EV Digest 4033
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Fw: EV Charter (Re: Politics v. advocacy was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
by "Dave Davidson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Transmissions
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: How to take action, EM, EV truck? (was: RE: save the EV Rangers)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: EV Marriage made in Heaven - WHAT No Comments ???
by "MYLES ANTHONY TWETE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Fwd: Re: Politics vs. advocacy (was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
by Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: NO POLITICS - READ THIS
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Building big EVs, was Re: EV Pusher Trailers?
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) OT: Hydrogen Not Zero Emissions (was: Drunk on hydrogen.)
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Transmissions (LONG, higher-performance questions)
by Christopher Robison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) geared bike hubs
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Building big EVs, was Re: EV Pusher Trailers?
by Felix Gardner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Fw: EV Charter (Re: advocacy was: Backdoor Politics)
by "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Transmissions (LONG, higher-performance questions)
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Backdoor Politics...come on guys, knock it off!
by Marvin Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I support a separate list for EV related politics. Not everyone has the
time, knowledge, place, or desire to build an EV, but still wants to drive
one.To them, manufacturers destroying EVs at the end of lease is very
important. Lack of available production electric vehicles outside of
California is an issue to those of us living other places. Also, California
is the only state allowed to make it's own antipollution laws. Other states
can only adopt California's rules or go with the federal rules.
Think our government doesn't ban things? Try importing a production EV from
Europe, such as a Pugeot 101 Electric, or Citreon Saxo Electric or a Renault
electric pickup (pardon my spelling). Can't be done. The US Government bans
these vehicles in this country.
On a more local level, electric scooters (whether built or purchased) are
banned in many localities. Can't ride them on bike trails because they are
motor vehicles. Can't ride on the street because they don't meet the motor
vehicle standards, and can't be licensed.
I personally don't object to politics of this nature on the list and
possible actions to affect the political climate, laws, etc. I thought this
came under the heading of the future direction of EVs. However, I strongly
object to the name calling, ridiculing, etc. That does not belong on any
list.
I have friends of all political beliefs. We can get into some heated
discussions, and sometimes have to agree to disagree. However, knowing why
folks who agree with them much more than with me still want to have and
drive EVs helps me when talking to them. Also, those of us who may disagree
with each other on many if not most topics can still come together and work
together on a common goal if we just respect each other. We can actually be
stronger because of our different beliefs and better able to argue for EVs
from all points of view.
If this list is to be only for the technical aspects of EV construction,
then another list for EV (only) related politics and political action is
needed. I will certainly join.
Dave Davidson
Glen Burnie, MD
1993 Dodge TEVan
From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Subject: Fw: EV Charter (Re: Politics v. advocacy was: Re: Backdoor
Politics)
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:24:38 -0500
David Roden hello,
Mark Klemkosky appears irritated at the politics on the EVDL. I sent the
attached email.
Steve Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 12:12 PM
Subject: EV Charter (Re: Politics v. advocacy was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
> The EV List is very good for tips and ideas on how to build an EV.
> I don't think we need more people telling what is OT (Off Topic). I
think the charter
> needs to be more evenly applied by members for themselves.
> According to the list's charter:
> The EV Electric Vehicle Discussion Mailing List is intended to
provide a forum to
> discuss the current state of the art and future direction of electric
vehicles. It is
not
> intended to discuss either EV appropriateness or comparisons with other
transportation
> primary drive modes such as the venerable internal combustion engine.
Those discussions
> are best relegated to the appropriate usenet newsgroup.
> An electric vehicle is any vehicle which uses an electric motor as
the primary or
> sole motive force. The energy storage device used to drive said motor
can use any
> technology including, but not limited to, solar electric, electric
battery, fuel cell,
> internal combustion engine coupled with a electric generator (hybrids),
or any
combination
> of these.
> Production electric vehicles are currently available. Internal
combustion engine
> vehicles can be converted to electric power. There exists a number of
companies who
> perform this conversion. There is also a number of manufacturers of
equipment allowing
you
> to "do it yourself."
>
> The EVTech list is another related EVDL list for more technical
electrical 'internals'
of
> controllers, etc. It could be a great primary list. Mark, I think it may
be exactly what
> you want.
> We don't live in a country where the Gov't bans things but it does
ignore and de-fund
> things. The major car companies need to pay their pensions to UAW
workers which is why
> the cars have rebates and also the 0% down finance options. They are
incidently still
> losing money on cars. They make profit by volume sales.
> I could go on. The current funding of Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars is partly
a government
> effort.
