Bicycle Motor Control System Crank Angle Threshold

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Bicycle motor control systems fail to optimally manage the timing and force of drive motor assistance, leading to discomfort and decreased riding experience when the rider suddenly stops pedaling, especially with coaster brakes, as the drive motor may not immediately stop during backpedaling.

Innovation Solution

A bicycle motor control system that uses a controller to detect manual drive force and torque thresholds to selectively stop the drive motor through regenerative braking, dynamic braking, or power interruption, ensuring smooth stops without sudden interruptions and avoiding coaster brake actuation during backpedaling.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If the drive motor continues running during backpedaling, then the rider can maintain momentum, but the rider experiences discomfort and the coaster brake may be unintentionally actuated

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemomentum maintenanceVSAvoidrider discomfort and unintended brake actuation
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The controller continuously monitors the direction of crankshaft rotation and manually applied force through sensors. When backpedaling is detected (rearward rotation or negative torque), the controller provides feedback to stop the drive motor, preventing discomfort and unintended brake actuation while maintaining safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the drive motor operation based on real-time detection of pedaling direction. The motor runs during forward pedaling to assist momentum, and stops during backpedaling to prevent harmful effects, creating a dynamic response to rider input.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Object-affected harmful factors

If the drive motor stops immediately when backpedaling is detected, then rider comfort is improved, but the stopping may be abrupt and unpleasant

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverider discomfortVSAvoidsmoothness of motor stop
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The controller detects backpedaling conditions in advance and prepares to stop the motor smoothly. By anticipating the need to stop and using progressive braking methods, the system cushions the transition to avoid abrupt stops and unpleasant rider experiences.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #11Beforehand cushioning (Prior cushioning)

3Productivity

If the force threshold is set to zero, then the motor stops responsive to any force change, but the motor stops inconsistently at top and bottom dead center angles

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemotor stopping responsivenessVSAvoidconsistency of motor stopping
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different force threshold values at different crankshaft positions. By setting higher thresholds at top and bottom dead center angles where torque naturally fluctuates, the system maintains consistent motor operation during normal pedaling while still stopping responsive to intentional backpedaling actions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

4Loss of time

If the drive motor stops at high bicycle speeds, then the rider can stop the motor quickly, but the system may unintentionally actuate the coaster brake

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemotor stopping timeVSAvoidunintended coaster brake actuation
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The controller uses feedback from rotation direction sensors to distinguish between intentional backpedaling (which should stop the motor) and situations where the motor should continue running. This feedback mechanism prevents unintended coaster brake actuation while maintaining quick stopping capability when appropriate.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The system allows users to easily stop the drive motor by ceasing manual force application, preventing discomfort and damage, and enhancing the riding experience by avoiding unintentional coaster brake actuation and ensuring consistent stopping at ideal crank angles.

Implementation Method 1

a torque sensor, and a crank rotation sensor that are provided in a sensory apparatus positioned in proximity to the crankshaft

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectTorque sensing: Torque

Implementation Method 2

The controller is configured to cause the drive motor to stop by at least one of a regenerative braking operation, dynamic braking operation, and power interruption to the drive motor

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectRegenerative braking: Electromagnetic Induction

Implementation Method 3

The controller is configured to cause the drive motor to stop by at least one of a regenerative braking operation, dynamic braking operation, and power interruption to the drive motor

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectDynamic braking: Joule Heating

Data Source

PatentUS10053184B2Bicycle motor control system
Publication Date: 2018.08.21 SHIMANO INC
  • US10053184B2 patent drawing
  • US10053184B2 patent drawing
  • US10053184B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A bicycle motor control system, configured to control a drive motor that is provided on a bicycle, comprises a controller configured to control a drive motor that is configured to selectively output driving force in accordance with a manual drive force, and cause the drive motor to stop when a detected manual drive force, sensed by a manual drive force sensor, falls below a predetermined force threshold value, which is set in accordance with a crank angle of a crankshaft.