjusted my throttle start and end voltage as Gionnirocket suggested. Now set to 10 and 40. And reset assist 0 to 1/1. What is interesting is I do have Throttle in assist 0 but only when moving faster than 8/KM H. So really I have one issue, I must be going faster than 8 km/h for my throttle to work in any PAS level.

 

[Gionnirocket]

Latest for me. I have adjusted my throttle start and end voltage as Gionnirocket suggested. Now set to 10 and 40. And reset assist 0 to 1/1. What is interesting is I do have Throttle in assist 0 but only when moving faster than 8/KM H. So really I have one issue, I must be going faster than 8 km/h for my throttle to work in any PAS level.

I didn't think it the issue... But still best to set it correctly.
The only other thing which I don't think to be the issue is on the THROTTLE tab set Speed Limit to By Displays Command. Then on the Display set the Speed Limit to your desired max speed. PAS/Throttle will be the same

 

[vidwiz]

(make sure the Throttle Tab is setup correctly, more on that in another thread).

Thanks for all your work! I have not found that thread?

 

[smorgasbord]

Thanks for all your work! I have not found that thread?

Yeah, I've not done a Throttle Tab for the Ultra since I don't think there's any magic sauce there - it appears that the Ultra throttle behaves pretty much the same as the BBS's, although I haven't tested the speed limit.

 

[vidwiz]

Wanted to relay my experience. Even tho I have swayed from your recommendations I found your info quite helpful in dialing things in.

I have a 90lb full squish fat bike w/ big battery. Thus my starting assistance level is 13.
My interest is in adventure Mountain biking, typical ride is 25 miles with 4000 feet of elevation gain. This bike can really climb with big motor and tires, I've scaled some hills I would have never made on my other ebikes. It is a big ungainly heavy mother tho.
When setting the scaling progression up as suggested, I found I wanted more of a noticeable difference in assistance levels at the lower end of the scale, and less at the top.
Also my bikes firmware is set up with dual 6 step settings. It appears to use 0,2,4,6,8, and 9 in the software. They both feel a lot alike until you get to the very highest level. In any event, I don't want to switch modes to get to full power so I just make use of the 2nd set of 6 settings. There is probably some duplicity I'm not sure of, taking the softwares 10 steps, and making 12 out of them.
So I opted for a 6 speed progression, using 0 set up not as 0 motor but starting at 13 adding 17.4 to each subsequent level. I actually found a linear progression to offer the most even advancement in power levels.
As another person noted, if I want 0 assistance I can just turn the bike off.
Now, each bump up of assistance results in a noticeable but gradual and even progression imo.
Perhaps there is a logarithmic scale of some sort already built in?
Anyway I liked your theory but in the real world, found linear works best for me.

 

[keithj69]

Wanted to relay my experience. Even tho I have swayed from your recommendations I found your info quite helpful in dialing things in.

I have a 90lb full squish fat bike w/ big battery. Thus my starting assistance level is 13.
My interest is in adventure Mountain biking, typical ride is 25 miles with 4000 feet of elevation gain. This bike can really climb with big motor and tires, I've scaled some hills I would have never made on my other ebikes. It is a big ungainly heavy mother tho.
When setting the scaling progression up as suggested, I found I wanted more of a noticeable difference in assistance levels at the lower end of the scale, and less at the top.
Also my bikes firmware is set up with dual 6 step settings. It appears to use 0,2,4,6,8, and 9 in the software. They both feel a lot alike until you get to the very highest level. In any event, I don't want to switch modes to get to full power so I just make use of the 2nd set of 6 settings. There is probably some duplicity I'm not sure of, taking the softwares 10 steps, and making 12 out of them.
So I opted for a 6 speed progression, using 0 set up not as 0 motor but starting at 13 adding 17.4 to each subsequent level. I actually found a linear progression to offer the most even advancement in power levels.
As another person noted, if I want 0 assistance I can just turn the bike off.
Now, each bump up of assistance results in a noticeable but gradual and even progression imo.
Perhaps there is a logarithmic scale of some sort already built in?
Anyway I liked your theory but in the real world, found linear works best for me.

Would be interested in your settings, but he did mention the settings were more for road work and not for mountain biking.

 

[smorgasbord]

...I opted for a 6 speed progression, using 0 set up not as 0 motor but starting at 13 adding 17.4 to each subsequent level. I actually found a linear progression to offer the most even advancement in power levels.
As another person noted, if I want 0 assistance I can just turn the bike off.
Now, each bump up of assistance results in a noticeable but gradual and even progression imo.
Perhaps there is a logarithmic scale of some sort already built in?
Anyway I liked your theory but in the real world, found linear works best for me.