> Steve Love -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Klemkosky, Mark A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 10:33 PM
> Subject: Re: Politics vs. advocacy (was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
>
>
> > Yawn. Again, what does this have to do about> building EV's????
This is wasted
> bandwidth. Until the gov't attempts to "ban" EV's I don't think these
types
> > of topics are relevant.
> > --Mark
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> > Sent: Sat Jan 15 19:25:12 2005
> > Subject: Politics vs. advocacy (was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
>
> > The thing is, the movement against EV's is happening on a bipartisan
> > basis--from Republican presidents to Democratic California governors
> > and CARB members, to senators and representatives on both side of
> > the aisle. Some have malicious intent, some are just paid off by
> > automakers and energy companies, and the rest believe the hype and
> > blindly follow whatever they read in the paper and see on TV.
> > The real problem here is automakers and oil companies. They are doing
> > whatever it takes to secure their current business plans of
high-margin
> > oil and high-margin SUV's and large cars.
> > I'm all for EV advocacy on this list, including write-in campaigns to
'right
> > the wrongs' perpetrated by biased or ignorant journalists and pundits.
If
> > we don't advocate for EV's, they will be taken away--first by removing
> > existing charging infrastructure, then by outlawing NEV's, and finally
by
> > outlawing conversions. It can happen very quickly, and it's up to the
> > people on this list to be vigilant of these attacks.
> > I'm all for eliminating political attacks on this list, but if
advocacy is moved
> > to another list, then I fear that we'll be undermined without even
knowing
> > about it. EV'ing won't be any fun if it gets limited to racetracks by
> > lawmakers.
> > Tim
>
> > -------
> > > Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:23:04 -0700
> > > To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> > > From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: Re: Backdoor Politics...come on guys, knock it off!
>
> > > There has been no objection whatsoever in the past about
the
> > > discussion of identical negative EV comments made on TV, radio, or
in
> > > magazines. We collectively write letters to the author or the
publisher. We
> > > send educational Emails collectively. We discuss the best course of
action
> > > to fix the damage done and perhaps attempt to educate the
misinformed
> > > author of the negative comments.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Felix Gardner wrote:
> Will someone explain to me how much of a hassle it is to use an
> automatic transmission with an EV, and what the pros and cons are.
First, the cons.
Most automatic transmissions are less efficient than manual
transmissions. Using one in your EV conversion will shorten your range a
bit (maybe 10%). But, a lot of newer autos have locking torque
converters. With one of these, their efficiency can be as good as a
manual transmission.
Or, you can eliminate the torque converter. Electric motors don't need
it; they have plenty of torque as-is. Shifting is harsher, but on some
transmissions you can re-valve it to shift much more softly.
Automatic transmissions have become very complex, and their controls are
now tangled into the engine controls. It can be very difficult in a
modern car to get the transmission to shift "right" with an electric
motor. You may have to "put up" with the auto shifting far too soon, and
forcing the electric motor to run at a much lower than optimal rpm. This
can be fixed if you can find information on "racing" mods that allow you
to change the shift points.
Automatics need hydraulic pressure to operate. This pressure comes from
a pump driven by the transmission's input shaft, so it has pressure even
at idle. But electric motors don't need to idle. So you stop at a red
light; the motor stops, the transmission loses hydraulic pressure, and
quits working. When the light turns green, the motor revs up but you go
nowhere. A second later, the pump has restored pressure and the
transmission engages with a *lurch*. The effect is much like shifting
into neutral, revving up the engine, and THEN dumping it into "drive".
You can fix this problem by a) letting the electric motor idle to
maintain pump operation, b) add an external electric motor to run the
transmission's pump, c) add an external electric motor *and* pump to
replace the transmission's internal pump. d) ignore the problem, and
pretend you're a teenager (vroom, screech)!
So, the bottom line is that you can use an automatic; but it will either
cost you a little range or be a lot more work. Manuals are just easier.
Of course, EVs don't really need any transmission at all. Notice that
none of your EVs at work have a transmission! But, the transmission
comes for "free" in most cars. If it is merged into the differential
(transaxle), you can't easily get rid of it. It's there whether you like
it or not!
> Can an EV work without a clutch, if so what are the advantages and
> disadvantages? Are EV harder on transmissions than ICE?
Yes, EVs work fine without a clutch. You can start in gear from a dead
stop, even on a hill. With a manual transmission, shifting becomes slow,
because you have to wait for the synchronizers to bring the two shafts
to the same speed (let up the throttle, shift into neutral, wait 1-2
seconds for the motor rpm to drop, push it into the next gear).
