EV Digest 4126
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: your EV battery selection
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Regenerating a series wound motor
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Regenerating a series wound motor
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Direct drive - how to do it right
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: 12 v system battery question
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Direct drive - how to do it right
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
by Catbus Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Direct drive - how to do it right
by "Christopher Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: BELT-ALTERNATOR-STARTERS
by Dave Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Direct drive - how to do it right
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: More calculator stuff
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12) Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
by Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: your EV battery selection
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: BELT-ALTERNATOR-STARTERS
by Andrew Letton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Direct drive - how to do it right
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
20) Vectrix update (was: Impromptu NBEAA meeting on Saturday)
by "Charles Whalen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: Battery Box Advice Sought
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: BELT-ALTERNATOR-STARTERS
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Industrial charger
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) RE: Battery Box Advice Sought
by Gnat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) RE: Battery Box Advice Sought
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: 100 mile trip
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: Direct drive - how to do it right
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
My guess is "Not well" in fact I'm not even sure you can get 1000 amps
out of them.
Deka's are Gel Cells, and Gel Cells don't like high currents.
I'm not sure about the 8G34s, but the ones I had (8G27?) can't really
handle much more than 250-300 amps. Sure they claim to have higher
current capability, but at 300 amps they sag well below 1.67V per cell.
> Don,
> Thanks again for making your project website such a great resource for the
> hobby. The Deka 8G34 looks like an impressive choice, the only data
> missing from your comparative spreadsheet seems to be a rating of how many
> amps each battery can deliver. I'm planning on a 192 volt DC drive in my
> Karmann-Ghia, and wondering how the Dekas would survive occaisional 1000
> amp launches with a Zilla 1k. Any ideas?
> Thanks,
> Jay Donnaway
> Vancouver, WA
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A couple points to consider for thse of you contemplating regen on series
wound motors by PWM modulating the field and tieing the armature directly
to the batteries.
The field coil in a series wound motor:
1) has EXTREEMLY low resistance, maybe 1/100 ohm, maybe even less.
2) has very low inductance.
3) is designed to run at 1 or 2 volts with 100 or more amps
These conditions are VERY hard on controllers that aren't designed to
handle them.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Peter,
I was assuming that the field is by far the largest inductive
component in the motor. The fact that it will only reach 1 or 2 volts
is not very important to a PWM motor controller as long as it has a
decent current limit, although this is why I tried it with a low
voltage controller fed from only 12V.
That said, I did blow the controller up (although I think it was more
to do with it getting wet) and I am open to the possibility that it's
just a bad idea :)
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:03:06 -0700 (MST), Peter VanDerWal
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A couple points to consider for thse of you contemplating regen on series
> wound motors by PWM modulating the field and tieing the armature directly
> to the batteries.
>
> The field coil in a series wound motor:
> 1) has EXTREEMLY low resistance, maybe 1/100 ohm, maybe even less.
> 2) has very low inductance.
> 3) is designed to run at 1 or 2 volts with 100 or more amps
>
> These conditions are VERY hard on controllers that aren't designed to
> handle them.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Since you mentioned Motor (singular) instead of motors (plural) I'm
assuming you have missed the point that single reduction ratio drivelines
require a motor/controller/driveline-ratio combo that can deliver HUGE
ammounts of wheel torque.
In a normal multispeed transmission, when you need to start out or climb a
hill (actions that require relatively high wheel torque), you shift down
into a lower gear. For higher speed highway cruising you shift up.
With a single ratio, you're stuck in one fixed gear. This HAS to be a low
enough ratio than you can handle the highest expect speed without over
spinning your motor.
Since you can't shift down to get more torque, the motor controller has to
be able to deliver this higher torque.
There are three common ways to achieve these results
1) Use a high ratio reduction and a motor that can spinn really fast (AC
drives)
2) Use a REALLY big motor and REALLY high current controller.
3) Use TWO motors, with series/parallel switching and a moderately high
powered controller.
>From what I'm gathering from reading your post, option #1 is out since it
would require a differential with a 10:1 reduction and I don't think those
are commonly available.
