EV Digest 3988
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Race scales
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) EVs Needed for Midwest Show
by Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) 300zx conversion
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: The Amazing Little Hawkers.
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Range + Golf cart vs. AGM wars
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: EVs Needed for Midwest Show
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: 300zx conversion
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Lithium-Ion Batteries
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: The Amazing Little Hawkers.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: The Amazing Little Hawkers.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Brush help
by Jude Anthony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tires?
by "Gabriel Alarcon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Range + Golf cart vs. AGM wars
by "John Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: The Amazing Little Hawkers.
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Follow-up on Valence Li-Ion batteries in 12V size
by Dragan Stancevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Race scales
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
17) Chargeing questions
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Refined hybrid truck ideas
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
19) Manufacturing an input shaft
by Dragan Stancevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Manufacturing an input shaft
by Seth Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Initial EV plans
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Manufacturing an input shaft
by Dragan Stancevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: 144V vs 108 V performance
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
These have been used for racing for years, they are a little inconvient
in that you can't make ramps and drive up on them, but very ggod for
garage work.
Ebay item # 4514698552
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4514698552&category=43998&sspagename=WDVW
these guys are on here a lot and the they say 1200 lbs/corner, good
thing as EV's get heavy.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This came in our email. It's too far away for us, but maybe some other
listers would like to participate.
Shari Prange
Hello, We have a show, Wings & Wheels, featuring custom and classic autos,
motorcycles and aircraft on August 12 & 13, 2005 at the Central Illinois
Regional Airport, Bloomington, IL. This year we would like to feature
electric and alternative energy autos in the show. I found your
information on the Internet, and am sending this email to you because you
may have an interest in our show.
This will be our third year. Our primary draw has been our airplane rides
in vintage aircraft. We also have radio-controlled aircraft and car
demonstrations, had kites and a drag car demonstration at the last show,
and would like to include alternative fuel vehicles in our show and in our
promotion this year.
The show will be in the parking lot of the old terminal, and we can
arrange demonstrations of the vehicles (by driving them on a course in the
parking lot) with information about them announced on the PA. I hope you
are interested in showing your own vehicle—there is no charge—and maybe
you know of other interested groups or individuals. If so, please forward
this email to them.
We also have vendor opportunities at $85 for a 10x10' booth space, $45 for
each additional 10x10' space. Admission for the public is free.
Thank you, and have Happy Holidays!
Nancy Churchill
Wings & Wheels
August 12 & 13, 2005
Central Illinois Regional Airport
Bloomington, IL, Rt. 9 West
www.wingsnwheelsbn.com
toll free 877-206-1501
1114 North Main St.
Normal, IL 61761
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Orbitals or perhaps surplus nicad?( don't like the low cell voltage).
Maybe start with orbitals then transition to orbitals with li-ion for
range. I agree it would be sacralidge to put flodded in a 300zx
I want this to be a tire smoking beast, but recognize a weight issue. (
I can't be to hypocritical on weight, the driver can stand to loose 100
himself!)
The ICE and all it's trim+fuel is at least 1/2 the battery+ motor
weight, I am hoping I am good with that.
I am buying a set of scales and will start weighing everything as I
build it. I took over 800 lbs off my mitsubisi PU when I was
autocrossing it.
I do understand load dispersion on unibodies and will be pop-rivioting
saddle plates where I add mounts and plan on using isolation on high
vibration parts like the motor plate, it will be directly mounted to the
pseudo frame with an alum plate and urethane bushings.
book on edge of dollar bill, hehe, 3 ways ; sofar :-)
I will try to avoid rear weight bias at all costs, even less range, I
have driven rear weight biased vehicles on and off track, and they are
at best "twitchy" always want to swap ends.
even a 50-50 bias Is bad, because it changes during weight transfer and
ends up going from rear to front to rear bias again. Not fun.
Would LOVE a zilla 2K to go with that 14degree advanced warp 9 and 300
volts of orbitals, but, damn, every part of conversion can't cost
1000's, I'll never finish, At least I have access to a machine shop and
can build anything. Maybe later, then move Z1K to 2nd conversion.
I am surprised you said you wouldn't convert a 300zx, I didn't think
3000 was that much more than what is being converted. At least it has
big brakes and a stout rear end with independent suspension. What was
the weight of a 510? john?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don't bet on it ;^> 2.5A will still vent your pack if you hold it long
enough; even 1A (or less) can. I don't think the recombination reaction
can keep up with more than a very low current indefinitely; the higher
rates (like 0.05C specified by Hawker) almost certainly take into
account the amount of head space in the battery for gasses to accumulate
pending recombination and the maximum durations that the current is to
be sustained.
True, the Dolphin does taper that 2.5 down to less than 1 as you pass
the 360 mark; question becomes will the battery gas if exposed to 1amp
fot 50 minutes.