But you generally don't have to shift an EV very often. Typically, you
just leave it in one gear (like 2nd) most of the time. You might use
reverse, and 3rd gear at 70 mph on the freeway, but that's about it.
> I would like to know about CVT. Are they efficient? Do they actually
> work, if so how do they function?
CVT is a generic name for lots of different technologies. There are
variable-diameter belts like a snowmobile, hydrostatic pump-motor setups
like a garden tractor, cone-wheel setups like the Subaru, and electric
motor-generators like the Toyota Prius.
In general, CVTs give up a little efficiency to get infinitely variable
ratios. They count on the variable ratio giving them more efficiency in
the engine than the CVT takes away. For this to work with an electric
motor, you'd have to replace the usual 80% efficient series DC motor
with an expensive 90% efficient PM motor.
> Can they be optimized customized and modified? Are there any on the
> market, if so are they expensive, where could I get one? What RPM HP
> and how much torque can they handle?
They come in all sizes, from tiny to huge. Giant earthmoving trucks use
them, with wheelmotors for all-wheel drive, for instance. The engine or
motor drives a variable-displacement hydraulic pump, and hydraulic
motors in each wheel provide the motion.
Diesel-electric locomotive use the motor-generator approach, and you can
see what they can pull!
--
"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 ---
Felix Gardner wrote:
> I am immediately asked, "What about an electric truck?" What can
> I say to people I work with to get them more interested in EV?
Tell them, "Hey, let's see if we can put these forklift parts in a car!"
Most people are afraid to go first. But they'll help if you lead the
way.
Get a small used pickup truck with a dead engine. Get a big forklift as
scrap, that has a good motor and controller but is otherwise worthless.
Install the parts. Put a bunch of Sam's Club 6v golf cart batteries in
the bed, to match the forklift's voltage (48v to 72v). Use one series
string of batteries (8-12) if you don't want to go very fast or very
far; two strings (16-24) for good range and performance.
My first EV was a lot like this. A 1974 Datsun pickup, 12 golf cart
batteries, a home-made contactor controller using forklift contactors,
and a 36v 500a motor (actually an aircraft generator). It accellerated
as well as the stock 4-cyl engine, and had a range of 20-25 miles. I
drove it to/from work every day for 2 years. It was cheap and crude, but
the EV bug bit, and I moved on to bigger and better EVs.
--
"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 ---
Uh, Steve, I, for one thought it was good news...didn't post my thoughts,
but I did the next best thing and emailed an EVer here in Portland who I
know has used flexcar many times and intentionally has only one IC car for
his family.
Is the $50 discount a one-time deal or each and every time an EVer drives
in to rent the car?
I presume there'd be a minimum trip/usage requirement for the discount?
Myles Twete
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- "Klemkosky, Mark A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Subject: Re: Politics vs. advocacy (was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
>
> Yawn. Again, what does this have to do about
> buidling EV's???? This is wasted bandwidth. Until the
> gov't attempts to "ban" EV's I don't think these types
> of topics are relevant.
>
Well, what subject occupies more bandwidth here than the problem of batteries
and range?
Politicians are willings to spend billions of your tax dollars in researching
hydrogen technology.
Wouldn't you like to see even a fraction of that going towards solving the most
discussed topic on
this list?
Dave Cover
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lawsuit? Don't waste your time there either. There's no legal basis for
it. Slander is "Oral communication of false statements injurious to a
person's reputation," and no person's reputation has been impugned here.
One man expressed his opinion about EVs. He's entitled to do that. He
happens to have a big soapbox. So it goes. Welcome to the real world:
Freedom of the press belongs to the man who can buy one.
Actually, it might be possible to sue for "Reckless Disregard" of
the truth. Broadcasters and newspapers have a duty to do some sort of
minimal research before they slam a person or a product. If they don't, and
a company or person can show direct financial damage, the person or company
can sue. Anyone that could show direct financial damage from the negative
comments could sue, because Rush (and the network staff) obviously did no
research whatsoever before he made the negative comments. In this case, the
hard part would be to show direct financial damage. That might be a tough
nut to crack in this case.
_ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
\'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=(___)=
U
Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 07:09 AM 1/16/2005, you wrote:
For a range extender for prolonged trips, what size generator would
would be required to power a Ford Ranger conversion? What information
do I need to know to select one?
Felix
Bigger than you think.
