EV Digest 3854
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Winterizing EV?
by "Adams, Lynn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: vacuum pumps
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: vacuum pumps
by "Christopher Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: vac. pump wiring & relay diode #
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: vacuum pumps
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: vac. pump wiring & relay diode #
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) RE: vacuum pumps
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Unsprung weight, a balancing act.
by "M.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Clutch Ruminations
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: OT: Food energy
by Ken Trough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Food energy (was: the cost of running an EV)
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: vacuum pumps
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: OT: Food energy
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) RE: Food energy
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) D'Oh! RE: vac. pump wiring & relay diode #
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Clutch Ruminations
by Seth Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: OT: Food energy
by Christian Kocmick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: vacuum pumps
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: OT: Food energy
by Ken Trough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: cost of the heart attack
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: EV digest 3850
by "wordrite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: vacuum pumps
by Jon Glauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) calorie to kwh conversion
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
24) RE: vacuum pumps
by "John Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: EV digest 3850
by Jon Glauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: EV digest 3850
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) 314.958!!! Buckeyes set new EV LSR
by Sam Uzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Re: EV 'X' prize? (part 1)
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, Here in Colorado, I have battery heaters controlled by thermal
switches to keep each part of my battery box between 70-90 F. I am
continually trying to improve the thermal control of the battery boxes,
mostly because I enjoy working on this problem.
However, If you are not deeply discharging your batteries (say no less
than 50%) you would probabally be ok with insulation. Your batteries
will heat while charging. If you can keep that heat in the battery box
through insulation, and you use your ev as a daily driver, you will
probabally be ok. Get some of those indoor/outdoor thermometers and
place them around your pack and see what effect your insulation is
having. Even with the heaters, I insulate my pack November to March If
the batteries get too hot, I can always remove the cover while charging.
Lynn
See my 100% electric car at http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/379.html
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of W Bryan Andrews
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 8:14 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Winterizing EV?
This will be my first winter with my Voltsrabbit in the US Midwest.
Temperatures here will be below freezing quite a bit. The bunny will be
in an attatched garage at night, but will have no such protection at the
office during the day.
It is my understanding that the cold will shorten my range. Not being a
very handy person, I'm looking for simple modifications to partially
counteract the cold. Would wrapping some insulation around the rear
battery case help, or would this run the risk of overheating the
batteries?
If I were to find some temperature-regulated battery-blanket for the
rear battery box, is it worth the effort, give than the front batteries
will still be out in the cold?
Would running a very light load on the drive batteries for a short
period bring the batteries up to temperature?
Thanks,
Bryan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jon Glauser wrote:
>
> I think I'll take a spin-off from this vacuum thread and ask a similar
> question:
>
> In the BSUEV (http://jon.silvercheetah.net/bsuev/24sept.asp) the vacuum
> pump is a mysterious aluminum box. It has a nipple out the top and two
> wires in the bottom. It measures roughly 5"x3"x10". It runs on 12V ~3A.
> It connects directly to the master cylinder and has no external
> resivoir. There are not any markings on it that we can find (perhaps on
> the bottom where we cant see). Anyone have any idea where this "silver
> box" may have come from? It runs at every full stop (not every brake
> press, just the longer harder ones).
One trick for quieting down a vacuum pump is to put it *inside* the
vacuum reservoir. Vacuum is a poor conductor of sound after all, so why
not use it to block the noise?
The example of this that I saw put the vacuum pump inside a piece of
large diameter plastic sewer pipe. You hear the pump when it starts (and
there is no vacuum), and it quieted down considerably as the air got
pumped out. Almost all the remaining noise came from the exhaust port.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What about cooling the pump and motor? Would there be any precautions
you'd need to take due to the reduced convection in a partial vacuum?
--c.r.
Lee Hart said:
> One trick for quieting down a vacuum pump is to put it *inside* the
> vacuum reservoir. Vacuum is a poor conductor of sound after all, so why
> not use it to block the noise?
>
> The example of this that I saw put the vacuum pump inside a piece of
> large diameter plastic sewer pipe. You hear the pump when it starts (and
> there is no vacuum), and it quieted down considerably as the air got
> pumped out. Almost all the remaining noise came from the exhaust port.
> --
> "Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
> citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
> has!" -- Margaret Mead
> --
> Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
Bob Bath wrote:
...
