结论：越障是几何问题加动力问题，先排查几何

越障高度测不过，第一反应常是动力不足，于是考虑加大电机功率。实际排查下来，相当一部分是几何问题——轮子够不够大、离地间隙够不够、重量分配合不合适，这些因素不解决，加多少动力都上不去。

排查顺序建议是：先看前轮能不能爬上去，再看底盘会不会托底，然后看驱动轮有没有失去附着，最后才考虑动力是否够。

四条排查线

排查线 现象 主要影响因素
前轮上障 前轮顶在障碍物上不动 脚轮直径、接近角、前轮载荷
底盘通过 前轮上去了但车体托住 离地间隙、纵向轴距、底盘形状
驱动附着 驱动轮打滑 驱动轮载荷、轮胎花纹与材质
动力输出 能上但速度骤降或停住 电机扭矩、减速比、控制策略

实际项目里，第一行和第三行占的比例较高。

前轮上障的关键是直径和载荷

脚轮能否翻越障碍，主要取决于轮径与障碍高度的关系。轮径越大，接触点越高，翻越所需的水平推力越小。这是纯几何关系，不受动力影响。

所以越障能力不足时，加大脚轮直径通常是有效的方向。代价是转向灵活性下降、占用空间增加、外观变化。这是一组明确的取舍。

另一个因素是前轮载荷。前轮压得越重，翻越需要的力越大。如果重心过于靠前，前轮载荷大，越障就困难。这时候调整重心分配比换轮子更直接。

还有一个容易忽略的因素是脚轮的旋转方向。脚轮在遇到障碍时如果处于不利的旋转角度，会顶住而不是翻越。有些产品在这一点上表现不稳定——同样的障碍，有时上得去有时上不去，原因往往在这里。

底盘托底与离地间隙

前轮上去之后，车体要能通过。这一步受离地间隙和轴距共同影响：间隙小容易托底，轴距长则跨越过程中底盘中部更容易接触障碍。

增大离地间隙的代价是重心升高，而重心升高会直接影响稳定性。这两项是明确对立的，设计时要在使用场景里找平衡：主要在室内平地使用的产品，间隙可以小、重心低、稳定性好；需要户外使用的产品，间隙要留够，但要用加大轮距等方式补偿稳定性。

驱动轮附着不足

驱动轮打滑的直接原因是垂直载荷不够或者摩擦系数不足。

垂直载荷问题多出现在越障过程中：车身倾斜时，重量转移到了非驱动轮上，驱动轮压力减小，于是打滑。这种情况下，调整重心位置或者改变驱动形式（比如从后驱改为中驱）可能比换轮胎有效。

摩擦系数则与轮胎材质和花纹有关。需要注意的是，试验用的障碍表面材质是规定的，与实际路面不同。在试验表面上打滑，未必代表实际使用中也打滑；反过来也一样。所以这一项的数据要结合实际使用条件理解。

动力与控制策略

排除了前三条之后，才轮到动力。这里除了电机扭矩本身，控制策略也起作用。

有些控制器在检测到阻力增大时会限制电流以保护电机，结果车在障碍前停住。这种情况下电机能力是够的，是保护策略过于保守。调整保护阈值可能就解决了，但要同时评估对电机热保护的影响。

还有的产品采用了越障辅助策略，在识别到卡顿时短时提高输出。这类策略要验证的是它不会在其他工况下误触发。

整改的相互牵制

越障这一项的整改，几乎一定会牵动其他项目：

加大脚轮，影响转向半径和整车尺寸；抬高底盘，影响稳定性；前移重心改善越障，可能恶化后倾稳定性；加大电机输出，影响续航和发热。

所以越障不应当单独整改。 建议在摸底阶段把越障、稳定性、制动、续航放在一组，拿到全部数据后统一定参数。只盯一项改，往往改完这项坏了那项，来回几轮。

越障与实际使用场景的对应

标准里的障碍高度对应的是常见的路缘和门槛。实际使用中遇到的情况更复杂：障碍可能是斜的、表面可能是松软的、前后可能连续出现。

所以在评估产品适用性时，除了看标称越障高度，还要考虑：使用环境里典型的障碍形态是什么、使用者是否有能力配合（比如主动前倾重心）、失败时的后果是什么（卡住还是有倾翻风险）。

最后一点尤其重要。 越障失败如果只是上不去，风险有限；如果失败模式是后倾，那就是安全问题，需要在设计上加以防范，比如设置防倾装置或者限制越障时的输出。

使用者因素

越障能力在实际中还受使用者影响。有经验的使用者会通过身体前倾、调整速度来帮助越障，同样的车在不同人手里表现可能不同。

这对产品设计有两点启示：一是说明书里应当有越障的操作提示；二是不应当把需要特定技巧才能达到的越障高度作为标称值，因为多数使用者达不到。

摸底阶段的测法建议

越障做摸底时，建议不要只测标称高度能不能过，而是从低到高逐级测，记录每一级的成功率和失败模式。这样得到的是一条能力曲线，信息量远大于单点结论。

曲线还能揭示一个重要信息：能力的陡降点在哪里。有些产品在某个高度之前很稳，超过之后突然完全上不去，这说明存在一个明确的几何限制；另一些产品则是成功率逐渐下降，这通常指向附着或动力的边界。两种形态对应的整改方向不同。