If you do the simple calculation for the required KWs (probably 20
kW) it will turn out to be too low when you actually take the vehicle with
the generator on the road. Power factor problems hurt you as does the
weight of the generator. If you elect to tow the generator as a trailer,
you will be even worse off. The aero drag and the rolling resistance chew
up a lot of extra HP.
You would probably need something close to 30 kW. This is a very
big and very expensive generator. In terms of pollution, you would be
better off driving an OEM ICE truck.
A pusher is a much more practical alternative. They are cheaper to
construct, pollute only modestly, and get better fuel economy. If you rig
it all up to have your regen electric drivetrain work in concert with the
pusher, you can likely approach the pollution and mileage numbers of a
factory-built hybrid.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is a little OT, but it is worth a mention.
Hydrogen cars are not "Zero Emissions". They emit hydrogen. If we
go to a hydrogen fleet, it turns out that if the transportation and filling
losses exceed 2%, the released hydrogen will present a serious threat to
the ozone layer. To be safe, the losses should be held to less than 1%.
If we look at the record for CNG and propane, the handling and
storage losses are something like 7%. Hydrogen is a MUCH smaller molecule,
and leaks out much more easily, so the losses should be much much worse.
Extraordinary measures would have to be taken to hold the losses below 1%.
It may not be even possible.
At 11:50 PM 1/15/2005, you wrote:
Nice little rant by a physics teacher. Uses Rav4 EV in one of his arguments.
http://www.therant.info/archive/000519.html
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
_ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
\'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=(___)=
U
Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In trying to decide what I'm going to do with my upcoming project, I
looked into this stuff a bit, and learned a few things about automatic
vs. manual transmissions. For typical conversions, it seems that the
tradeoffs are pretty well understood and documented, manual
transmissions seem simpler and a bit more efficient if you mind your
shift points, and automatics are tricky (you have to creep the motor to
keep the hydraulic pump working) but have been made to work
successfully. In those conversions that have used automatic
transmissions successfully, I have no idea how the mechanism managed to
choose the right shift points, given the very different torque curve of
a DC electric motor. (someone help me out here?)
For higher performance setups though, it seems to me the real
difference is between planetary (like a typical automatic) and
dog-and-gear (typical manual) designs. Traditional manual transmissions,
while tempting because of their simplicity of installation, have the
requirement of disconnecting power via the clutch in order to shift.
Planetary transmissions don't have any gear teeth or dog rings that are
engaged/disengaged when shifting -- it's all done with brake bands
(automatic transmissions) or clutch packs (racing planetaries). This
allows you to shift under load. I've had some ideas about using
planetary trannies in an EV:
1) Perhaps an ordinary automatic transmission could be modified to
actuate its brake bands under manual control, thus acting as a
moderate-performance clutchless transmission. Has anyone done this?
2) Powerglide transmissions are a type of high-performance 2-speed
planetary transmission based on the old 1950 Chevrolet Powerglide design
that uses an oil pump like an automatic, but typically shifts under
manual control. They're only two-speed, and have some efficiency loss
due to the oil pump, but I've been thinking of using one on my truck
conversion.
3) Multi-section racing planetaries like the Lenco and Jerico are
basically "stacks" of 2-speed planetary transmissions, so you can have
as many speeds as you want -- one segment for each ratio change. Each
segment is like a Powerglide with an important difference -- they ditch
one of the clutch packs and pistons, and (I believe) don't use a
hydraulic pump, but rather they rely on mechanical leverage from the
shifters (one shift handle per section). By having only one clutch
pack, they reduce the shifting action to a simple engage/disengage of
the clutch. How they do that is fascinating (to me) and leads to a major
problem with using these in anything but a dragster.
When a section is in low gear, power is being transmitted through a
one-way coupling called a "sprag clutch" that holds the sun gear still
while the ring gear on the input spins the planet carrier, which drives
the output. Shifting into high gear clutches the ring directly to the
planet carrier and to prevent the whole mechanism from locking up, the
sprag clutch is now freewheeling, allowing the sun gear to spin. What
this means is that the input is only locked to the output in high gear
-- in low gear, the motor is allowed to spin at a lower speed than the
output shaft (which doesn't really happen in drag racing, but can on the
street). Aside from making regen impossible in any gear but the
highest, at any point when the motor is spinning significantly slower
than the output shaft, any moderate application of the throttle or rapid
deceleration of the wheels (like after a burnout) can cause the motor to
"catch up to" the freewheeling sprag clutch, and when it does the impact
will cause damage to the transmission. This is why Lenco and others warn
you to only come out of a burnout in high gear, when all your sections
are locked 1:1, to prevent this from happening.