Absolutely; a sensible question. Pick a number between about 13.5 and
14.7V/module and run full current up to this level, then drop the
current limit to something you are comfortable with and continue the
rest of the way to the 14.7V/module level. If you have your LED
monitors installed, you could pick the initial voltage level and
following current such that you get the quickest recharge without any
module going over-voltage for an excessive time. You would probably
find that you need to charge more gently with a fresh pack as well as
with an old one that is less well-balanced.
This is starting to make sense. What I can do is change the charge
program to charge full-blast to say 332 volts or so, then shift to the
5amps to 350, then 1.5 to 367, then hold 367 for 50 mins at a rate of
<1amp. Since I have been watching the charger as of late with the
E-meter I can tell with a fair degree of accuacy if the result winds up
with an under or over charged battery.
Really interesting will be to see how much time it spends in each phase
of the charge.
Unfortunately, we just don't know. *If* Hawker's reasons are similar to
USBMC's, then perhaps charging at high rates for the first few minutes
of bulk will yield most or all of the benefits; this is something that
you can experiment with - it certainly can't be *worse* for the pack to
give it 5-10min of C/3 at the start of charge than to charge it at 2.5A
with the Dolphin every time.
True. I'll see how much benefit charging the pack at 20amps to 13volts
average will do.
Something I would seriously consider is replacing the pack with a single
string of larger AGMs, such as Optima YTs, Exide Orbitals, or the Deka
Intimidators. The D34 YTs, for instance would provide about the same
capacity as your present pack (even though you apparently seldom use the
full capacity anyway). Going to a single string makes charging a bit
more predictable and cuts your number of modules in half (a reasonable
cost savings if you were to install regs).
Would do this in a heartbeat, except for the bane of the Prizm: The pack
is mounted low and in a tight spot. I'd have to put them in the trunk
and rear seat area of the car, which would wipe it out as a useful
automobile. The car also handles like it is on rails now due to the
1,000lbs of weight arranged under the car and right in the center.
Moving that to the trunk would increae the polar moments, and would make
the car roll around.
Now, there is those lithium batteries in the U1 size. A pack of those
would weigh 300lbs, have a 40ah size (about the size of the hawkers when
you take into account the 1C shrinkage in lead batteries) and have all
the built in regs in the world. Two strings would be an 80ah pack that
is 400lbs lighter than what I have in there. 80-100 miles of range,
400lbs less weight.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Ok, I'm drooling now.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roger Stockton wrote:
>I had the opportunity to go for a test ride in mid
>Dec, now that he is over the 500Hp mark, and I can
>honestly state that I would be *thrilled* with an EV
>with this level of performance, flooded, AGM, or
>gerbils in the battery box! ;^>
If only the guy who owned that monster diesel truck ran it
on straight vegetable oil. He'd see about a 7% horsepower
increase AND wouldn't need a drop of gas. Imagine the
cockeyed looks people would be giving him at the track then.
"Veggie Truck".
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Electro Automotive wrote:
>This came in our email. It's too far away for us, but
>maybe some other listers would like to participate.
I heard about some Alternative Fuel Drag races in Joliet,
Illinois, next year. If I only had an idea of who was going
to be there and if there is even going to be a turnout. I'd
love to attend an event like this.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jeff Shanab wrote:
>At least it has big brakes and a stout rear end with
>independent suspension. What was the weight of a 510?
I know this question wasn't adressed to me, but over a year
ago when I was looking for conversion candidates, I remember
a fully-outfitted 510 with no driver and a full tank being
around 2,350-2,400 pounds. A stripped version modded for
racing could get down to about 1,750 pounds, I think.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I can deal with mounting and wiring up 12, 12 volt
batteries.
But I don't like the thought of having to mount and wire 96
bats...
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/images/bat_paral.jpg
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/images/box_trial.jpg
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/images/bat_full.jpg
~$8,960 - 345V pack
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/main2.htm
http://www.metricmind.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Great post, Rich!
Rich Rudman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have seen 399 Hp at 750 plus from one of those Duramax
> Trucks. On a Dyno.... Turbo Tech's Dyno in Tacoma , Wa for
> real Hp. I helped tie it to the hardpoints on the Dyno. Holy
> S!!! . I don't like GM anything, But the Duramax and the
> Allison tranny are my Fav for real hard work.
Yeah, my buddy started out a Ford man too, but it took a lot more tricks
to get a Powerstroke near the 400HP level (including propane injection),
and reliability dropped way down. At 500HP+ his Duramax is still
running stock injectors and turbo. So far it looks like the Allison
tranny will be the weak link...
> EV mode... the tow Rig for the Gone Postal trailer is a
> Duramax..