Yes, you put the diode across the motor; anode to the positive side,
cathode to the negative side.
Err...
It should be exactly opposite polarity, if you do it like above,
diode will conduct and burn out.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Christopher Robison wrote:
> What about cooling the pump and motor? Would there be any precautions
> you'd need to take due to the reduced convection in a partial vacuum?
Yes, the motor would get poor cooling. However, a vacuum pump motor has
a very low duty cycle (as long as you don't have any vacuum leaks).
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>> Yes, you put the diode across the motor; anode to the positive side,
>> cathode to the negative side.
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> It should be exactly opposite polarity, if you do it like above,
> diode will conduct and burn out.
Oops! You're right, Victor. Thanks for the correction.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee, this is a GREAT idea! Way to go - thinking **inside** the box.
Don
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: October 15, 2004 2:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: vacuum pumps
Jon Glauser wrote:
>
> I think I'll take a spin-off from this vacuum thread and ask a similar
> question:
>
> In the BSUEV (http://jon.silvercheetah.net/bsuev/24sept.asp) the
> vacuum pump is a mysterious aluminum box. It has a nipple out the top
> and two wires in the bottom. It measures roughly 5"x3"x10". It runs on 12V
~3A.
> It connects directly to the master cylinder and has no external
> resivoir. There are not any markings on it that we can find (perhaps
> on the bottom where we cant see). Anyone have any idea where this
> "silver box" may have come from? It runs at every full stop (not every
> brake press, just the longer harder ones).
One trick for quieting down a vacuum pump is to put it *inside* the vacuum
reservoir. Vacuum is a poor conductor of sound after all, so why not use it
to block the noise?
The example of this that I saw put the vacuum pump inside a piece of large
diameter plastic sewer pipe. You hear the pump when it starts (and there is
no vacuum), and it quieted down considerably as the air got pumped out.
Almost all the remaining noise came from the exhaust port.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!"
-- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I read an article a long time ago and it talked about low frequency
resonance the lower the better. I think cady's were around 16 hz.
Mike G.
Jeff Shanab wrote:
The ratio of sprung to unsprung is a major part of the vehicle
dynamics equation, it is why little cars have trouble achiving good
ride quality. the unsprung weight has to be reduced to the point where
components are unsafe or really expensive.
Since an EV has a mass of batteries to react agaisnt the spring
compresion of that heavy wheel motor and can push it back down to the
road without suffering to much body displacement, it may work out.
One last thing to watch out for when changing spring rates. Avoid
combinations of weight - spring constant combinations that fall in the
60hz range for natural frequency, it will make occupants car-sick.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'll look forward to reading your test data. I wouldn't expect an
earth shattering improvement, but effectively maybe 60 pounds lighter
would be 2% faster acceleration, worth a tenth or two off the 0-60
time.
I'd like to get all your videos on your grassrootsev site, can you
put one of those handy paypal things for that on your site? Would it
be easy for you to cram them all onto one DVD?
Machining the hub right on the motor shaft sounds pretty clever. I
thought I remembered you posting you were buying commercial taperlock
couplers now. Which method do you prefer?
--- Steve Clunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Geared weight is even worse! Suppose your 1st gear is a 10:1
> overall
> > ratio. Weight in your clutch, flywheel, and motor acts like it
> has
> > ten times the effective rotational inertia! Another way to think
> > about it is about 100 times more energy will go into this geared
> > spinning flywheel than a stationary one bolted to the car upon
> > accelerating. Figure a flywheel is about 1/2 the diameter of a
> wheel,
> > and you can figure that every pound you take off the flywheel is
> like
> > taking about 2 pounds off the car.
> >
> these are some of the reasons I like the lov joy couplers , total
> weight is
> only a few lbs. What I have done in the past is to take the clutch
> spines
> out of the clutch and weld it to one of the Lov joy couplers , the
> other
> half I just buy with the 1 1/8 hole for the motor.
>
> > Lightweight flywheels and pressure plates are well known racer's
> > tricks, but generally discouraged for street use. A gas car with
> a
> > very light flywheel is hard to start, idles poorly, and is easy
> to
> > stall.
> >
>
> Maybe some day sombody will start selling a aluminum flywheel with
> a nice
> taper lock hub in one unit , let the buyer put the holes for the
> presser
> plate or the seller could do that also.