An 11" motor with a 2K amp controller might suffice for option #2.
Option #3 with two 8" motors and a 1K amp controller is probably the
lowest cost, most reliable method. Of course if you live in a really
hilly area, you might need a 2K amp controller.
Personally I'd go with the 4th option, a normal motor/controler and a
small two speed tranny. Perhaps something like two speed transfer case,
like one of the crawler add-ons for 4wd rock crawlers.
Note: without a normal tranny with reverse gear, you need to add fwd/rev
contactors for all of the above setups except #1 (AC controllers typically
have a reverse mode).
> Does anyone else have a direct-drive setup, with a different arrangement?
> Short of doing the above, I'm guessing all I might need is something that
> acts like the tail housing on a tranny, to support the output spline. This
> would require that I can mount the motor just right, which might be why
> John's using an additional U-joint (?)...
>
> --chris
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Perhaps the idea solution would be to turn the DC/DC off when parked,
but have a "wake-up" timer that turns it on periodically (say, 1 hour a
week, or whenever the battery voltage falls to 80% SOC). The DC/DC can
run at higher current and so operates efficiently; but is off most of
the time.
been thinking about this also , I was thinking of a simple timer made with a
large capacitor , mosfet , and relay . When you turn the car off , the
large cap which would be hooked to the gate( and diode/key ) would keep the
fet on holding the relay and dc dc on till cap drained . So you turn the car
off and 1 hour later the dc dc goes off, This would also have the dc dc off
when the charger started to push the pack voltage high. ,( unless your doing
a fast charge ) .
Steve Clunn
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've always liked the way NEON did his VW buggy. It looks like he just
flipped the rearend and mated the motor directly.
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/125.html
From: "Christopher Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Direct drive - how to do it right
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:39:20 -0600 (CST)
For my upcoming conversion project, I'd like to investigate the
possibility of doing direct drive. I haven't made my decision yet, but
I'd like to get as much information as I can about how to go about it.
I'm aware of reasons why this might not be a good idea (no way to
disconnect the driveline in case the controller fails "on", etc), and
while I'm open to input on the pros/cons, what I'd really like to know is
how it's done.
I've looked at what pictures I could find of the one very successful
direct-drive setup I'm aware of (Wayland's White Zombie) and it appears
that there's a custom-machined fitting that fits on the motor shaft, this
bolts to a strange-looking, flat-mating U-joint on a short shaft with a
male spline at the other end, which is supported by a crossmember and a
what looks like a large pillow block. I would guess that from there to the
rear end would be a pretty typical driveshaft setup.
John, do I have this wrong? I really wish I'd paid more attention on the
occasions I've seen the car in person! Are such parts available, or was
this all totally custom-made?
Does anyone else have a direct-drive setup, with a different arrangement?
Short of doing the above, I'm guessing all I might need is something that
acts like the tail housing on a tranny, to support the output spline. This
would require that I can mount the motor just right, which might be why
John's using an additional U-joint (?)...
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not sure what you mean by leaving the pipe "whole", unless you mean not
sawing, which would remove copper saw-dust.
My point was merely that you would get approximate measurements if you
flattened it, then measured, since the corners would not be perfectly
square, and the inside surfaces would not be perfectly touching.
So to rephrase m'self:
Apipe = Arod - Aspace
Apipe = Copper cross section area of the pipe
Arod = cross section area the pipe would have if it where solid rod
Aspace = cross section area of the empty space inside, the hole
if you flattened the pipe, or even slice it open and unroll it, you
should still have the same number of square cm of copper in a cross
section, but a round pipe's diameter and wall thickness are easy to
measure with common tools.
Now if you are also redistributing the copper along the length you'd
change the cross section,
e.g. if you stretch the pipe to twice it's original length, the
cross section area would be 1/2 the original, regardless of the cross
section's shape, unless the density changed.
Mike-
Don Cameron wrote:
The area of concern is the area of flattened pipe (as measured), not the
pipe left as a whole. Are you assuming that part of the pipe will be left
whole? This is not the case. These are small 8 x 2.5 cm bars.