我们的做法

做越障项目时，我们会记录失败发生在哪个阶段——是前轮没上去、底盘托住了，还是驱动打滑、动力不足。只给一个越障高度数值，对整改没有指导意义。

对于把越障作为卖点的产品，建议在摸底阶段测出实际能力曲线：不同障碍高度下的成功率，而不只是标称值能不能过。这条曲线能说明产品在标称值附近还有多少余量，对判断量产一致性风险很有用。

有需要可以把底盘结构参数和轮系配置发过来先判断，或者直接联系：132 4819 8029。检测能力见服务介绍，产品分类见电动轮椅检测与代步车检测，标准信息见标准查询。

English version

Conclusion: obstacle climbing is geometry plus power, and geometry comes first

When obstacle climbing height falls short, the first instinct is usually insufficient power, leading to thoughts of a larger motor. In practice a substantial share of cases are geometric: wheel diameter, ground clearance and weight distribution. Until those are addressed, added power does not help.

A sensible diagnostic order is: can the front wheel get up, will the chassis ground out, do the drive wheels keep traction, and only then, is there enough power.

Four lines of investigation

Front wheel ascent, where the castor stops against the obstacle, is governed by castor diameter, approach angle and front wheel loading. Chassis clearance, where the front wheel mounts but the body grounds, is governed by ground clearance, wheelbase and underbody shape. Drive traction, where the drive wheels slip, is governed by drive wheel loading and tyre tread and compound. Power delivery, where the vehicle mounts but stalls or slows sharply, is governed by motor torque, reduction ratio and control strategy.

The first and third account for most cases in practice.

Front wheel ascent depends on diameter and load

Whether a castor can climb an obstacle depends principally on the relationship between wheel diameter and obstacle height. A larger wheel contacts higher up and needs less horizontal force to roll over. This is pure geometry and is unaffected by available power.

Increasing castor diameter is therefore usually an effective direction when climbing ability is short. The cost is reduced manoeuvrability, more space taken and a changed appearance: a clear trade-off.

Front wheel loading is the other factor. The more weight on the front wheel, the more force is needed to climb. Where the centre of gravity sits well forward, adjusting weight distribution is more direct than changing wheels.

Castor orientation is easily overlooked. If the castor happens to be at an unfavourable angle when it meets the obstacle, it jams rather than rolls over. Some products are inconsistent on this: the same obstacle is cleared sometimes and not others, and this is usually why.

Grounding out and ground clearance

Once the front wheel is up, the body must pass. This depends on clearance and wheelbase together: less clearance grounds more easily, and a longer wheelbase makes mid-body contact more likely during the crossing.

Increasing clearance raises the centre of gravity, which directly affects stability. These two are in clear opposition, and the balance has to be found in the intended use. A product used mainly indoors on level floors can have low clearance, a low centre of gravity and good stability. An outdoor product needs clearance, and stability must be recovered by other means such as a wider track.

Insufficient drive traction

Slipping arises from inadequate vertical load or inadequate friction.

Load problems typically appear during the climb itself: as the body tilts, weight transfers to non-driven wheels, drive wheel load falls and slip follows. Adjusting the centre of gravity or changing the drive configuration may be more effective than changing tyres.

Friction relates to tyre compound and tread. Note that the obstacle surface used in testing is specified and differs from real road surfaces. Slipping on the test surface does not necessarily mean slipping in service, and the reverse also holds, so this result should be read alongside actual use conditions.

Power and control strategy

Only after the first three is power the issue, and control strategy matters alongside motor torque.

Some controllers limit current when resistance rises, to protect the motor, and the vehicle stops at the obstacle. Here the motor is capable and the protection is simply conservative. Adjusting the threshold may resolve it, but the effect on thermal protection must be assessed at the same time.

Some products use a climbing assist strategy that briefly raises output when a stall is detected. What needs verifying there is that it does not trigger inappropriately in other conditions.

Interactions during remediation

Remediating obstacle climbing almost always disturbs something else. Larger castors affect turning radius and overall dimensions. More clearance affects stability. Moving the centre of gravity forward to help climbing may worsen rearward stability. More motor output affects range and heat.

Obstacle climbing should therefore not be remediated in isolation. Group it with stability, braking and range during preliminary testing and set parameters once all the data are in. Chasing one item at a time typically means fixing one and breaking another over several rounds.

How we handle it

We record which stage the failure occurred at: the front wheel not mounting, the chassis grounding, the drive slipping, or power running out. A bare obstacle height figure gives no guidance for remediation.

Where climbing ability is a selling point, we suggest measuring an actual capability curve during preliminary testing: success rate against obstacle height, rather than only whether the nominal figure is met. That curve shows how much margin remains around the nominal value, which is useful for judging consistency risk in production.

Send us the chassis parameters and wheel configuration and we can assess it. Phone or WeChat: +86 132 4819 8029.