>
>
> > For electric motors, however, no worries! Electric motors are
> smooth,
> > and don't need a heavy flywheel to even out the torque
> pulsations.
> > They can't stall, so no worries there. And they don't idle, so no
> > need to worry about that -- and even if it does idle no worries.
> A
> > lighter flywheel will give a bit better acceleration and a bit
> better
> > range.
>
> I don't think anybody has had both setup to really compare , I am
> planning
> on redoing my Porsche and going form clutch to no clutch , the hub
> I made
> for that car was .07 out , with 120 v it work fine but 240 showed a
> vibration , I'll take some good measurements one power used with
> both setup
> and then we'll have some real info.
=====
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Enough of this OFF TOPIC thread already! Take it to a biking forum or
something. It is not contributing to the quality of info in my inbox.
8^)
-Ken Trough
Admin - V is for Voltage Megasite
http://visforvoltage.com
AIM - ktrough
FAX - 801-749-7807
message - 866-872-8901
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I wrote:
> According to <http://www.wiredwales.com/info/c_factor/energy.htm>,
> a calorie is 0.000001163 kWh, so 38 calories is
> 0.000044194kWh (or 0.044194Wh).
>
> This means that that 0.333kWh single patty hamburger contains
> enough energy for 7535miles of travel at 12mph (about 628hrs worth).
>
> This clearly illustrates that there is some serious
> inefficiency involved in the human body's conversion of food
> energy to physical energy ;^>, since it is pretty obvious
> that none of us are going to cycle for 628hrs on a single burger.
It has been pointed out to me offlist that nutritional calories are
actually 'kilocalories', and so 38 calories (nutrition) is 0.044194kWh
or 44.194Wh.
This much more sensibly works out to the single patty burger containing
enough energy for about 7.5miles at 12mph, or about 38minutes of riding.
This in turn, combined with Gail's and my own observations regarding our
food intake while powering our own commutes to/from work, suggests that
the human body is probably actually fairly efficient at converting food
energy to physical output.
Sorry for muddying the waters ;^>
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Although I could use a PVC pipe, I would like to find an enclosure that
could have easy access. So if I was to look for a watertight enclosure for
the vacuum pump (e.g. from Hammond or some such company). To what depth
should the enclosure be rated? Here are my calculations:
Given that 1 ATM is approx 15 psi, and that a typical vacuum pump works to
about 9 psi, we need a box that can hold 6psi.
I presume they rate water proof enclosures by having them at sea level
pressure (15 psi) then dunk them in water. So I would need a box that could
handle 15 + 6 = 21psi. Using the handy-dandy "pressure at water depth" web
page (http://www.gazza.co.nz/waterpressure.html), it is found that at 4.5m
or 15 feet, the pressure is approx 21 psi. So I would need an enclosure
that could handle submersion to this depth.
Does this sound right? (or should I say "no sound"?)
Thanks
Don
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: October 15, 2004 3:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: vacuum pumps
Christopher Robison wrote:
> What about cooling the pump and motor? Would there be any precautions
> you'd need to take due to the reduced convection in a partial vacuum?
Yes, the motor would get poor cooling. However, a vacuum pump motor has a
very low duty cycle (as long as you don't have any vacuum leaks).
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!"
-- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think the original point of the whole thread was, it doesn't always take 2
tons of steel to get you from point A to Point B, even if said 2 tons is an
EV. Different people are going to use different solutions, depending upon
their circumstances.
In my case, with 20 miles each way, 3/4 of that on 55 mph roads with NO
provision for cyclists, and the return trip in the dead of night, a powered
solution makes the most sense. Besides, the way some of the nuts that work
at this plant drive, I wouldn't dare try riding a bike on the same road with
them in the daytime, much less at night.
And with the lack of charging at work and a 40 mile round trip, plus the
speeds involved, pretty much rules out electric 2 wheel as well.
And as a third point, in my case my old 650cc motorcycle is giving every
indication that it can be made driveable again for less than $1000,
considerably less than a new version would cost, and ends up recycling it
instead of dumping it in the junkyard.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Trough
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 10/15/2004 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Food energy
Enough of this OFF TOPIC thread already! Take it to a biking forum or
something. It is not contributing to the quality of info in my inbox.
8^)
-Ken Trough
Admin - V is for Voltage Megasite
http://visforvoltage.com
AIM - ktrough
FAX - 801-749-7807
message - 866-872-8901
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ken Trough [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Enough of this OFF TOPIC thread already! Take it to a biking forum or
> something. It is not contributing to the quality of info in my inbox.