They also use pipes at large hydro dams for current carrying.
Don
Victoria, BC, Canada
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Catbus Mike
Sent: February 25, 2005 6:35 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Current Capacity of 1/2" Copper Pipe
Don Cameron wrote:
Thanks Lee,
So the cross sectional area of the flattened copper pipe is 1" x 0.1" =
0.1 in sq. This is just a bit smaller than the cross section area of a
2/0 cable, so I am still in the clear.
To be more precise, it would be the cross sectional area of the unsquashed
pipe, minus the area of the hole.
using the standard formula for area of a circle:
area = pi*(radius*radius)
where pi is approximatly 3.1415
Assuming you are flattening the pipe yourself and are being gentle enough
about it to avoid thinning the pipe wall much.
The thinnest part of your conductor will have the highest resistance.
FWIW, I've read about large radio transmitters, where the frequency makes
the skin effect significant, using pipes as antenna feed lines and running
coolant through the pipes.
Mike Shipway
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter VanDerWal said:
> Since you mentioned Motor (singular) instead of motors (plural) I'm
> assuming you have missed the point that single reduction ratio drivelines
> require a motor/controller/driveline-ratio combo that can deliver HUGE
> ammounts of wheel torque.
I wasn't very clear on this point; I'm aware that very high torque will be
required.
> In a normal multispeed transmission, when you need to start out or climb a
> hill (actions that require relatively high wheel torque), you shift down
> into a lower gear. For higher speed highway cruising you shift up.
>
> With a single ratio, you're stuck in one fixed gear. This HAS to be a low
> enough ratio than you can handle the highest expect speed without over
> spinning your motor.
If I do go with direct-drive, the money I don't spend on a
transmission/clutch/adapter plate/etc will be spent on getting a decent
rear end and driveshaft; most likely a Ford 9" setup. I have a great deal
of flexibility with ratio choices with this rear end, though clearly I
can't change while I'm driving. :o)
>
> Since you can't shift down to get more torque, the motor controller has to
> be able to deliver this higher torque.
>
> There are three common ways to achieve these results
> 1) Use a high ratio reduction and a motor that can spinn really fast (AC
> drives)
> 2) Use a REALLY big motor and REALLY high current controller.
> 3) Use TWO motors, with series/parallel switching and a moderately high
> powered controller.
I have chosen method #2. Z2K-EHV, 13" Warp motor. The dual windings on
the 13" motor also allow me to use method #3. (As an aside, I really like
that Netgain mounted the motor's 8 terminals on the end, instead of the
side. I think this will make mounting everything a bit easier.)
>
>>From what I'm gathering from reading your post, option #1 is out since it
> would require a differential with a 10:1 reduction and I don't think those
> are commonly available.
For the 9", I've seen ratios as high as 6.33, which would put me at the
motor's quoted 5k redline at around 70mph, assuming 30" wheels (which
might not end up being the case).
I would probably go with something a bit faster than this though, shooting
for something around 110mph at the top end. A 4.11 ratio would get me
there, but might sacrifice acceleration too significantly.
Again, I'm still judging the sanity of going this route. What would help
is knowing if I can keep the motor in current limit up to 2500 rpm or so
at WOT with a 348V pack. If so, then I'm thinking I've got a pretty flat
torque curve up to 5k, given the s/p switch in the middle. I'm guessing
this is probably excessively optimistic. Netgain gave me a spreadsheet I
need to study more carefully.
>
> Note: without a normal tranny with reverse gear, you need to add fwd/rev
> contactors for all of the above setups except #1 (AC controllers typically
> have a reverse mode).
Agreed.
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Raymond Knight wrote:
An ICE motor requires far too much torque to get it moving to effectively be
able to start it with a belt drive. I think the engineers have got it right
when they went to incorporating the alternator/starter into the
flywheel/bell housing.
My Dad's International Harvester has a blockoff plate on the
bellhousing, and starts via an ordinary looking generator and V-belt.