Which brings me to my long-winded point #3 ... Mark Farver and I were
discussing the idea yesterday of using electronic control to prevent the
motor from ever spinning more slowly than its appropriate speed, given
the speed of the vehicle and the current gear. Essentially, such a
system would watch for any downshifts or unpowered acceleration of the
vehicle (like coasting downhill) and provide inputs to the controller to
gently accelerate the motor to match. If we're right, such an
arrangement might make a tranny like the Jerico or Lenco "streetable".
Has anyone else considered or done anything like this?
4) Has anyone had experience with ditching the torque converter on
planetary or automatic transmission? If I can get away without one, JW
Performance Transmissions (http://racewithjw.com) seems to make a very
nice Powerglide case that is unique in having a separate bolt-on
bellhousing, which perhaps could be eliminated if a torque converter is
not required. Any thoughts?
--Christopher Robison
AustinEV
On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 10:33, Klemkosky, Mark A wrote:
> I don't think CVT technology is mature enough yet
> to meet the needs of anything but the most tame
> of vehicles. As for automatic transmissions, there
> are solutions to make them work; however, you pay
> a price in efficiency when comparing to a manual
> transmission.
>
> There are a few manual transmissions that do not
> require a clutch - of course, they are racing
> trannies and are a tad bit pricey. I'm putting a
> Jerico 2 speed in my project - no clutch and no
> fly wheel. The only disadvantage is that it would
> be very difficult to downshift in these types of arrangements.
>
> Jerico makes trannies from 2 speed all the way up
> to 5 speed. Richmond makes a 2 speed as well, but
> I'm not sure if they use dog gears which might be more
> of a flat shifting type of arrangement.
>
> Lenco also makes a manual type of tranny that
> works very much like an automatic. These are
> extremely pricey and it's unclear is they are suited
> to daily driving. Some other EV'ers may know.
>
>
> --Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Sent: Sat Jan 15 22:44:29 2005
> Subject: Transmissions
>
> EVDL,
>
> I have always disliked automatic transmissions, and preferred manual
> over automatic. Will someone explain to me how much of a hassle it is
> to use an automatic transmission with an EV, and what the pros and
> cons are.
>
> I understand that manual transmissions are the way to go with EV. Can
> an EV work without a clutch, if so what are the advantages and
> disadvantages? Are
> EV harder on transmissions than ICE?
>
> I would like to know about CVT. Are they efficient? Do they actually
> work, if so how do they function? Can they be optimized customized
> and modified? Are there any on the market, if so are they expensive,
> where could I get one? What RPM HP and how much torque can they
> handle?
>
> Felix
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello all,
I'm still working on my ebike. It works but it isn't geared right (too high)
I'm considering using one of the hubs that have internal gearing. I'm
not sure if they are underdriven or overdriven though. If anyone can
give me any hints that would be great.
Right now I have a v.01 bike with a large 10" sprocket (about 40 teeth)
driven by a 12 tooth sprocket on a jack shaft driven by a 6" which is
driven by a 2" pulley on the motor :-)
The wheel size is 24"
It works but it's still geared too high for the current I can pull with
the AC motor drive ( Rod Hower helped me out with getting the AC drive,
thanks! )
So I would like to go for a gear box of sorts. I wanted to stay away
from a friction drive because they are so inefficient.
Thanks.
--
Martin K
http://wwia.org/sgroup/biofuel/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> A pusher is a much more practical alternative. They are cheaper to
> construct, pollute only modestly, and get better fuel economy. If you rig
> it all up to have your regen electric drivetrain work in concert with the
> pusher, you can likely approach the pollution and mileage numbers of a
> factory-built hybrid.
How are pusher or generator trailers integrated into the EV? Do they
supply power directly to the motor, directly to the batteries, or are
they connected to the charger? What is the means by which the power
from the generator gets to wheels for a generator trailer?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I found I had sent this email to the entire list by mistake. Whats done is done.
It does seem to be generating good discussion.
Steve Love
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Davidson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:05 PM
Subject: RE: Fw: EV Charter (Re: Politics v. advocacy was: Re: Backdoor
Politics)
> I support a separate list for EV related politics. Not everyone has the time,
knowledge, place, or desire to build an EV, but still wants to drive one.To
them,
manufacturers destroying EVs at the end of lease is very important. Lack of
available
production electric vehicles outside of California is an issue to those of us
living other
places. Also, California is the only state allowed to make it's own
antipollution laws.
