Thrown off after nosedive with no pushback warning (nose dive, nose-dive)

  • The Onewheel is an inherently unstable powered unicycle, not a self-balancing device. All of its sophisticated sensors and controllers merely give it a way to respond to the control input from the rider. It's more stable than a traditional unicycle because the control system can make more precise adjustments to the wheel more rapidly than humans can by turning a crank with their legs, and because the tire is wide. Aside from that, you're still learning to balance a unicycle, but this one goes a lot faster.

    New riders have to work hard just to avoid falling, and slow speeds feel fast. Pretty soon they get the hang of balancing. They get the hang of steering. Their confidence improves. Slow speeds feel very slow. They don't feel like beginners anymore.

    The stability and power they get from the motor and electronics come with a trade-off: Unlike legs turning a crank, the motor of a Onewheel isn't wired into the rider's brain, so the rider's awareness of the motor's limits is vague. As the rider approaches those limits, the motor loses its ability to improve stability, or even to provide useful feedback to the rider.

    At that point, the rider has become the pitiable fool (and let's be honest: We are all this fool) who deliberately rode a powered unicycle in Extreme mode (so that it would be even less able to protect the fool from himself) at a higher speed than he can safely fall...

    Anyone with a defective board should certainly have it serviced. The rest of us should understand that we're learning how to ride a powered unicycle at unsafe speeds, and we should adjust our expectations accordingly. It's not safe, nor is it easy, and that's part of the appeal. If you're taking high-speed nosedives, congratulations! You're no longer a beginner! Here's another piece of good news: You're not an expert yet, so you still have lots of cool stuff to learn.

  • @badcheese nailed it. (and this is why you should always wear a HELMET.)

  • @badcheese While I agree with everything you said.. There are some of us that were till in classic mode that this has happened to. I'm not complaining and don't necessarily believe it's the fault of the OW... But just like a unicycler (if that's even a word) would check their mecahnical parts to their bike, I would like the same for the OW. Stream me the data of the ride to understand why these things happen. What as the speed, gyroscope angle, engine rotation, etc. It's not too much to ask to FM to open that up to its riders.

  • @dj.rknz I would like to know that someone in a senior management or engineering role at FM is reading this thread. Could you please confirm that this is the case? Thanks very much.

  • @badcheese I'm afraid I must disagree with Mr Cheese on this. A unicycle is an analog device under the direct and absolute control of its rider. Its instability and difficulty are due entirely to the physics of its design. This is the reason it costs $150 instead of $1500.

    A OW, on the other hand, is a digitally intermediated, highly-abstracted ride by wire system that depends heavily on behaviorial models embodied in software along with a complex network of sensors and actuators. The fact that it is not self-balancing is immaterial; more material are the facts that the behavior of the system depends almost entirely on the assumptions and judgements of the system's designers, how these are embodied in software and component selection, system testing and revision, heavy end-user input and honest reassessment, and more testing and revision. In this regard a OW is more like a fighter jet than it is like a unicycle. As with the jet, there can be strong perceived pressure on management to "bury the data"; this must be resisted at all costs, particularly with a system as immature as the one we are talking about.

  • @dj.rknz said:

    [...] This is the reason [a unicycle] costs $150 instead of $1500.

    A cheap unicycle costs $150. What we have is a fancy unicycle. Here's a guy who spent $2800 on his unicycle, and it doesn't even propel itself:

    A OW, on the other hand, is a digitally intermediated, highly-abstracted ride by wire system [...] the behavior of the system depends almost entirely on the assumptions and judgements of the system's designers [...] In this regard a OW is more like a fighter jet than it is like a unicycle.

    The OW is far from ride by wire. With the right software, we could replace the pilot of a modern fighter jet with a corpse and still fly fancy aerobatic maneuvers. Put a corpse on a OW, and the best you could hope to do with software control is maybe drag it in a straight line for a short distance - assuming the fender kit keeps the corpse from jamming up the wheel, etc. (I'll leave the remaining details as an exercise for the reader...)

    Also, keep in mind that pushback just means the wheel speeds up slightly in an effort to get a little bit ahead of the rider's center of balance. The most extreme thing about Extreme Mode is that the pushback is extremely subtle.

  • @badcheese I think what @dj.rknz meant when he said "ride by wire" is that the rider's physical input does not translate in a direct mechanical fashion to the control of the vehicle, a la a bicycle or unicycle. The input is translated through sensors and processors and then fed as binary information to the motor control unit.

    There is a term in motorsport, "brake by wire" which means that a processor controls the brakes based on input from the driver vs. direct mechanical braking where depressing the pedal engages a series of mechanical bits to cause the brakes to be applied. The "feel" and feedback of a "by wire" mechanism isn't going to be as straightforward as one where direct mechanical input is involved. With a vehicle as advanced and new as the OneWheel, there is going to be a lot of room for development to improve all of the things. It would be very nice if FM would release some sort of API to at least monitor the vehicle's data output. Tasker integration would also be incredible, but I don't see that ever happening. I'm afraid that they won't open up even the data output of their proprietary software any because of the looming threat of Chinese knockoffs. You know the Trotter is only the beginning of that shit circus...