Modern serpentine belts can handle considerably more torque; some
aftermarket supercharger kits just loop a longer belt around the
supercharger instead of driving it separately.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Williams)===================DoD #978===
== "Peace Through Superior Firepower" USAF Strategic Air Command ==
========================== http://www.bacomatic.org/~dw/index.htm ==
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>Christopher Robison wrote:
> most likely a Ford 9" setup.
Check out this drop in Chevy 12 bolt center that goes in a 9" housing.
Nearly 10 lbs lighter and it's 3% more efficient then a 9" center
section!
http://www.strangeengineering.net/catalog/64.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> >Also, if anyone works with javascript, I'd love to add an
> >acceleration section - right now, the controller's peak current entry is a
moot
> >point.
> >
> >cowtown @ spamcop.net
> >
> >
> If you can send me the math formuli and the HTML form you want to attach
> it to, I can knock out the javascipt pretty quickly.
>
> 'Mad' Mike Shipway
I don't know the formulae, I just host the calculator and do the simplest of
changes. I guess I could search for other sites that can do this, but not being
a programmer, I've already had to fix basic errors I've made in the javascript
several times.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For more than 20 years, I have been using and recommending 1" x 1/16"
copper strap for battery interconnects for vehicles up to 144V and 500
amps. We have had zero problems with these. Hammering copper pipe is a
lot of work. It makes it very difficult to bend to fit the direction it
needs to take to reach the terminals. Also, it is very
rigid. Periodically on this list there are concerns about rigid
interconnects damaging battery posts. A 1/16" strap with a couple of 90
degree bends in it has sufficient flex.
As for source, I go to a local sheet metal shop and have them shear 1" wide
strips 3' long for me. Then I cut and bend them to suit.
Why do so many people on this list seem to want to do everything the hard way?
Mike Brown
Electro Automotive POB 1113 Felton CA 95018-1113 Telephone 831-429-1989
http://www.electroauto.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Electric Car Conversion Kits * Components * Books * Videos * Since 1979
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don,
For your case nothing to worry about regarding Deka's current capacity,
since your system will never allow to draw more than 280A battery
current at full power. You can limit it to even lower value if you wish.
Practically, you will not see more than 100A for normal acceleration,
may be 150A up hills - this is what I observe for ACRX.
(This setting, of course, is separate from the motor current limit
which you also can set to any value if you want to limit the torque
for whatever reason).
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different.
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
My guess is "Not well" in fact I'm not even sure you can get 1000 amps
out of them.
Deka's are Gel Cells, and Gel Cells don't like high currents.
I'm not sure about the 8G34s, but the ones I had (8G27?) can't really
handle much more than 250-300 amps. Sure they claim to have higher
current capability, but at 300 amps they sag well below 1.67V per cell.
Don,
Thanks again for making your project website such a great resource for the
hobby. The Deka 8G34 looks like an impressive choice, the only data
missing from your comparative spreadsheet seems to be a rating of how many
amps each battery can deliver. I'm planning on a 192 volt DC drive in my
Karmann-Ghia, and wondering how the Dekas would survive occaisional 1000
amp launches with a Zilla 1k. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Jay Donnaway
Vancouver, WA
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:16:26 -0800, Electro Automotive
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For more than 20 years, I have been using and recommending 1" x 1/16"
> copper strap for battery interconnects for vehicles up to 144V and 500
> amps. We have had zero problems with these. Hammering copper pipe is a
> lot of work. It makes it very difficult to bend to fit the direction it
> needs to take to reach the terminals. Also, it is very
> rigid. Periodically on this list there are concerns about rigid
> interconnects damaging battery posts. A 1/16" strap with a couple of 90
> degree bends in it has sufficient flex.
Personally I prefer to use the largest size of transformer winding
strap available from my local electrical place - this is heavily
enameled so after drilling the holes, I buff the enamel off using a
sanding disk on the grinder. Then I've got a nice looking, insulated,
corrosion proof connection.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>Mike Brown wrote:
>
> Why do so many people on this list seem to want to do everything the hard way?