> 8^)
Whatsamatta? Is your delete key broken? ;^>
It is Friday, the list is otherwise quiet, and discussing the energy
consumption of human-powered transportation relative to that of
e-scooters/e-bikes/EVs that might displace it is not entirely off topic
(even if the results appear to be counter to your personal interests in
promoting the use of e-scooters ;^)
Have a great weekend!
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My bad! Of _course_ I'm running the vac. pump off of
the low voltage (12V line). TOOO FUNNY! (Should
never post after 9:30 PST).
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob Bath wrote:
> > if I recall, the diode that protects the relay
> contacts, which is
> > in parallel with the vacuum pump load is about the
> same current
> > rating as the pump (12-25A), and 5 times the
> voltage (144, so say
> > between 500-1000V)?
>
> Your vacuum pump is running on 144v, not 12v? Why?
> 144v x 25a is enough
> to drive the car down the road!
>
> Most of the vacuum pumps people use run on 12v. Yes,
> they can draw
> 12-25a, though the running current on mine (from a
> GM car) is more like
> 10a.
>
> The diode should have about the same current rating
> as the load, but its
> voltage rating needs to be no higher than that
> powering the motor. The
> lowest voltage diode you're going to find is
> probably still 30v, which
> is plenty for a 12v motor.
>
> Yes, you put the diode across the motor; anode to
> the positive side,
> cathode to the negative side.
> --
> "Never doubt that the work of a small group of
> thoughtful, committed
> citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only
> thing that ever
> has!" -- Margaret Mead
> --
> Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
>
=====
'92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel? Are you
saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The torque to accelerate a mass like a flywheel is proportional to the
mass moment of inertia and the rate of acceleration. If you use kg-m^2
and radians per second you get torque in newton meters. A newton meter
is about 3/4 of a foot pound. For cocktail napkin math, figure
rpm/second = 0.1 radians per second squared. (really it is a factor of
~1/9.55 but this is an approximation) So a change of 2000 rpm in one
second is about 200 radians per second squared.
Simple enough, right? SO what is the mass moment of inertia of a
flywheel. You could estimate it with a few formulae, or get a CADD
jockey to spit it out. My hunch for a 4 cylinder flywheel is
0.1-0.2kg-m^2, and a motor rotor is like 0.02-0.05. But if someone
e-mails me a drawing of a VW flywheel and pressure plate, I can get an
estimate from my CADD software.
A sample calculation:
Stock flywheel, pressure plate, clutch. 1000 RPM/sec, 0.2kg-m^2. Call
it 100 rad/sec^2*.2kg-m^2 or 20 Nm or 15 ft-lb. At stall you may have a
lot of torque on tap, but accelerating from 4000-5000 rpm, 15 ft-lb
might take a big bite out of the available torque. If you get an
aluminum flywheel and keep a steel pressure plate, you might drop half
the inertia thereby freeing up 7Nm. Doesn't sound like much, but that
is a net gain. See below.
Assume you have 80Nm available at 4000 RPM. You use 40 Nm to overcome
wind drag, 5 for rolling resistance. That leaves you with 35 NM with
which to accelerate. If you can accelerate at 100 rad/sec^2 in 2nd
gear, then most of the remaining torque (20Nm) goes to the steel
flywheel and pressure plate and you are left with 15 Nm. Or you
accelerate more slowly. With the aluminum flywheel, you have a net
25Nm. 1.66X the net torque! Hypothetical, yes. But that is at least an
illustration of where the data goes.
I hope this illustrates this phenomenon a bit. And someone send me a
drawing of a car flywheel, and I will get an estimate.
Seth
On Oct 15, 2004, at 7:26 PM, David Dymaxion wrote:
I'll look forward to reading your test data. I wouldn't expect an
earth shattering improvement, but effectively maybe 60 pounds lighter
would be 2% faster acceleration, worth a tenth or two off the 0-60
time.
I'd like to get all your videos on your grassrootsev site, can you
put one of those handy paypal things for that on your site? Would it
be easy for you to cram them all onto one DVD?
Machining the hub right on the motor shaft sounds pretty clever. I
thought I remembered you posting you were buying commercial taperlock
couplers now. Which method do you prefer?
