ZENE High Performance RC Brushless Modification QA

[gyenesvi]

5 hours ago, ZENE said:

It looks like this post has gone silent. I hope to know how some of my friends have used it recently, and I look forward to more creative sharing from you.

It would be easier to get feedback if we'd also get answers to our questions :) There was a question above about the availability and price of the motors alone that went unanswered. I'm curious too, as the form factor of the motor looks quite good, though the mounting points could use some improvements, something like on the Lego L motor. What are your thought on that? BTW, what's the total length of the motor?

And one more thing: I see that you are using a 2445 motor in your product (meaning 24mm diameter, 45mm length), and the same motor also exists in a smaller 2435 variant. Would it be possible to use that motor as well? Could it be (somewhat) easily swapped out? A smaller but bit less powerful motor would also be more useful for my purposes.

Edited May 8, 2024 by gyenesvi

[Ryokeen]

Can only agree with what @gyenesvi said. Also some more technical data on the individual parts would be helpfull. Like the gear ratio of the differentials(it's about 2.65:1, counted the teeths) or the BEC(power supply from the ESC to the receiver and servos) specs, like voltage, continous amps, the type of battery connector of the ESC(T-deans, XT90,XT60), are only 2s or 3s LiPo's supported. Has the ESC a break function ? If so can that be turned off as it would make 2 motors actually usefull for tracked vehicles.
All that might not be needed for the 3 full conversion kits, but for the individual parts, that would be good to know. The ESC data mainly as that determines what kind of Lipo one needs and if more than 1 geekservo can be used without overstressing the ESC BEC.

[NoEXIST]

12 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

A smaller but bit less powerful motor would also be more useful for my purposes.

However it will be less powerful, I don't think you'll notice the difference. Honestly in my opinion its overkill for Lego cars

[gyenesvi]

7 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

However it will be less powerful, I don't think you'll notice the difference. Honestly in my opinion its overkill for Lego cars

Exactly my point; the current motor seems like a bit of an overkill for many purposes, and the smallest possible one (2435, 3300 Kv) should also be enough, would spin slightly (10%) slower and would draw much less amps (50%) according to the below specs, while the whole motor could be at least one stud shorter.

On 1/10/2024 at 3:12 PM, ZENE said:

Answer: 2445 brushless motor, 3600kv, maximum speed 50000, maximum voltage 13.2v, please refer to Figure 9 below

figure 9 

On the other hand, I think this is one of the best possible form factors for an RC motor to be used in Lego, because the radius is exactly 3 studs, it fits nicely to the system, it does not require extra housing, and it allows an axle to run right underneath or next to it. Together with the planetary reduction on it, it might be an ideal solution, maybe even without other metal parts. I'm thinking something like if a motor like this could be a replacement for 2 coupled buggy motors in a small form factor, that would be great. With some improvements, it could be doable I think:

- the output could be slower (at least 2x slower, even then it would be about 2x faster than buggy motors), so bigger planetary reduction would be needed

- better mounting points would be needed, like on an L motor, at least on the front (probably the back is not easily doable)

- the total length should be at most 9 studs, but maybe 8 would be doable as well: the 2435 is 35mm long, that is 4.5 studs. The planetary reduction on a lego L motor is 1.5 studs, and the mounting points on the front is 1 stud long. In total that would be 7 studs, but maybe it needs one extra stud for firmly attaching the planetary/front part to the motor, that's how I got 8 studs. 9 studs would in principle allow for mounting points on the back, but the cabling may be in the way for that..

What do you think @ZENE?

[ZENE]

wow,haha to0 many questions. I will list and back to you @gyenesvi @NoEXIST 

[Krzychups]

22 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

BTW, what's the total length of the motor?

About 74 mm.

22 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I see that you are using a 2445 motor in your product (meaning 24mm diameter, 45mm length), and the same motor also exists in a smaller 2435 variant. Would it be possible to use that motor as well?

Probably no because a 2445 motor has got 2.3 mm shaft - but a 2435 one has got 2.0 mm shaft.

Driving a model I don't feel the esc has got brakes, I brake by the motor. 

Last time I drove the rc model (I've charged the battery 2 times) it felt like it was going slower (on the same normal road). I've tried steering on two different radio controllers. Why is this happening? I've rebuilt the car model a bit but it doesn't seem to have much effect (or it does). 

Edited May 9, 2024 by Krzychups

[Ryokeen]

2 hours ago, Krzychups said:

Driving a model I don't feel the esc has got brakes, I brake by the motor.