Maybe it makes it more fun in a masochist sort of way? ;)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Electro Automotive wrote:
Why do so many people on this list seem to want to do everything the
hard way?
Because not aware of easier ways yet, and don't have your experience.
This is what this list is for.
What I would use is braded straps sold in any automotive shop, or
you can buy a spool of braid and cut to fit.
You crimp the end of strap just like any other cable, but it is
far more flexible totally relieving stress to the battery terminals.
1" copper will be flexible enough if tyou have few inches length,
but if it is to interconnect nearest posts of two adjacent
batteries, it may still be too rigit to stress the seal around
battery posts if batteries move a little (and they always do),
unless one makes stres relieving bents and avoid using straight
short pieces.
Victor.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Huh?
Maybe for a conventional V-belt, but I happen to know a particular
Porsche 914 that has half of its considerable horsepower running through
a belt.
cheers,
Andrew
An ICE motor requires far too much torque to get it moving to effectively be
able to start it with a belt drive.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I've always liked the way NEON did his VW buggy. It looks like he just
> flipped the rearend and mated the motor directly.
>
> http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/125.html
>
Umm, Damon...that's a VW. Rear engine directly connected to the transaxle
is the standard configuration for the old aircooled VWs.
He didn't "flip" the transaxle that I can see, looks like it's in it's
normal configuration.
It's called a "transaxle" because it's a combination multispeed
transmission and rear differential all in one unit that is "designed" to
have the engine mount directly to the back and the axles mount on the
sides.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<< As for source, I go to a local sheet metal shop and have them shear 1" wide
strips 3' long for me. Then I cut and bend them to suit.>>
I have a 30 ft coil of this sitting around for several years - what's it worth
with a fine patina of age? It's safer for someone as klutzy as me to use
welding cable, even if it means paying to have the lugs crimped - cheaper and
more professional in the long run compared to my amateur creations. Also, the
strap doesn't work very well in a combination of tight spaces, short distances,
and the non-lead connections of my SLAs.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Speaking of Vectrix, I called the company a few days ago to express my
impatience with their timetable for the launch of North American production
and sales, based on the last thing I had heard, which was an EV World
interview a few months ago with one Vectrix employee where he said that
there wouldn't be any bikes in the US until 2007 or 2008. So I asked the
company if they could hook me up with one of their European distributors who
would be willing to assist me with making arrangements to ship a bike to me
in the US late this year when Vectrix launches their European production.
(There is a US Customs approved motorcycle import DOT-compliance facility
just a few miles from my house. Unlike cars, importing motorcycles from
abroad is a relatively simple and inexpensive affair since motorcycles don't
have to be crash tested like cars do. As I understand it, the only thing
that motorcycle importation requires is just changing out the lights and
speedometer to comply with DOT regulations; that's what the DOT-licensed
motorcycle import shop near my house does.) The company official I spoke
with at Vectrix told me that I was certainly welcome to do that if I wanted
and they would help me in that regard but that it may not be necessary
because they are now planning to allocate a limited amount of their 2006
production to the North American market, depending on how many people sign
up on their North American consumer order reservation form at:
http://www.vectrixusa.com/company/consumer.html
So that leaves me hopeful that I will be able to get a bike next year
(without having to go to the trouble of importing one from Europe) and not
have to wait until 2007 or 2008.
However, lest anyone think that I am just sitting around waiting for EV
companies to follow through on their production promises, such is not the
case, as I am also doing a conversion with Steve Clunn. But I am definitely
quite keen on that Vectrix scooter from the test ride that I took last year.
Best regards,
Charles Whalen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 7:12 PM
Subject: Impromptu NBEAA meeting on Saturday
There will be an impromptu get-together
this Saturday (Feb 26th) at Thunderstruck Motors
in Santa Rosa for test drives of two Vectrix
e-motorbikes with Jim Plagenhoef, Director of Sales
for North America, Vectrix Corporation.