--- Steve Clunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Geared weight is even worse! Suppose your 1st gear is a 10:1
overall
ratio. Weight in your clutch, flywheel, and motor acts like it
has
ten times the effective rotational inertia! Another way to think
about it is about 100 times more energy will go into this geared
spinning flywheel than a stationary one bolted to the car upon
accelerating. Figure a flywheel is about 1/2 the diameter of a
wheel,
and you can figure that every pound you take off the flywheel is
like
taking about 2 pounds off the car.
these are some of the reasons I like the lov joy couplers , total
weight is
only a few lbs. What I have done in the past is to take the clutch
spines
out of the clutch and weld it to one of the Lov joy couplers , the
other
half I just buy with the 1 1/8 hole for the motor.
Lightweight flywheels and pressure plates are well known racer's
tricks, but generally discouraged for street use. A gas car with
a
very light flywheel is hard to start, idles poorly, and is easy
to
stall.
Maybe some day sombody will start selling a aluminum flywheel with
a nice
taper lock hub in one unit , let the buyer put the holes for the
presser
plate or the seller could do that also.
For electric motors, however, no worries! Electric motors are
smooth,
and don't need a heavy flywheel to even out the torque
pulsations.
They can't stall, so no worries there. And they don't idle, so no
need to worry about that -- and even if it does idle no worries.
A
lighter flywheel will give a bit better acceleration and a bit
better
range.
I don't think anybody has had both setup to really compare , I am
planning
on redoing my Porsche and going form clutch to no clutch , the hub
I made
for that car was .07 out , with 120 v it work fine but 240 showed a
vibration , I'll take some good measurements one power used with
both setup
and then we'll have some real info.
=====
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Speaking of human / electric propulsion, has anyone heard any news about
Twike here in the states? (Wasn't there "some guy" importing them up in
Seattle?)
CTK
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you did use a large (6" plus) piece of PVC, you could mount the pump to
the end cap (Screw on) and cap the other end with a glue on cap. Then if you
need to work on it, just unscrew the PVC pipe body.
David C. Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 5:00 PM
Subject: RE: vacuum pumps
Although I could use a PVC pipe, I would like to find an enclosure that
could have easy access. So if I was to look for a watertight enclosure
for
the vacuum pump (e.g. from Hammond or some such company). To what depth
should the enclosure be rated? Here are my calculations:
Given that 1 ATM is approx 15 psi, and that a typical vacuum pump works to
about 9 psi, we need a box that can hold 6psi.
I presume they rate water proof enclosures by having them at sea level
pressure (15 psi) then dunk them in water. So I would need a box that
could
handle 15 + 6 = 21psi. Using the handy-dandy "pressure at water depth"
web
page (http://www.gazza.co.nz/waterpressure.html), it is found that at 4.5m
or 15 feet, the pressure is approx 21 psi. So I would need an enclosure
that could handle submersion to this depth.
Does this sound right? (or should I say "no sound"?)
Thanks
Don
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: October 15, 2004 3:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: vacuum pumps
Christopher Robison wrote:
What about cooling the pump and motor? Would there be any precautions
you'd need to take due to the reduced convection in a partial vacuum?
Yes, the motor would get poor cooling. However, a vacuum pump motor has a
very low duty cycle (as long as you don't have any vacuum leaks).
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!"
-- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think the original point of the whole thread was, it doesn't always
take 2 tons of steel to get you from point A to Point B, even if said 2
tons is an EV.
Of course this is true. I just don't think we need 50 posts analyzing
the caloric value of a cheeseburger.
-Ken Trough
Admin - V is for Voltage Megasite
http://visforvoltage.com
AIM - ktrough
FAX - 801-749-7807
message - 866-872-8901
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
$102,000 billed to me when insurance company rejected claim. $40,000
when insurace paid contract price. (can you believe they would hold me
to the $102,000 when they would take 40K ? ) (No-one panic, it was a
partial block that they fixed with a stint, out in 2 days ) but I need
to get back on the bike!