Even more EV mode: if there was ever any doubt about what Gone Postal is
capable of achieving once it gets all of its power to the track, the
quarter mile performance of my buddy's Duramax ought to give some
reassurance. 7000lbs, 482HP, 910ft-lbs (both at the rear wheels), and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gone Postal is a svelte 4000-4500lbs in comparison,
and has somewhere around 500 battery HP on tap doesn't it? It may not
get quite as much HP to the ground as the Duramax, but it probably
delivers similar or greater torque. The aerodynamics are probably
comparable, and while with a bit less HP to the ground Gone Postal may
have a bit of a struggle to break the 100mph mark, I don't expect it to
have much trouble at all dipping well into the 12's.
> The point of this reply.
> You certainly DO still need the regs.!!
OK; I need you to educate me on this point, because I don't see it.
You described how the regs form part of the control loop such that if
amy module exceeds its regulation setpoint, it signals the charger to
cutback. The charger reduces the current limit until all the regs are
happy again.
If this is the case, then what is the benefit of a full featured 2.5A
regulator instead of a simpler, cheaper voltage sensor other than
perhaps 2.5A more charge current? As far as I can tell, once the
charger can "see" the individual module voltages, then it can adjust the
charge rate to whatever is required to keep the highest voltage module
at or below whatever setpoint you choose. At this point, the only
benefit I can see to being able to bypass 2.5A around any module is that
the charger can 2.5A more through the non-bypassed modules.
Sure, this will reduce charge time... slightly. I think we largely
agree that the regs do their thing mostly *after* the bulk charge, and
except in the case of Madman level charge currents, most of the Ah are
returned in the bulk phase. In the case of Madman level charging, only
50% of the Ah may be returned in bulk, but just how much impact on
charge duration is there between cutting back to 75A (with regs) or
72.5A (without) from 80A (for example)? Once the current starts
tapering, it usually tapers pretty quick and without regs it seems you
would taper exactly the same as with, just 2.5A lower in level.
> Yes.. the recombiners should hold thier own.
> But..... and this is a Big Butt, I have never seen the
> recombiners stay up with even a 2amp constant over charge.
> This is WHY the Zivans on the Sparrows kill the Optima Yts
> in such a short order. Even at 2 amps Gassing happens. And I
> don't care who says they do or don't!!!
As of this past August, the word from Dr. John Olson of Optima fame is
that 4A is the maximum recombination current an Optima will support
without thermal runaway, and that 2A for 1hr will result in a loss of
less than 1g of H2O even if all of the energy goes into electrolysis.
Optima's definitely gas at 2A, they may even vent at 2A (I've seen it at
lower currents too).
Is this why Zivan's on Sparrows kill YTs? Who knows; this is at least
the 3rd plausible theory I've heard.
> I have seen gassing as low as 15 volts at 500
> milliamps. With a new set of Yts, half a amp will drive them
> to 17 some odd volts. So.... You still need Regs..
This is where we can only agree to disagree; as far as I'm concerned
once you're over the gassing threshold you worry about current to
regulate the gassing rate and avoid venting; let the voltage go where it
wants to so the plates can fully charge. The only hesitation I have
here is that Hawker recommends a maximum of 15.6V for their batteries,
so I would observe this, however, they also state that the finish charge
must continue for the full duration even if the voltage hits this limit,
so I still wouldn't use a reg unless I could kick it up to the higher
finish voltage limit.
> Umm I tried this, knowing what you know Roger.... I killed
> the Yt pack in my Fiero in less than 18 months... Alway had a
> voltage controlled charger, Never ran it dead, filled often
> just to top off. DEAD in 18 months, less than 1/2 range
I can't help but have difficulty reconciling the phrase "conservative
charge algorithm" and Madman in the same context ;^>
It doesn't serve anybody for me to try and guess what you did or didn't
do, in the end all that matters is that whatever you tried didn't work
for you. My goal is not to charge in the shortest possible time, but
rather to charge sucessfully without regs, since my (employer's)
customers won't build regs into their vehicles and applications. I have
no doubt that it can be done, but I'm pretty certain that the charge
times would be too long for you.
> Limit pack current, Umm that's a time penalty...
Yep, that is the tradeoff.
> and a it becomes a Wild ASS guess... Also the abuse of the regs
> depends on the history of the pack... DOD, temps,
> selfdischarge.... how hard it was just pulled down, and Moon
> phase.... And what sign it's under.....etc. The biggie.. is
> how unequalized is the pack??? has it been pushed to Equal,
> or pulled farther apart???? You need some knowledge of the
> past to predict the future...OR....Regs and live in the present.
There is certainly some truth to this, however, the situation is not as
bleak as you might think.
> First the Mk2b Regs have a "equalize" mode that kicks the Reg
> voltage up 1.5 volts.. just for this need.
Excellent; I was pretty sure they did, but not certain enough to say one
way or the other.
> I would sure expect the the extra volt would certainly push a
> gassing batteries internal pressure MUCH higher. Though if
> the Amps are the same, the Coulombic generation of gasses is
> the same.