Other states can only adopt California's rules or go with the federal rules.
> Think our government doesn't ban things? Try importing a production EV from
> Europe,
such as a Pugeot 101 Electric, or Citreon Saxo Electric or a Renault
> electric pickup (pardon my spelling). Can't be done. The US Government bans
> these
vehicles in this country.
> On a more local level, electric scooters (whether built or purchased) are
> banned in many
localities. Can't ride them on bike trails because they are motor vehicles.
Can't ride
on the street because they don't meet the motor vehicle standards, and can't be
licensed.
> I personally don't object to politics of this nature on the list and possible
> actions to
affect the political climate, laws, etc. I thought this came under the heading
of the
future direction of EVs. However, I strongly object to the name calling,
ridiculing, etc.
That does not belong on any list.
> I have friends of all political beliefs. We can get into some heated
> discussions, and
sometimes have to agree to disagree. However, knowing why folks who agree with
them much
more than with me still want to have and drive EVs helps me when talking to
them. Also,
those of us who may disagree with each other on many if not most topics can
still come
together and work together on a common goal if we just respect each other. We
can actually
be stronger because of our different beliefs and better able to argue for EVs
from all
points of view.
> If this list is to be only for the technical aspects of EV construction, then
> another
list for EV (only) related politics and political action is needed. I will
certainly
join.
> Dave Davidson
> Glen Burnie, MD
> 1993 Dodge TEVan
> >From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> >To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> >Subject: Fw: EV Charter (Re: Politics v. advocacy was: Re: Backdoor
> >Politics)
> >Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:24:38 -0500
> >
> >David Roden hello,
> >Mark Klemkosky appears irritated at the politics on the EVDL. I sent the
> >attached email.
> >Steve Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 12:12 PM
> >Subject: EV Charter (Re: Politics v. advocacy was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
> >
> >
> > > The EV List is very good for tips and ideas on how to build an EV.
> > > I don't think we need more people telling what is OT (Off Topic). I
> > > think the charter
> > > needs to be more evenly applied by members for themselves.
> > > According to the list's charter:
> > > The EV Electric Vehicle Discussion Mailing List is intended to
> > > provide a forum to
> > > discuss the current state of the art and future direction of electric
> > > vehicles. It is not
> > > intended to discuss either EV appropriateness or comparisons with other
> > > transportation
> > > primary drive modes such as the venerable internal combustion engine.
> > > Those discussions
> > > are best relegated to the appropriate usenet newsgroup.
> > > An electric vehicle is any vehicle which uses an electric motor as
> >the primary or
> > > sole motive force. The energy storage device used to drive said motor
> >can use any
> > > technology including, but not limited to, solar electric, electric
> >battery, fuel cell,
> > > internal combustion engine coupled with a electric generator (hybrids),
> >or any
> >combination
> > > of these.
> > > Production electric vehicles are currently available. Internal
> >combustion engine
> > > vehicles can be converted to electric power. There exists a number of
> >companies who
> > > perform this conversion. There is also a number of manufacturers of
> >equipment allowing you to "do it yourself."
> > >
> > > The EVTech list is another related EVDL list for more technical
> >electrical 'internals'
> >of
> > > controllers, etc. It could be a great primary list. Mark, I think it may
> >be exactly what
> > > you want.
> > > We don't live in a country where the Gov't bans things but it does
> >ignore and de-fund
> > > things. The major car companies need to pay their pensions to UAW
> >workers which is why
> > > the cars have rebates and also the 0% down finance options. They are
> >incidently still
> > > losing money on cars. They make profit by volume sales.
> > > I could go on. The current funding of Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars is partly
> >a government
> > > effort.
> > > Steve Love -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Klemkosky, Mark A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 10:33 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Politics vs. advocacy (was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
> > >
> > >
> > > > Yawn. Again, what does this have to do about> building EV's????
> >This is wasted
> > > bandwidth. Until the gov't attempts to "ban" EV's I don't think these
> >types
> > > > of topics are relevant.
> > > > --Mark
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> > > > Sent: Sat Jan 15 19:25:12 2005
> > > > Subject: Politics vs. advocacy (was: Re: Backdoor Politics)
> > >
> > > > The thing is, the movement against EV's is happening on a bipartisan
> > > > basis--from Republican presidents to Democratic California governors
> > > > and CARB members, to senators and representatives on both side of
> > > > the aisle. Some have malicious intent, some are just paid off by
> > > > automakers and energy companies, and the rest believe the hype and
> > > > blindly follow whatever they read in the paper and see on TV.