I have all kinds of books on bicyling science and am interested in
building an electric assited bike also. As the racers can atest too,
Horespower is kinda meaningless it is the torque that does the work and
the rpm is how fast, but it helps us with our calculations. Eddie Merks
was measure at putting out 2hp peak, everyone is under 1 hp after the
first minute, but even I can put out as much as the peak torque that my
little mitsubishi truck put out. it is the low rpm that gives the low
HP. High torque low rpm is not normal efficiency of motors, so while
humans gear up, a motor must gear down.
so let us say I want to go 40mph to work under electric power, it is 8
miles on level ground.
power to push through the air + power to roll + power to climb is the
majority
1/2 C V^2
C = volocity in m/s 40 miles * 5280 feet * 1 meter
* 1hr = 17.9 m/s
my book
uses
17.9 hr mile 3.28
feet 3600s
watts = C * [K1 + K2C^2]
k1
k2 watts neglecting slope, headwind, and acceleration needs
RR = raodster 7.845
.3872 2361
SS = sport bike, dropped handlebars 3.509 .258 1543
RG = racer 2.508
.1916 1144
CHPV = steamlined fairing 3.097 .06
400 wow!, need a fairing
UHPV = reclined and stramlined 1.85
.03 205 ok, not worth getting ran over.
8 miles at 40mph is 12 min (yeah, right, it takes 20 in the car)
2361 W / 24V = 98 amps /5 = 19.6aH = 2 optimas to get there ? 2
Hawker G12v38 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 33lbseach need at least 2x cause of
wind,accelr not feasable
1543 w / 24v = 64amps / 5 = 12.8aH reasonable at 20mph
1144 W /24V = 47amps / 5 = 9.5ah reasonable at around 30
400 /24 = 16amps /5 = 3ah gonna need fairing for 40mph
Rich, what kind of real world numbers can you give us from the MBH?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
All: Has anybody heard of the new Accord Hybrid? It has a V6 with full
time ICE, variable cylinder shut-off (3 at a time), and Electric motor
for assist. It claims to be faster than a stock Accord, and
30-35mpg...An interesting idea anyway..........
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 3:01 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: EV digest 3850
EV Digest 3850
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Solution for "Gone Postal's" broken tranny found
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) TS Price Increase
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Charging 8VGC-HC
by Nawaz Qureshi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Adapter Questions
by Mark Farver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Insurance idea: drive more, pay more
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: TS Price Increase
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Transmission noise question
by Paul Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: TS Price Increase
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Adapter Questions
by Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: New Batteries Not So New
by "Raymond Knight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Dog clutches
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Michelin Active Wheel
by Lee Dekker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) article: Segway: Concept Centaur
by Paul Wujek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: Dog clutches
by "Andre Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Fuel Cell Tech. Job Opening
by Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: TS Price Increase
by Sam Thurber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) 34XCD
by Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Dog clutches
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: New Beetle Conversion Web Update
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: TS Price Increase
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Adapter Questions
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Fwd: Michelin Active Wheel
by Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) production of electric cars.
by Lee Dekker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Fwd: Michelin Active Wheel
by Lee Dekker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) RE: Michelin Active Wheel
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually, my intended question was: Who made this pump / where did it
come from?
I noticed everyone elses pumps draw twice as much curent and are noisy.
This pump is quiet to me. It draws little current (3A max) and has a
built in resivoir. I guess I don't care that it runs at every stop, I
don't notice it.
-Jon Glauser
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
When nutritionists talk about calories, they're actually talking about *kilo*
calories. I guess they thought things would be better if they were more confusing.
In light of this, Roger's calculations indicate that a standard hamburger would get
you about 7.5 miles. Doesn't sound too unreasonable.
Frank
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is a much better idea than what I tried: I put the vacuum pump
inside a surplus ammo case (the kind that cinches nice and tight with a
rubber seal). As soon as I turned it on it went "schlock!" and the sides
sucked it breaking the seal!
Almost all the noise comes from the exhaust anyway. A good muffler is
the most important thing. And it has to be fairly free - flowing. I put
a very quiet very restrictive one on, and my pump failed (membrane
ripped) in two days. May have been a coincidence, but it was a strong
one.
- John
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave
Sent: October 15, 2004 5:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: vacuum pumps
If you did use a large (6" plus) piece of PVC, you could mount the pump
to
the end cap (Screw on) and cap the other end with a glue on cap. Then if
you
need to work on it, just unscrew the PVC pipe body.
