PROPOSED SHAPING - One-Direction Mode - Why? Efficiency, Safety!
A one-direction mode. No, not the boy band.
Here's Why Would I Want This
98% of the time, when I'm commuting or riding around, I'm going in my dominant direction, so being able to slow down and go the other direction isn't an advantage, but the safety and extra efficiency of being able to start and stop quickly would be a huge plus.
OW would benefit from the safety of another way to communicate "I need to get off!" to the OW.
By default, the procedure for disengaging the motor is to 1) come to a stop 2) balance 3) uncover half the sensor pad 4) wait half a second. This is a 4-step procedure. And it's necessary if the rider wants the flexibility to travel quickly in both directions.
A New 1-Step Exit Procedure
I'm advocating for a new 1-step "disengage the motor" procedure: push down on the tail hard. It's quick, it's a efficient, it's natural. In response, all the OW needs to do is either a) slow down and disengage at 0mph or b) if already at a standstill, crawl in the tail direction, but slowdown and disengage if the speed gets to 2mph (or whatever testing bears out is a algorithm for that! Hopefully my concept is clear, though.).
The current 1-step exit procedure is, of course, jump off. But the downside is that this is pretty sloppy and can scratch up your board, if you "jump off wrong" you can also end up putting forward input and having a half second runaway board situation because once it's over .5mph it doesn't care if your foot is on or off the sensor pad, it's going! I've banged up my ankles and the board from such situations, for sure... lol.
In an emergency situation, my knee jerk reaction is generally going to be to lean back hard, which will slow me down to avoid whatever I'm focused on. But I'm in danger if I'm focused on some other thing and OW tries to accelerate back in the other direction once it reaches 0mph.
For that reason, I want a shaping where if OW detects a quick deceleration and reaches 0mph, it disengages.
To get on OW and balance, it should still crawl in either direction, but if I try to go more than 2mph in the opposite direction, it slows down and shuts off.
So to be clear, I want it to crawl in either direction just fine so I can get on and get my balance, but it should only allow me to go fast when I'm moving in the sensor pad direction.
I think this shaping should be clearly described by these rules:
- everything the same as delirium when going forward
- while balancing at a standstill, light input in the tail direction crawls up to 2mph in the tail direction
- hard input from a standstill or while crawling in the tail direction immediately disengages the motor
- while going forward, if "quick" deceleration is detected, motor disengages as soon as forward speed hits 0mph
Would Be Willing To Code It Myself
If there were a way users could directly edit shapings to determine board behavior, I would be willing to figure out how to build this mode myself if given access to the tools to do so. So any information about that would be welcome.
The dismount feature on the original OW was perfect.
On the +, it's a bitch to dismount from time to time.
Bring back the old way.
Interesting. Do you think the Shaping I'm proposing sounds like something you would also use?
Or is it just me? lol
I never rode the original, so I can't compare.
Honestly I think the way it is probably best until they screwed it up a little with the newer version.
There was no need for wider sensor area and delay IMO.
Hmmm. I like having my foot on the pad however I want it, but I figure if I decide I only need to go in one direction, then a new way to stop could be built around just pushing down on the tail. Really simple.
Technically... if OW were unidirectional... it wouldn't need a sensor at all.
I have been practicing a quick dismount where I brake hard until the back bumper scrapes the ground during the last 2 or 3 mph. That slows me down even more. Before I'm fully stopped I take my front foot off completely and place it on the ground as I come to a stop, keeping my weight on the rear foot though. Half the time the board stops dead as soon as I hit 0 mph. Other half I don't get the front foot off in time for the 1/2 second delay and I get a brief wheel slip as the board tries to push back but then it stops as soon as wheel-slip is detected. It works as long as I have my rear foot near the back of the board because the weight on the wheel is very low and all my weight is crushing the bumper into the ground and so the brief wheel spin doesn't jerk the board. I think it's just a matter of practice with the the front foot timing to prevent that. When it works, it's a fast, clean dismount.
I like this idea a lot. You've got my vote.
@desperado I'm going to be attempting that today, for sure. But still, the unpredictable nature of it is spooky. Especially in downtown LA.
I don't need it getting away from me at a crosswalk and hitting someone on a wheelchair or getting under someone's car.
My thinking is that safety isn't something to be practiced, it has to be built in.
After all, wouldn't this maneuver be a whole lot easier if the only instruction was "push down on the tail until it turns off" ? And it did it EVERY time?
@enigmizzle Thanks bud.
@desperado I was doing the same thing for a bit. Worked well in 80% of situations I encountered in my daily commute.
@ryancwynar Someone might want to suddenly change direction without the board shutting down, like if you start crossing a street and see a car coming too late or something, you would want an emergency reverse, not an emergency shutdown in that case. I do this for balance practice too, when I don't have a lot of space, just going back and forth as fast as I can within a 5 foot length, with the bumpers scraping the ground a bit.
It should be an option applicable to any shaping, just a checkbox for "safe stop mode" or something. I'm sure they will start considering these options as soon as they get up to speed as a company.
@desperado yeah, I agree. I think it should be an optional setting.
The only way to get a good quick emergency reverse option would be with a higher power motor. 2000W would make it so you could change directions pretty damn fast from pretty high speed.
As I understand it, every 750W or so is equivalent to about 1 horsepower.
@ryancwynar The current motor already has enough torque to change directions much faster than it does, but changing directions on a self-balancing device always has to be on a curve, or it'll throw the rider off.
@thegreck Huh, that's interesting. Yeah, I could definitely see that. All my gut feel for the relationship between power and weight comes from playing with high powered electric bicycles, but that's a much heavier object with a bigger wheel that's harder to turn, so it takes more power to get that acceleration feeling.
+1 for releasing an SDK to allow community to develop custom modes
Not really a big One-Direction fan. I mean they're very talented. I just don't like their music...but I'd go all bonkers for a K-Pop mode.
I love the ideas put forth, ryancwynar. I imagine not releasing the SDK is probably a liability thing and the last thing OneWheel wants is for someone to release shaping that winds up hurting a rider or worse. Having said that, I agree that the dismount can be tough but for me the way the board's designed requires a specific type of sneaker:
Still I'm bumping and keeping the thread alive because I think it would be awesome for one wheel to consider offering shaping like this.
PS - You're right, I never go backward either.