Brakes on an esc means that a motor won't change rotation direction in an instant. With breaks an esc will first use the motor to slow down/break and only if you stand still and then push the throttle into reverse again, the motor will spin in reverse. Boats or tracked vehicles(tanks) mostly don't have breaks as they either drive slow or don't have much force applied if directions are changed.

About your speed, check the battery voltages(each cell) and internal resistance(check online about lipo health). Any decent charger(not usb) can do such checks. Just to make sure the LiPo is still good as yeah they age and don't like to be stored full or empty. Else the motor could have gone to hot wich can damage the coils or magnets, degradin performance.

Had a testdrive with a 3652 motor and a total reduction of 8:1 and a car of about 1.5-2kg. And it got quite warm. So my main concern about the 2445 or smaller motors is that they could get quite hot if used in any vehicle in the 1kg+ range. After all that scale is mostly used in 1:16 or smaller rc cars.

[ZENE]

@gyenesvi If there are any omissions in my reply, please let me know. Thank you very much to @Ryokeen @Krzychups @NoEXIST for your professional and clear reply.

On 5/9/2024 at 2:48 AM, gyenesvi said:

It would be easier to get feedback if we'd also get answers to our questions :) There was a question above about the availability and price of the motors alone that went unanswered. I'm curious too, as the form factor of the motor looks quite good, though the mounting points could use some improvements, something like on the Lego L motor. What are your thought on that? BTW, what's the total length of the motor?

And one more thing: I see that you are using a 2445 motor in your product (meaning 24mm diameter, 45mm length), and the same motor also exists in a smaller 2435 variant. Would it be possible to use that motor as well? Could it be (somewhat) easily swapped out? A smaller but bit less powerful motor would also be more useful for my purposes.

1. What is the total length of the motor + reduction gearbox?
Answer: After adding the planetary reduction gearbox, I measured it with a vernier caliper: length is 7.38cm. 

As for price, I won’t discuss it here. Contact me on my website please.

2. Can the 2435 motor be compatible with a reduction gearbox? If it is compatible, does it need to adjust the size?
Answer: It is compatible with our reduction gearbox. Knowledge 2435 is not very versatile. Once a heavy vehicle, it will not be able to drive it easily. For dimensions, please refer to the parameter diagram in my topic.

3. Are there ESC parameters? Can I use multiple geekservo servos?
Answer: 2A current, barely powering less than 3 servos, BEC power supply parameters: 5V/2A. Of course, I will sort out the more detailed parameters step by step.

4. Is it easy to adjust the reduction ratio of the planetary reduction gearbox?
Answer: The reduction ratio inside cannot be easily adjusted. It has been encapsulated.

5. The total length should be a maximum of 9 studs, but maybe 8 would work: the 2435 is 35mm long, which is 4.5 studs. The planetary reducer on the LEGO L motor has 1.5 studs and the front mounting point is 1 stud long. A total of 7 studs are needed, but maybe an extra stud is needed to securely attach the planet/front to the motor, which is why I got 8 studs. In principle, 9 studs could provide mounting points on the back, but the wiring might get in the way.
what do you think
Answer: It makes perfect sense. We also recognize this and are currently designing and upgrading it.

It looks like I can only post images smaller than 20KB. Is this because my contribution is too small? 😂

 

8 hours ago, Krzychups said:

About 74 mm.

Probably no because a 2445 motor has got 2.3 mm shaft - but a 2435 one has got 2.0 mm shaft.

 Driving a model I don't feel the esc has got brakes, I brake by the motor. 

 Last time I drove the rc model (I've charged the battery 2 times) it felt like it was going slower (on the same normal road). I've tried steering on two different radio controllers. Why is this happening? I've rebuilt the car model a bit but it doesn't seem to have much effect (or it does). 

In addition to the battery problem mentioned by Ryokeen, you need to consider whether the structure is loose and check whether the screws on the differential housing need to be tightened. Need more information from you to analyze

[letsbuild]

1 hour ago, ZENE said:

It looks like I can only post images smaller than 20KB. Is this because my contribution is too small? 😂

 

We all have this restriction - you'll have to upload to a website like Flickr then link the picture here

[NoEXIST]

15 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

On the other hand, I think this is one of the best possible form factors for an RC motor to be used in Lego, because the radius is exactly 3 studs

I was looking for some brushless motors to use, the best form factor I found was 1410 or 2430. They're small and allow to create some mounting points on the back and the front like PF L or PU L.

However the problem for this form factor is that stock Lego reduction (M/L motors) wouldn't handle this.

There are also two ways to work with it:

Using XL reduction, but it requires bigger size, maybe something like PU XL but possibly shorter

Or not using planetary reduction at all and always put huge gearing down in your model.