I'm not sure why you think the extra volt should have any effect on the
rate of gassing. As you observe, the rate of generation of gasses is
proportional to the current.
> I would not want my batteries to be in this
> situation....at all. 14.8 and NO gassing....
To each his own; my understanding is that Optima specifially states that
the voltage be unlimited during the 2A finish, and that Hawker allows
the finish voltage to hit 15.6V specifically because this is required in
order to fully recharge the plates.
Back at the bulk/absorption transition there is no argument: 14.8V and
no gassing is a happy place to be.
> As Ryan is finding out ...maybe we should drop the end
> voltage for Orbitals down to 14.6, instead of the Optima
> Yellow Top tried and true 14.8 volts. Orbs do seam to vent at
> a lower voltage.
This is venting at the bulk/absorption transition that you're seeing?
> The regs on my Orbs seamed to get crasy about 277, Even when
> my Regs are set to 14.8(*19)= 281. 284 lit all the regs hard
> on!. 281 was a quite flicker from about 1/2 the pack.
> 277, an not a reg fired.
That all the regs lit on at 284V is not too surprising, but that not a
reg fired at 277V (14.6V/module) is impressive! Any chance that you
have been logging individual module voltages during some/all of these
cycles and will make this data available in some form on your site?
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris Zach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is starting to make sense. What I can do is change the charge
> program to charge full-blast to say 332 volts or so, then
> shift to the 5amps to 350, then 1.5 to 367, then hold 367 for 50
> mins at a rate of <1amp. Since I have been watching the charger as
> of late with the E-meter I can tell with a fair degree of accuacy
> if the result winds up with an under or over charged battery.
>
> Really interesting will be to see how much time it spends in
> each phase of the charge.
332V (13.3V/module) is quite conservative, but still ought to let your
pack see full current for at least the first few mimutes of each charge.
You might have to vary the 50min final duration until the E-Meter shows
that you're achieving the desired 5-10% overcharge.
Let us know how it works out!
> > Something I would seriously consider is replacing the pack with a
> > single string of larger AGMs,
>
> Would do this in a heartbeat, except for the bane of the
> Prizm: The pack is mounted low and in a tight spot. I'd have to put
> them in the trunk and rear seat area of the car, which would wipe it
> out as a useful automobile.
I'm certainly not suggesting putting the batteries anywhere but in the
stock location! Your 26Ah Hawkers are just a hair under 5" tall
(4.96"), and the D51 YTs are just a hair over 5" tall if you lay them on
their side (5.0625"). It seems to me that there is more than a fighting
chance that you could squeeze 25 D51 YTs into your existing box, but
even if not, having a new box fabricated that is 1/4"-1/2" deeper (or a
spacer to fit between the box and the floorpan of the car) would likely
be cost-effective in the long run (i.e. 25 YTs has *got* to be enough
cheaper than 50 Hawkers to recover the fabrication cost PDQ).
The D51's are just 41Ah vs your present 52Ah, but if there is any
headroom available on your charger/controller, perhaps you can make up
some of the difference by installing a couple extra modules to crank the
pack up to 336-360V. Unfortunately, the full-size 55Ah D34 YT is
6.8125" tall when laying on its side, which would mean making the
battery box nearly 2" deeper to accommodate them... something which is
probably unacceptable.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We're prepping the motor in anticipation of receiving our adapter.
Nathan's just got the bell housing off; I have pictures at my website:
http://judebert.com/wasted_youth/EV/current.html . Since I've never
seen *good* brushes and commutators before, I have no idea if what I'm
looking at is normal. Hence the pictures. Please visit and comment.
The unsettling news is that we only have two possible settings for our
brushes. Reading my EV archives, it appears that we'll need to drill an
extra set, 10 degrees (or approximately 0.8") in the other direction.
Horrors. I expect to make a cardboard template of the current holes,
move the set screws to the neutral position, flip the cardboard, and
drill new holes. Anybody got any better ideas?
Thanks,
Judebert
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Check out Greenseal.org. They have tested more than a dozen tires and have a
list based on their rolling resistances. I got a price for 4-Bridgestone B381,
their top scorer, 414.21 installed, 185/65R14's.
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Tromley<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 10:16 AM
Subject: RE: Low Rolling Resistance Tires?
Lynn Adams wrote:
> I just purchased a set of Toyo Ultra 800. These tires are
> rated at 44 psi and have 100,000 mile advertized life. I
> have not seen any change in my seasonally adjusted range with
> these tires yet. Can'nt say if they are good or bad, but
> will compare over time and let the list know.
I've had a set of these on my ICE '98 Accord for over a year now. They
replaced the original Michelin MX4s. The most striking difference was the
improved ride of the Toyos. The car has Koni shocks, which always increase
ride harshness (in my experience with 5[?] cars). The Toyos are "like
buttah" compared to the Michelins. They seem to be wearing like iron. No
data on ultimate grip or rolling resistance, but response is on par with the
Michelins.