> > > > The real problem here is automakers and oil companies. They are doing
> > > > whatever it takes to secure their current business plans of
> >high-margin
> > > > oil and high-margin SUV's and large cars.
> > > > I'm all for EV advocacy on this list, including write-in campaigns to
> >'right
> > > > the wrongs' perpetrated by biased or ignorant journalists and pundits.
> > If
> > > > we don't advocate for EV's, they will be taken away--first by removing
> > > > existing charging infrastructure, then by outlawing NEV's, and finally
> >by
> > > > outlawing conversions. It can happen very quickly, and it's up to the
> > > > people on this list to be vigilant of these attacks.
> > > > I'm all for eliminating political attacks on this list, but if
> >advocacy is moved
> > > > to another list, then I fear that we'll be undermined without even
> >knowing
> > > > about it. EV'ing won't be any fun if it gets limited to racetracks by
> > > > lawmakers.
> > > > Tim
> > >
> > > > -------
> > > > > Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:23:04 -0700
> > > > > To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> > > > > From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > Subject: Re: Backdoor Politics...come on guys, knock it off!
> > >
> > > > > There has been no objection whatsoever in the past about
> >the
> > > > > discussion of identical negative EV comments made on TV, radio, or
> >in
> > > > > magazines. We collectively write letters to the author or the
> >publisher. We
> > > > > send educational Emails collectively. We discuss the best course of
> >action
> > > > > to fix the damage done and perhaps attempt to educate the
> >misinformed
> > > > > author of the negative comments.
> > >
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris, I was building direct drive (converterless) and air shifted/CO2
shifted powerglides 20-25 years ago and I am sure the technology has
progressed greatly since then. If you talked to the guys that make that
`glide case or any of the other companies that make racing `glide knockoffs
they should be able to help you with what ever you need. To go convertless
pretty much all you need to do is drive the pump (in a front pump tranny)
with a spud made off the old converter. You will need the spline off the
stator in the converter to drive the input as well. I have also had thoughts
of doing it with a belt and motor from the side or just an aux electric
pump, possibly the guys that make kits for RVers to use on the dinghys to
make their automatic trannys lubricate while being towed can supply the
pump. Or you could do what Rod did on one of his drag cars and hook the
clutch pedal to a cylinder to pressure the trans. That might be kind of a
pain for anything but a drag car tho. I am sure you can figure out
something. Good luck, David Chapman.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: Transmissions (LONG, higher-performance questions)
In trying to decide what I'm going to do with my upcoming project, I
looked into this stuff a bit, and learned a few things about automatic
vs. manual transmissions. For typical conversions, it seems that the
tradeoffs are pretty well understood and documented, manual
transmissions seem simpler and a bit more efficient if you mind your
shift points, and automatics are tricky (you have to creep the motor to
keep the hydraulic pump working) but have been made to work
successfully. In those conversions that have used automatic
transmissions successfully, I have no idea how the mechanism managed to
choose the right shift points, given the very different torque curve of
a DC electric motor. (someone help me out here?)
For higher performance setups though, it seems to me the real
difference is between planetary (like a typical automatic) and
dog-and-gear (typical manual) designs. Traditional manual transmissions,
while tempting because of their simplicity of installation, have the
requirement of disconnecting power via the clutch in order to shift.
Planetary transmissions don't have any gear teeth or dog rings that are
engaged/disengaged when shifting -- it's all done with brake bands
(automatic transmissions) or clutch packs (racing planetaries). This
allows you to shift under load. I've had some ideas about using
planetary trannies in an EV:
1) Perhaps an ordinary automatic transmission could be modified to
actuate its brake bands under manual control, thus acting as a
moderate-performance clutchless transmission. Has anyone done this?
2) Powerglide transmissions are a type of high-performance 2-speed
planetary transmission based on the old 1950 Chevrolet Powerglide design
that uses an oil pump like an automatic, but typically shifts under
manual control. They're only two-speed, and have some efficiency loss
due to the oil pump, but I've been thinking of using one on my truck
conversion.