The numbers you're entering are percentages of amps. Power (watts) = Amps * Volts, and Volts is basically constant, based on your battery. So, I don't see how there is a built-in logarithmic scale if you don't make one. Note that the percentages all get multiplied here:

Motor actual current = Basic_Tab->Limited Current (Amps) * Basic_Tab->Assist_Level_Limited Current (%) * Torque_Tab Current(%)

Torque_Tab Current is calculated from:
• Actual Pedal pressure is fed into the Delta Voltage table to arrive at a voltage that's Base Voltage plus whatever ranges are fully encompassed in the pedal pressure plus whatever scaled voltage is in the range containing the pedal pressure.
• That Voltage is used to re-map to a Calculated Pedal Pressure.
• Depending on the Wheel RPM, one of the six columns is used
• Within that chosen column, the Calculated Pedal Pressure is used to map between Start(kg) and Full(kg) a similarly proportioned amount between MinCur(%) and MaxCur(%).
• The resulting percentage is the Torque_Tab Current(%) in the first equation.

So, at any rate, all we're doing here is changing the percentage of current being sent to the motor, so if that's linear, the power output from the motor should also be linear. What you're experiencing is a linear increase in additional power with each higher level. The power jump from 17% to 35% is a doubling of the power, but the power jump from 87% to 100% is only a 15% increase in power.

If you wanted to experiment, you could make MinCur(%) and MaxCur(%) the same (choose something like 50%) to eliminate torque / speed effects, and then any pedaling should produce the same percentage out of the Torque Tab and so any changes would be solely from changing Basic Tab levels.

That all said, you gotta go with what works best for you.

 

[smorgasbord]

Would be interested in your settings, but he did mention the settings were more for road work and not for mountain biking.

Just a note that I've been doing more and more off-road riding lately. Here in NorCal, on the John Nicholas trail and the Aquinas trail up over Montevina from Los Gatos. I continue to be happy with the spacing of the pedal assist levels I've outlined. And so far don't see a need to change the Torque Tab settings either. I may play around with 0 Speed Boost time as starting while uphill can be difficult on some slippery terrain.

 

[smorgasbord]

Just a note that I updated the first post in this thread with:
1) A new screen grab
2) Some findings on trying to set PAS 0 to the lowest possible values.
3) A note on why my screen grab show 2 magnets when I only have 1.

 

[Nvreloader]

Smorg
Just a thought here, since there are several riders discussing their settings,
and we all don't ride the same bikes and conditions, wouldn't it be of help to all,
to have each rider give a brief note on their bike, gear setup, and type of riding
they do?
Then anyone following along could choose a close setting to fit their bike
and their riding style.

Something along these lines:
Bike - Wart Hog MD 750 (750 Ultra w/dual 15a battery's, 100#'s / Fat tire),
Riders Weight - 6'0'/195#'s,
Gearing - 11-34 T w/ 44T CR with 26 x 4.5 tires,
Ride modes - Pedal / Pedal Assist / Throttle
Riding style - Off road trails / Cow/Wild horse trails / cross county,
Sandy/Dry creek bottoms / Steep rocky side hills / Heavy brush/trees etc.

I have added your new info to my log book,
Your thoughts and suggestions......
Thank you,
Don

 

[smorgasbord]

These are the main reasons I haven't posted my specific settings. They don't apply to different bikes, different riders, or in different riding environments.

I think the matrix of such differences are so great that it becomes really hard to have a set of "stock" settings from which to choose.

I suppose there could be a few starting points, but here again, just looking at the PAS tab:
1) With powerful motors (1500 or 2000 watts instead of 1000), the same rider will want lower assist at the lower PAS levels.
2) With heavier bikes (steel versus aluminum vs carbon fiber), and/or heavier riders, the same rider will want more assist at lower PAS levels.
3) Off road riders will want more assist at slower bike speeds than on road riders, and those who do both will want to figure out how to use the SPD columns and perhaps have more PAS levels (or even utilize Sport/Eco settings that some displays have).

And, that's not even getting to the important Torque Tab. The list goes on and on.

I think some default values for the Torque table might be appropriate, and perhaps some guidance around the SPDXX columns. I'll think about adding some commentary to those threads.

 

[Nvreloader]

Smorg
Thank you,
I forgot to add riders weight.
Don