On this car both the Michelins and the Toyos wear *better* at 44 psi. Nice
and even, no wearing out in the middle. At the (lower) recommended
pressures they wear out quicker on the tread edges.
My only complaint with the Toyos is that I've replaced tires twice due to a
gouge through the sidewall. Can't say for sure, but it might have something
to do thin sidewalls to provide that nice, compliant ride. I got mine at
http://www.etires.com<http://www.etires.com/> . They easily had the best
price, but strung me along
on both the replacement orders. Plan on pestering them.
HTH,
Chris
P.S. Etires also carries Nokian, which might be the next LRR-ish tire I
try.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: Range + Golf cart vs. AGM wars
> Go through the archives and look at Jonathan Dodge's
> electric 914.
Jonathan has been off the EV List for several years, so I
forwarded him the message, so he could see how we're still
talking about him on the List, making him a legend in his own time.
He wrote a reply that will bring everyone up to date on
how his EV is doing these days, which I'll paste in after this.
I just thought I'd mention that my Ghia used to run on floodies.
I had 10 Trojan 27 TMHs, the same type as Jonathan was originally
using. With a Curtis 1221b, I would guess that my car's performance
was very nearly identical to the stock Ghia and it had a measured,
worse case scenario range of 40 miles. The funny thing......
is that I was expecting to eat V8s and lay 30' of rubber with
that setup. Anyway, here's what's new with Jonathan and his 914.
...John
--------------------
I have 775 cycles on my Optimas, and over 14,000 electric miles on the 914.
Recharge efficiency is 99%. Deepest discharge is ~28Ahrs. I don't have
regulators. Well, actually I have some prototype "Regulators Lite" from Lee
Hart, but they don't dissipate enough power to really do much. Over time
though, maybe they do. The pack is very well balanced. I don't do any
equalization other then about once a week, after the batteries are already
charged, I plug in the charger again. This makes it run through the taper
charge again, which is kind of like an equalization cycle because the
batteries are already full, and the charger runs about an hour and twenty
minutes in the taper mode. These Optima batteries are 6 years old, and I
have been driving with them for 5+ years now. I parked the car for 2
winters, which was a mistake. The batteries hold up better when used, and I
lost 2 of the 16 batteries. I'm amazed that all the others aren't bad by
now. They are getting soft. Part of that is the colder weather, but they
are starting to act a little old.
What has helped more than anything is the on-board charger that I built
because it has a good two-stage algorithm with a plenty "rounded corner"
going from bulk charge mode to taper mode. By rounded corner, I found that
keeping the current fixed until the pack voltage reached 2.44 V/cell (@ 25
deg. C) would cause thermal runaway on warm days, so I lowered the voltage
(I don't remember off hand the value) where it transitions from bulk to
taper mode. (The charger is ambient temperature compensated.) Since then,
the charger has never under any circumstance taken the batteries into the
deadly thermal runaway condition, whereas earlier chargers would. After the
taper charge, which always ends up less than 1 Amp, the charger shuts itself
off. It is so nice to plug it in a walk away, knowing the charger is taking
good care of the batteries.
The other thing that has helped is charging both at home and at work. The
batteries would possibly be worn out by now if it weren't for this. I can
make the 22Ahr round-trip without charging in between, but charging after
11Ahr each way has definitely extended the lifetime of the batteries. I
also found it very convenient because the car is always full. I can run
errands without worries.
The boat batteries were a good experiment. I had more range but also more
weight and a short life. After 18 solid months of abuse, they were done.
AGMs with a decent charger and shallow discharges definitely outlast boat
batteries, even under the same conditions.
I drive very conservatively. After buying this second battery pack, I
really couldn't care less if I'm faster than another car. The irony is the
914 is faster with the lighter, higher performance AGMs than before. Not a
huge difference though. Anyway, with the 168V pack, I try to keep the
battery current below 200A at all times. It is capable of higher current
for sure, and sometimes I do need to punch it. Normally I can keep up with
around-the-town traffic with less than 200A for accelerating, and less than
100A once up to speed (usually less than 45mph on my way to work and back).
I am convinced that keeping the current down has helped the batteries last
so long. It also puts less stress on connectors, controller, motor brushes,
etc.
Take care, and I wish you a good and happy new year!
Jonathan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 01:11 PM 30/12/04 -0800, Gadget wrote:
I have four strings of Hawkers on my EMW, and I have
the banks cross tied, so that each level of batts is
at the same voltage. I don't have regs on them yet, so
I periodically charge each level independently to keep
them in balance. Does anyone else cross tie their
strings? it seems to work well for me, is there a
reason why I shouldn't?