David C. Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 5:00 PM
Subject: RE: vacuum pumps
> Although I could use a PVC pipe, I would like to find an enclosure
that
> could have easy access. So if I was to look for a watertight
enclosure
> for
> the vacuum pump (e.g. from Hammond or some such company). To what
depth
> should the enclosure be rated? Here are my calculations:
>
> Given that 1 ATM is approx 15 psi, and that a typical vacuum pump
works to
> about 9 psi, we need a box that can hold 6psi.
> I presume they rate water proof enclosures by having them at sea level
> pressure (15 psi) then dunk them in water. So I would need a box that
> could
> handle 15 + 6 = 21psi. Using the handy-dandy "pressure at water
depth"
> web
> page (http://www.gazza.co.nz/waterpressure.html), it is found that at
4.5m
> or 15 feet, the pressure is approx 21 psi. So I would need an
enclosure
> that could handle submersion to this depth.
>
> Does this sound right? (or should I say "no sound"?)
>
> Thanks
> Don
>
>
>
>
>
> See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
> www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Lee Hart
> Sent: October 15, 2004 3:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: vacuum pumps
>
> Christopher Robison wrote:
>> What about cooling the pump and motor? Would there be any precautions
>> you'd need to take due to the reduced convection in a partial vacuum?
>
> Yes, the motor would get poor cooling. However, a vacuum pump motor
has a
> very low duty cycle (as long as you don't have any vacuum leaks).
> --
> "Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
> citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!"
> -- Margaret Mead
> --
> Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377
leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually, the cylinder shut-off is not a new idea. There was a car that
did this back in the days before electronic engines. It did it with
vacuum lines!! But it was so complex that it broke too often to continue
with. It was a production car but I cannot remember the make or model,
sorry.
-Jon Glauser
wordrite wrote:
All: Has anybody heard of the new Accord Hybrid? It has a V6 with full
time ICE, variable cylinder shut-off (3 at a time), and Electric motor
for assist. It claims to be faster than a stock Accord, and
30-35mpg...An interesting idea anyway..........
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Cadillac 4-6-8 Variable Displacement 368 had solenoids to disconnect the
valve rocker and just use 6 cylinders or even 4 cylinders. Is that the one
you were thinking of?
David C. Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Glauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: EV digest 3850
Actually, the cylinder shut-off is not a new idea. There was a car that
did this back in the days before electronic engines. It did it with vacuum
lines!! But it was so complex that it broke too often to continue with. It
was a production car but I cannot remember the make or model, sorry.
-Jon Glauser
wordrite wrote:
All: Has anybody heard of the new Accord Hybrid? It has a V6 with full
time ICE, variable cylinder shut-off (3 at a time), and Electric motor
for assist. It claims to be faster than a stock Accord, and
30-35mpg...An interesting idea anyway..........
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
yeehawhawhaw!!
awwesome, indeed... next move is to step up to the plate and take down that
pesky turbine car holding the all-category LSR!!!
---begin---
This morning at 9:40am mountain time the Buckeye Bullet, driven by Roger
Schroer, set a new Land Speed Record for the E-III class at 314.958
mph. The vehicle duplicated the previous day's run with very similar timed
miles and an exit speed of over 318 mph.
Following the run Roger Schroer was inducted into both the 200 mph and 300
mph clubs, and much celebrating commenced.
This has been a very proud day for all involved.
GO BUCKS!
GO FAST!
cheers,
Giorgio Rizzoni
---end---
(sorry if this is a repeat from this morning - my ISP is having intermittant
email blackouts)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I sent a suggestion. Feel free to tear it apart, but please
keep everything within the rules of the EVDL(ie. keep the
politics to a minimum, although I'd be more than willing to
debate that part off list). On a purely technological basis,
how viable is the idea of a 150+ mile range at 70+ MPH speed
EV with 0-60 acceleration comparable to a normal gasoline
powered car, top speed about 80 MPH, and price tag of under
$25k if it were to be mass produced? Would make an
interesting debate.
==================================
Suggested Name of Challenge (i.e. WTN X PRIZE for ****):
The Sustainable Auto Challenge
Brief Description of Suggested Challenge (No more than 600
words please):
With America's dependence on foreign oil from a politically
volatile region growing significantly in a post 911 world,
the effects of global climate change and man's possibly
significant role within it, and the health implications of
automobile exhaust within our cities, a drastic reduction in
crude oil consumption and tailpipe emissions is one method
to reduce the magnitude of these problems. Electric vehicles
are just one way to help achieve the goal of reducing these
problems. Recently, electric cars such as AC Propulsions
TZero, Solectria's Sunrise, Mitsubishi's Eclipse EV
prototype, and Electrovaya's Maya 100 have all demonstrated
or been claimed to have demonstrated performance and
cruising range comparable to a gasoline car of today. Being
low-volume productions or prototypes, they are prohibitively
expensive, keeping them out of the hands of ordinary
consumers.