3) Multi-section racing planetaries like the Lenco and Jerico are
basically "stacks" of 2-speed planetary transmissions, so you can have
as many speeds as you want -- one segment for each ratio change. Each
segment is like a Powerglide with an important difference -- they ditch
one of the clutch packs and pistons, and (I believe) don't use a
hydraulic pump, but rather they rely on mechanical leverage from the
shifters (one shift handle per section). By having only one clutch
pack, they reduce the shifting action to a simple engage/disengage of
the clutch. How they do that is fascinating (to me) and leads to a major
problem with using these in anything but a dragster.
When a section is in low gear, power is being transmitted through a
one-way coupling called a "sprag clutch" that holds the sun gear still
while the ring gear on the input spins the planet carrier, which drives
the output. Shifting into high gear clutches the ring directly to the
planet carrier and to prevent the whole mechanism from locking up, the
sprag clutch is now freewheeling, allowing the sun gear to spin. What
this means is that the input is only locked to the output in high gear
-- in low gear, the motor is allowed to spin at a lower speed than the
output shaft (which doesn't really happen in drag racing, but can on the
street). Aside from making regen impossible in any gear but the
highest, at any point when the motor is spinning significantly slower
than the output shaft, any moderate application of the throttle or rapid
deceleration of the wheels (like after a burnout) can cause the motor to
"catch up to" the freewheeling sprag clutch, and when it does the impact
will cause damage to the transmission. This is why Lenco and others warn
you to only come out of a burnout in high gear, when all your sections
are locked 1:1, to prevent this from happening.
Which brings me to my long-winded point #3 ... Mark Farver and I were
discussing the idea yesterday of using electronic control to prevent the
motor from ever spinning more slowly than its appropriate speed, given
the speed of the vehicle and the current gear. Essentially, such a
system would watch for any downshifts or unpowered acceleration of the
vehicle (like coasting downhill) and provide inputs to the controller to
gently accelerate the motor to match. If we're right, such an
arrangement might make a tranny like the Jerico or Lenco "streetable".
Has anyone else considered or done anything like this?
4) Has anyone had experience with ditching the torque converter on
planetary or automatic transmission? If I can get away without one, JW
Performance Transmissions (http://racewithjw.com) seems to make a very
nice Powerglide case that is unique in having a separate bolt-on
bellhousing, which perhaps could be eliminated if a torque converter is
not required. Any thoughts?
--Christopher Robison
AustinEV
On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 10:33, Klemkosky, Mark A wrote:
I don't think CVT technology is mature enough yet
to meet the needs of anything but the most tame
of vehicles. As for automatic transmissions, there
are solutions to make them work; however, you pay
a price in efficiency when comparing to a manual
transmission.
There are a few manual transmissions that do not
require a clutch - of course, they are racing
trannies and are a tad bit pricey. I'm putting a
Jerico 2 speed in my project - no clutch and no
fly wheel. The only disadvantage is that it would
be very difficult to downshift in these types of arrangements.
Jerico makes trannies from 2 speed all the way up
to 5 speed. Richmond makes a 2 speed as well, but
I'm not sure if they use dog gears which might be more
of a flat shifting type of arrangement.
Lenco also makes a manual type of tranny that
works very much like an automatic. These are
extremely pricey and it's unclear is they are suited
to daily driving. Some other EV'ers may know.
--Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Sat Jan 15 22:44:29 2005
Subject: Transmissions
EVDL,
I have always disliked automatic transmissions, and preferred manual
over automatic. Will someone explain to me how much of a hassle it is
to use an automatic transmission with an EV, and what the pros and
cons are.
I understand that manual transmissions are the way to go with EV. Can
an EV work without a clutch, if so what are the advantages and
disadvantages? Are
EV harder on transmissions than ICE?
I would like to know about CVT. Are they efficient? Do they actually
work, if so how do they function? Can they be optimized customized
and modified? Are there any on the market, if so are they expensive,
where could I get one? What RPM HP and how much torque can they
handle?
Felix
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> You know what they say about brevity...(it's the soul of getting to
>> the point).
Who was it who said, "I would have made it shorter, but I didn't have the
time?"
Marv
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:00:09 -0800
> To: EV Discussion List <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Subject: Re: Backdoor Politics...come on guys, knock it off!
>
>> If you are ready to quit the EV list because someone said
>> something negative about foolish comments made by Rush Limbaugh, you need
>> to seriously rethink your priorities.
>>
>>
>>
>> _ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
>> \'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> =(___)=
>> U
>> Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
>
> A waste of bandwidth or just off-topic - long posts may be too little editing
> rather than too much bandwidth, and if the topic is related to EVs, aren't we
> on-topic? You know what they say about brevity...(it's the soul of getting to
> the point).
--- End Message ---