Gadget
Only by observation - Richard Bebbington had triplet sealed batteries in
his mini, when one was failing, he 'knew something wasn't right' but had no
means to measure what was going on. So the bad one in a triplet pulled down
the others, and *then* he knew where the problem was. I'm sure he'll come
in with his experience if he has an important comment to make.
I'v gone with dual strings, each with their own regulator, so I will be
able to tell when a module goes bad.
James.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thursday 30 December 2004 13:47, Mark Dodrill wrote:
> Looks interesting--I'd encourage others to check it out too. I'll ask
> them about pricing to see if these are unobtainium or not. Maybe we
> could all chip in $10 or $20 to get a few for Rich or Joe to put to
> the test...
I asked them and TS about pricing information and, TS came much much cheaper
than they did.
--
Peace can only come as a natural consequence
of universal enlightenment. -Dr. Nikola Tesla
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 12/30/2004 4:16:08 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Shanab)
These have been used for racing for years, they are a little inconvient
in that you can't make ramps and drive up on them, but very ggod for
garage work. >>
I've made two sets of these, one for a Chevelle stock car (3500#) and one for
a friends sprint car (2000#). $15 worth of steel and spray paint and an
afternoon with a mig and a chop saw.
Hardest part is the trips to the thriftshop to find 4 suitable scales.
With a little practice I could get within .1% on corner weights.
Ben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was considering having a special meter set at my house for chargeing.
The deal is $.05/kwh if I agree to charge only midnight to 7 am.
1. So if I drive to work and school, 24miles total and discharge to 30%
soc, will letting the batteries(AGM) sit from 3 (2 days a week) or
6(3days a week) to midnight, waiting to charge, shorten their life
significantly? I know I have heard not to let them sit discharged, but
is that measured by the hour or the day?
2. If I decide to ask my boss to charge at work, whats a good way of
figurng out how much to pay. Here will be the scenario
up at 5 am get ready and drive the 8 miles to work with lights and heat
at 2:30, drive 8 miles home, shower and get ready for school (1 or 2
hours available to charge during this time)
at 5:30 pm drive 4 miles to school, lights on
at 7pm drive home 4 miles with lights on to home
8+8+4+4 = 24
what would be best?
# miles
+lights
*heater
8+*->charge-> 8 ->4+->4+->charge
8+*-> 8 ->charge->4+->4+->wait til midnight->charge
8+*-> 8 ->charge->4+->4+->charge immidiatly
8+*-> 8 ->4+->4+->charge immidiatly
8+*-> 8 ->4+->4+->wait til midnight->charge //this is the one
I am worried the most about
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Listers,
OK, I think I've got a good plan-of-action set up
to get myself on the road to converting my truck, a 4 cylinder,
2wd, 98 Nissan Frontier that I had originally bought with the
intention of converting to an EV, to a parallel hybrid. I can do
it incrementally (read affordibly) and when I get it as efficient
as I can, I'll install the EV drivetrain. Depending on where I live,
what kind of commute I have, and the resulting range of the
finished hybrid in EV mode, I might be able to make this my
only car.
The first step(s) are to get the truck as efficient as
possible. This is along the same idea that if you are converting
your home to PV power; you first need to get the house as
electrically efficient as possible. Also, getting the truck as
light and aerodynamic as possible means I can have a smaller
EV drivetrain and get the same performance as a larger one.
Efficiency to-do list for truck (pre-hybridization)
1. Weigh truck before any work is started. This will be my
baseline for weight reduction.
2. Install electric water pump and electric radiator cooling
fan. Even though it is more important to make a vehicle
light and more aerodynamic, the bed cap I'm going to make
will take several weeks to finish. The water pump and fan will
take a weekend to install and will give more immediate mpg
savings.
3. Install a vacuum gauge to monitor engine efficiency.
4. Install a tachometer to target most efficient engine rpm.
5. Build cap to improve aerodynamics.
6. Change to synthetic xmsn fluid to reduce resistance,
especially in cold weather.
7. Buy narrower, LRR tires. Inflate with run-flat sealant and
remove the spare tire.
8. Make and install bellypan to improve aerodynamics.
9. Install wheel covers.
10. Remove passenger mirror.
11. Install fender mirror, remove driver side mirror.
12. Convert all the interior and exterior lights (except head-
lights) to LEDs.
13. Insulate cab and tint windows to improve air conditioner
efficiency. Look into electrically driven air conditioner
to allow removal of ac compressor. Or, if possible, run the
current compressor with an electric motor. Any suggestions
on what motor to use to run the compressor? A Scott maybe?
Conversion of so many components from being run
mechanically to being run electrically will probably require the
installation of a high output alternator. When the truck is
finally converted to parallel hybrid, the starter battery will be
removed and the 12v system will be run off of the traction pack
through a dc to dc converter.
14. Convert to manual steering or drive the current power steering
pump with a motor.