Production volumes aside, the electric vehicle may now be a
viable competitor with internal combustion engine
automobiles, as many models produced by small companies have
demonstrated highway speed cruising ranges in excess of 200
miles per charge along with acceleration comparable to or
better than that expected from ordinary ICE vehicles.
The challenge suggested would entail the construction of an
all-electric battery operated car with the purpose of
demonstrating it may be possible to produce an affordable
electric vehicle that can serve as a primary car for a
household of 2 people or less or as a secondary car for a
larger household. The car would have to have at least 1/3
the cruising range expected of a typical gasoline car to be
considered viable by the majority of the American public, a
top speed at least enough to match any speed limit in the
U.S., acceleration comparable to or better than a typical
2005 model year car, adequate trunk space, and the features
expected of most cars today.
Suggested Potential Rules:
Spending limit of $15,000 for parts for one car, an
unlimited amount of money may be used for crash testing, the
car entered must be able to accelerate from 0-100 km/h in
under 10 seconds, top speed must be at least 140 km/h(Can be
higher if desired with no limit), range per charge at 120
km/h speeds on flat terrain in an established set of weather
conditions must be at least 200 kilometers, energy
consumption from batteries to wheels must be under 400 watt
hours per mile at 120 km/h speeds under an established set
of weather conditions, charge time of battery from 0% to
100% must be under 3 hours from a 110V outlet, must be able
to comfortably seat at least two people with heights up to 2
meters each and masses up to 110 kilograms each, must pass
all DOT safety requirements, must be able to last its first
100,000 miles without any major repairs or major servicing
costs(ie. battery packreplacement), must have power windows,
power locks, heating, air conditioning, sterio and sound
system, must have a braking distance from 100 km/h to 0 km/h
of under 250 feet, must have at least 13 cubic feet of trunk
space, must have a minimum achievable 700-foot slalom speed
of 90 km/h, and must have an interior noise level of under
60 dB at 120 km/h speeds under an established set of weather
conditions. Any custom fabricated parts may be used, however
the material and labor costs of custom-fabricated parts must
be included. If the labor is done by the team itself and is
free, it does not need to be included, although a limit of
500 man-hours will be placed on time spent making
custom-fabricated parts for the car entered. Only the parts
used in the car entered will count towards this total number
of man hours. Time designing parts does not count towards
500 man-hour time limit for custom fabrication, only
fabricating the actual part itself counts. An additional 750
man hours will be granted for assembly of the car itself. In
production volume of more than 1,000 units per year, selling
price of the car at a profit or with no net change in
revenue should be no more than $25,000, as determined by a
set of constraints for calculating the cost of mass
production. The car tested must have all of the same
components and settings as the car intended to be sold,
tested, and driven, including tires, interior trim, ect.
A gathering of all competitors should be held where all cars
are tested to see if they meet the minimum specifications.
Of the cars meeting the minimum specifications, they will be
run through a series of performance tests and rated
accordingly. A points system should be used, similar to the
Michelin Challenge Bibendum of 2003, in which a GPA should
be awarded for a seperate set of categories. The categories
would be acceleration(0-100 km/h), braking, top speed,
slalom speed, cruising range(at 120 km/h), interior noise,
charging time via 110V outlet, interior space, trunk space,
and energy consumption. Of the cars entered, the team to
score the highest overall GPA wins the prize. If no cars
meet the minimum criteria, no one wins the prize and the
deadline is extended by one year and for each successive
year that no one successfully completes the challenge, the
deadline shall be extendedone year thereafter.
Suggested Time Life of the Award (how long given to win?):
Until midnight(Pacific standard), January 1st, 2007
How Many Companies to Compete?:
Unlimited
Suggested Prize Amount:
$1,000,000
Suggested Funding Mechanism (ideas for the best way and/or
the sources to raise the money to pay off the winner of the
challenge competition):
Various sources for funding, such as environmental
organizations(Greenpeace, ect.), Universities, Auto
Companies, ect.
--- End Message ---