I personally like the second solution, but it definitely needs bearing everywhere it's even possible

[gyenesvi]

Thank @ZENE for the answers!

8 hours ago, ZENE said:

1. What is the total length of the motor + reduction gearbox?
Answer: After adding the planetary reduction gearbox, I measured it with a vernier caliper: length is 7.38cm. 

8 hours ago, ZENE said:

5. The total length should be a maximum of 9 studs, but maybe 8 would work: the 2435 is 35mm long, which is 4.5 studs. The planetary reducer on the LEGO L motor has 1.5 studs and the front mounting point is 1 stud long. A total of 7 studs are needed, but maybe an extra stud is needed to securely attach the planet/front to the motor, which is why I got 8 studs. In principle, 9 studs could provide mounting points on the back, but the wiring might get in the way.
what do you think
Answer: It makes perfect sense. We also recognize this and are currently designing and upgrading it.

I see, that's just a bit longer than 9 studs, so would be hard to work with, but sounds good that you are considering an upgrade!

8 hours ago, ZENE said:

2. Can the 2435 motor be compatible with a reduction gearbox? If it is compatible, does it need to adjust the size?
Answer: It is compatible with our reduction gearbox. Knowledge 2435 is not very versatile. Once a heavy vehicle, it will not be able to drive it easily. For dimensions, please refer to the parameter diagram in my topic.

I understand it would be a bit weaker, but the idea is that for smaller models, that could still be by far enough.

8 hours ago, ZENE said:

4. Is it easy to adjust the reduction ratio of the planetary reduction gearbox?
Answer: The reduction ratio inside cannot be easily adjusted. It has been encapsulated.

I guess the question was if it is possible to encapsulate a different ratio? Or how about double-stage reduction, like in the Lego motors?

More reduction could be advantageous in two ways. The output would spin slower, so would be less of a problem for plastic parts, and the torque would become bigger, so the smaller motor could also be enough for more applications. For example, if I take a 3300 Kv motor, then it has 24420 RPM at 7.4V (2s LiPo), and 36630 RPM at 11.1V (3s LiPo). With double stage planetary reduction (1:16 for example), the output speeds would be 1526 and 2290 RMP respectively, which is roughly as fast or 50% faster than a Buggy motor's fast output. So even that speed would be very good for many applications, if it was in a small form factor.

3 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

However the problem for this form factor is that stock Lego reduction (M/L motors) wouldn't handle this.

Sure, that's why I like the custom planetary reduction solution of Zene, because it solves that problem :)

3 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

Or not using planetary reduction at all and always put huge gearing down in your model.

Yeah, I don't quite like that, not only because you'll need bearings everywhere, but also because you'll need a lot of space for all that reduction (and all that needs bearings/metal gears). I think the built-in planetary is the easy and space efficient way of avoiding the need for plastic gears/axle holes to handle high RPMs.

 

[ZENE]

21 hours ago, letsbuild said:

We all have this restriction - you'll have to upload to a website like Flickr then link the picture here

Got. Make sense.  Thank you.

 

14 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Thank @ZENE for the answers!

I see, that's just a bit longer than 9 studs, so would be hard to work with, but sounds good that you are considering an upgrade!

I understand it would be a bit weaker, but the idea is that for smaller models, that could still be by far enough.

I guess the question was if it is possible to encapsulate a different ratio? Or how about double-stage reduction, like in the Lego motors?

More reduction could be advantageous in two ways. The output would spin slower, so would be less of a problem for plastic parts, and the torque would become bigger, so the smaller motor could also be enough for more applications. For example, if I take a 3300 Kv motor, then it has 24420 RPM at 7.4V (2s LiPo), and 36630 RPM at 11.1V (3s LiPo). With double stage planetary reduction (1:16 for example), the output speeds would be 1526 and 2290 RMP respectively, which is roughly as fast or 50% faster than a Buggy motor's fast output. So even that speed would be very good for many applications, if it was in a small form factor.

Sure, that's why I like the custom planetary reduction solution of Zene, because it solves that problem :)

Yeah, I don't quite like that, not only because you'll need bearings everywhere, but also because you'll need a lot of space for all that reduction (and all that needs bearings/metal gears). I think the built-in planetary is the easy and space efficient way of avoiding the need for plastic gears/axle holes to handle high RPMs.

 

Encapsulating different gears is a good direction, and we will consider this.

This mainly depends on the demand, including the use of 2435 motor or other motors. If the demand in this area increases, we will conduct more compatibility tests. 😉

Regarding the fixing plan for increasing the side of the motor, once it is completed, I will post it here.