    But that being said, I agree with you both on your major points.

  • Wow: I ate it bigtime in a nosedive scenario on pavement and been on crutches for weeks. I sent the board back to onewheel after they told me it may be defective but now im told its working fine. They are sending it back. This thing did the dive 2 times.

  • @smashdunk Expecting the company to respond to any questions that are not real simple and generic is impossible. The have a firewall up to prevent us from talking to anybody except each other re: anything technical, and this toy is technical as hell. All it is is software.

  • @powder Sorry to hear that! But nosedives typically happen when people lean forward and put all of their weight on the front, rather than keeping their center of gravity over the wheel and tilting the board with their feet to speed up or slow down.

    The OneWheel uses your body and the laws of entropy [Edit: INERTIA, not entropy] to keep itself level by moving in the direction the deck is tilted, causing your body weight to shift backwards. But the OW can no longer use your body to stabilize itself if you're off balance (which is what happens when you put your body weight on the front of the board). All that will happen is the nose will hit, the board will stop, and you'll get thrown onto the ground, hard.

    If you stay centered, the chances of this happening are significantly lowered. And a lot of the times, if you do nosedive, you'll be able to either pull out of it, or run it out.

    Anyway, hope you feel better and can jump back on that horse! But if you do... stay centered!

  • @thegreck I'm sorry, but I have to correct you about the "laws of entropy" thing. What you're talking about are the laws of Newtonian Physics. Entropy is some heady stuff about the universe's tendency to ever more chaos.

  • @bmtka Oh, sorry... I meant inertia, not entropy! I had to re-read my post to even believe I had said that.

  • I'm scared to get back on the board at least on pavement cause no pushback warning and I've been thrown down twice now on pavement and the company told me to send the board back and they would test it...cost me $53 to ship and they maintain nothing wrong with it. Lots of us are getting thrown off forward for some reason and the company seems to be stonewalling re: reason. I'm an old guy and I've been on crutches due to this.

  • @Kwok That's the answer...attach a couple of small wheels to the front to counter nose dive. I can bloody well do that. As soon as I get off my crutches I will give it a try.

  • @powder Just follow my advice (keep your center of gravity over the wheel, and concentrate on not putting your weight on the front footpad) and you should be fine. Even if you roll over something unexpected that causes the nose to suddenly go down, if you're balanced, you should be able to run it out instead of falling on your face.

    This isn't just something I made up... it's the physics of how the OneWheel works; plus it's how every advanced rider who never nosedives rides their OneWheel.

  • Thanks...will try harder to balance front to back. The times I nosed it were when I was trying to accelerate out of a dip in the pavement and I leaned forward when the board slowed too much.

  • @powder said:

    Thanks...will try harder to balance front to back. The times I nosed it were when I was trying to accelerate out of a dip in the pavement and I leaned forward when the board slowed too much.

    There you go. Stay centered and it's just a matter of leveling the board with your feet, not with the weight of your body. When the board is tilted forward, the wheel will speed up to try and get ahead of you to level it, but if your weight is on the front of the board, instead of getting ahead of you, IT LAUNCHES YOU.

  • @thegreck

    Great advice.

  • Banned

    I'd have to agree it seems that this should not be happening. I feel it's a design or electric program flaw. I also think the concept of it cutting out upon minimal feet adjustment is bad. I mean your feet are constantly shifting and moving a bit during riding, especially on all terrain. So the boards just going to cut out on you as soon as you go over a bump that causes your foot to move or raise a bit?

    This seems like a concern which is happening to almost everyone and while falling doing a sport like snowboarding is expected I can't imagine anyone wants to unexpectedly smash their face into the concrete and possibly avert death at any given random moment regardless of skill.

  • @poopmonkey Try Googling "Segway Fails" and then tell me that the OneWheel is the only self-balancing vehicle that fails if you put too much weight on the front.

    The OneWheel's design is amazing, and the electronics are stellar. The only people complaining of nose dives are either people who have never ridden one, or beginners who don't quite have the hang of it yet and haven't fully grasped the limitations of a single-wheeled self-balancing device. I've been riding for 3 months; I ride it to and from work, I ride it on the weekends, I ride it every chance I get... and I've never had a nosedive-related wreck.

    You just have to stay centered and keep your balance when you ride, plain and simple. Same as on a skateboard. Same as with any board sport. People who surf or skate or ride a snowboard have to LEARN how to do it. And they fall off a lot while they're learning. This isn't a design flaw, it's life.

    If you want to ride around on a self-balancing unicycle and look like a wanker because you think it's safer, that's up to you. The rest of us understand the danger involved in this sport and we face it head-on, because it's worth it.

Log in to reply