15. Make fiberglass rear wheel shrouds.
16. Lightweight bumper.
17. Aluminum pulleys.
18. Aluminum radiator.
19. Aluminum driveshaft.
20. Smaller, aluminum gas tank. The size of the tank will
depend on the increase in mpg. A mileage increase of 15%
would allow you to carry 15% less fuel and have the range
the vehicle currently has. Assuming gasoline weighs 6
lbs a gallon, if you can reduce the amount of gas carried
by 4 gallons, you have saved 24 lbs. While it doesn't
sound like much, over the life of the vehicle, small weight
savings like this add up. This is an example of how
efficiency gains in one area of a vehicle allow more gains
in another.
21. My ultimate goal, as far as the ICE portion goes, is to
convert the truck to diesel. Not only will this even further
improve mileage, it will also allow the use of biodiesel and
waste vegetable oil using the kit available from
Greasecar.com. But until then I will strive to make the truck
as efficient as possible, for my own benefit and to show the
others what is possible with a little work and creativity.
Hybridization-
1. Get a 4x4 front axle.
2. Get an 8" or 6.7" 96v ADC motor.
3. Find a gearbox to reduce rpm of motor to that of the xmsn
in second gear.
4. Tilt the bed.Can anyone recomend a tilt kit?
5. Build mount, blower, and cover for motor and get a driveshaft
built.
6. Make battery boxes.
7. Get controller, charger, etc.
8. Install everything, buy batteries.
9. Electric only odometer. Actually I don't even know if something
like this can be done. I'd like to have a seperate odometer that
would count the miles only when in EV mode. Ideas?
I'm going to film/photograph/document the entire process
and publish it all on a website and maybe even make a DVD so
anyone else could copy what I do to convert their vehicle. As you
can see I've had a lot of time on my hands to think and plan (been
standing lots of watches)! Any ideas, comments and criticisms are
welcome. Thanks.
John Shelton
__________________________________________________________________
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This may sound silly but has anyone tried manufacturing a new transmission
input shaft?
The output shaft of my motor is ~4" long and it has been bugging me immensely
because it is too long and requires a big distance between the motor and the
clutch bell. So I've been thinking of just manufacturing a new input shaft
for the transmission that would be shorter and have the the spline that would
couple with the motor output shaft.
Has anyone tried this before.
Thanks.
--
Peace can only come as a natural consequence
of universal enlightenment. -Dr. Nikola Tesla
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yep. Well, technically, it was an ac induction motor armature with a
transmission shaft spline on it. Heat treated 4340 steel. I would
actually suggest taking the existing shaft, cutting it down and using
loctite in a sleeve to rejoin the parts *if* you have adequate bonding
area. Loctite 620 is what I used to join two other parts in the
drivetrain that took a lot of torque. Enough to spin the tires on a 16
ton Kenworth (hybrid) truck, so the stuff will hold if you do the math
right. Yes, people will think you are crazy, but it can work.
Seth
On Dec 30, 2004, at 11:31 PM, Dragan Stancevic wrote:
This may sound silly but has anyone tried manufacturing a new
transmission
input shaft?
The output shaft of my motor is ~4" long and it has been bugging me
immensely
because it is too long and requires a big distance between the motor
and the
clutch bell. So I've been thinking of just manufacturing a new input
shaft
for the transmission that would be shorter and have the the spline
that would
couple with the motor output shaft.
Has anyone tried this before.
Thanks.
--
Peace can only come as a natural consequence
of universal enlightenment. -Dr. Nikola Tesla
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Still at the early planning stages here.
A quick basic drawing:
http://img150.exs.cx/img150/5492/ev1uo.gif
In that example, would the Anderson Connectors be able to
handle the amps in all those situations? The thing I like
about that setup is everything can be disconnected and it's
all modular. Just seems like an idyllic setup too me.
Or, could all that be hardwired together? If it was, could
the charger be used and it not have any effect on the
controller for example?
Now for the "safety" items, I can only imagine something
happening in the motor, controller, or charger to cause a
short. Where does a circuit breaker and/or a fuseable link
or two fit into that above drawing?
Any(if any?) advantages to using say a Warp 11" motor
instead of a 8" or 9" in a ~2500lb car?
144v vs 192v?
16 batteries in series = more range compared to 12 bats in
series right?
Also, how are all these gauges connected to the system?
http://www.electroauto.com/catalog/gauges.shtml
2500lb car, 9" motor, 144 or even 192 volts. Ballpark
figures for 0-60 and 1/4 mile time? ~6 seconds 0-60 and
14's in the 1/4? (I'm dreaming right? :) ) Any range
estimates?
Thanks for any and all info. Constructive criticism
welcome.
Regards
Ryan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thursday 30 December 2004 20:44, Seth Allen wrote:
> Yep. Well, technically, it was an ac induction motor armature with a
> transmission shaft spline on it. Heat treated 4340 steel. I would
> actually suggest taking the existing shaft, cutting it down and using
> loctite in a sleeve to rejoin the parts *if* you have adequate bonding
> area. Loctite 620 is what I used to join two other parts in the
> drivetrain that took a lot of torque. Enough to spin the tires on a 16
> ton Kenworth (hybrid) truck, so the stuff will hold if you do the math
> right. Yes, people will think you are crazy, but it can work.
So here's the thing, the motor shaft looks like this:
http://www.metricmind.com/images/5133shaft.jpg
So what I would like is to make a transmission input shaft that would slide
onto the motor shaft, just like this adapter:
http://www.metricmind.com/images/hub3.jpg
I'm going to take apart the transmission tomorrow just to see how complicated
is this particular input shaft(shape wise). If it's not too complicated I
could probably spin it on my lathe out of a 4340 steel rod, and than ship it
to someone to make the DIN spline to fit onto the motor, and than heat threat
it. The way it looks now is that it would be cheaper than buying all that
extra aluminum and extra milling to pad the difference.
But what you are suggesting is interesting too. If I machined a sleeve that
fit onto the tranny input shaft and on the spline adapter on the other side
it could work too. I would just need to cut off the input shaft short and
make a sleeve. Interesting.
http://www.metricmind.com/images/hub4_.jpg
Or perhaps since I do have the shaft adapter in picture above maybe I could
just spin a tranny input shaft that would mate onto the keyway on the shaft
adapter. I don't like having so many extra couplings but it might work just
as well and making a keyway is much cheaper than an internal spline.
--
Peace can only come as a natural consequence
of universal enlightenment. -Dr. Nikola Tesla
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Assuming that you keep the same motor, gearing, and controller:
1. The batteries will need to produce 33% more current to produce the same
power (144/108)
2. The motor will need 33% more current to make the same power.
3. The power peak will occur at 25% lower RPM causing your shift points to
be lower.
4. The motor back EMF will be the same at the same RPM. With 25% less
voltage, the current it draws at the same RPM will also be reduced by 25%,
causing the available power at the same RPM to be reduced by 46%.
(108/144)^2
5. To maintain the same speed, you will need to be in a 33% taller gear to
pull the same power from the battery.
6. The motor will be turning 25% slower to make the same power causing it to
draw 33% more current causing the I^2R losses to increase 77%, the fan
losses to decrease by 44% and the cooling to drop ~25%.
In summary:
1. The car will accelerate significantly slower on the freeway.
2. The motor will run hotter at the same power level.
3. You will probably wish you had another (higher) gear in the gearbox. (If
you never used fifth gear before, you probably will start using it)
To reengineer the car for the lower voltage you need:
1. Higher amperage controller (allows more battery current to make up for
the lack of battery voltage)
2. Lower voltage motor (Lower back EMF to allow it to draw more current at
higher speeds and Lower internal resistance to reduce I^2R losses).
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adams, Lynn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:49 AM
Subject: 144V vs 108 V performance
> I am considering reducing my pack voltage from 144 V to 108 V in the
> next battery pack replacement and am curious to know what performance
> change I can expect. I currently am using 18 T875's 8V flooded golf
> cart batteries and am considering changing to 18 T125's (cannot quite
> fit T145's-maybe if I raise the hood...). My controller is a T-rex 600,
> motor ADC 8 inch (name plate rated at 96V).
>
> My commute is 43 miles, recharge at work and 43 miles home. To
> comfortably handle this range, I need a solid usable 60 mile range of
> mixed surface street and highway speeds. I have battery current draws
> between 60A (on flat) to 200 (on the big hills), with an average draw of
> about 90 amps. For the 43 miles I usually use less than 10KWH (by the
> emeter) from the battery. The largest draw I have ever seen on the
> emeter is 350A, while accelerating up a big hill to see how much current
> I could draw.
>
> To summarize, with the 144 V pack I am now getting:
>
> Top range: 60 miles
> Typical %discharge at 43 miles 75%
> Typical KWH for 43 miles 10 KWH
> Acceleration: stock civic like-keeps up with traffic easily, including
> high speed merges
> Pack life: about 12,000 miles
>
> What could I expect with 108 V of T125's?
> Range ?
> %discharge at 43 ?
> KWH used should be about the same?
> Acceleration: slower, faster (ability to deliver more current), about
> the same?
> Pack life?
>
>
>
> Of course the other option I'm actually considering (but searching for
> funds)
> 156 V system using SAFT STM 5-140's. What could I expect from this
> pack?
>
>
> I'll be doing something in the next couple months and would be
> interested to get the list's opinion.
>
>
> Thanks
> Lynn
>
> Commuting through Denver Colorado every day!
> See my 100% electric car at http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/379.html
>
>
--- End Message ---