This meeeting is quite a coup for NBEAA and
something I've been working on for some time, so
please come along and give Jim feedback on this
exciting new form of electric transportation.
More info at:
http://www.vectrixusa.com
Start time: 10am.
Location:
Thunderstruck Motors
3200 Dutton Avenue #220
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
(707)575-0353 Tel/Fax
http://www.thunderstruck-ev.com
Avcon, 220V and 110V charging available.
and here's a map:
http://tinyurl.com/4fcgk
Look forward to seeing you there,
Nick
Dr Nick Carter,
Owner, npc Imaging, 2228 Magowan Drive, Santa Rosa, CA 95405 USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel/fax: +1 (707) 573 9361
http://www.npcimaging.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Woo-hoo! TS batteries arrived today. Building battery boxes tomorrow!
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matthew D. Graham
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 4:31 PM
To: 'Electric Vehicle Discussion List'
Subject: RE: Battery Box Advice Sought
Bill,
That sounds exactly like where I was just a few months ago. I debated this
issue for the four battery boxes in the Nissan 240SX conversion I'm working
on for holding 25 Orbitals. I found that after exhaustively working on all
the design details of sheet metal boxes and incorporating features for all
the strength-adding ribbed supports, I didn't have the tools and technical
expertise to do it myself, and for the life of me, couldn't get anyone to
quote the job for me.
So, I ended up going with the angle iron approach. Easy to weld, but hard to
look at. Of course my preference (and I assume yours) would be to have
beautiful, perfectly incorporated sheet metal boxes. In the end, my decision
was really based on what I could get done in the interest of getting the car
on the road sooner rather than later. I've always planned on improving on
this aspect in the future by ripping out the angle iron and installing
professional sheet metal boxes. Of course, after a visit with John Wayland
in Bend a couple weeks back (story to follow later) I've been absolutely
shamed into moving that higher up in my list of priorities.
That said, I expected to use 18GA steel for my boxes when I considered doing
it myself. (Later, I was leaning towards aluminum, done professionally) With
Dutch bends and ribs for support, it should be pretty sturdy. Of course,
thicker gauge might be necessary for other reasons--namely your welding
equipment and skills. I've had difficulty MIG welding 20 GA, and sometimes
18, even when using Argon. Then again, my welding experience is very
limited.
Let us know what you decide!
Matt Graham
300V Nissan 240SX (STILL in progress!)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:48 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Battery Box Advice Sought
I'm getting ready to build my rear battery box and have made a mockup. I
could make the box out of angle iron, or sheet metal (not aluminum; I don't
have TIG welder). If I use sheet metal, I'd like some advice on how thick
(gauge) it needs to be to safely support the weight of the TS cells.
There's a 3-part image at:
http://www.fredrickgroup.com/ElectricCarConversion/Mockup3Fold.jpg .
The first image shows the cutout of the gas tank hump. It measures 36 x
10.5 inches. The battery box won't drop down into it, but will span it.
The second image shows a particle board mockup of the battery box. Box has
two levels (rear level about 4 inches higher than front) and is 45-1/8
inches at its widest point. The 18 inches from front to back, divided into
10.5-inch front section and 7.5-inch rear section.
The third image shows my (artistically poor!) attempt at demonstrating what
the TS cell arrangement will look like in the box.
The front part of the box will hold around 275 pounds of TS cells, and the
rear part of the box will hold around 190 pounds of TS cells.
All advice appreciated.
Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dave Williams wrote:
>
> Raymond Knight wrote:
>
> > An ICE motor requires far too much torque to get it moving to effectively be
> > able to start it with a belt drive. I think the engineers have got it right
> > when they went to incorporating the alternator/starter into the
> > flywheel/bell housing.
>
> My Dad's International Harvester has a blockoff plate on the
> bellhousing, and starts via an ordinary looking generator and V-belt.
>
> Modern serpentine belts can handle considerably more torque; some
> aftermarket supercharger kits just loop a longer belt around the
> supercharger instead of driving it separately.
You are correct; belts *can* handle the torque. That's not the problem.
The real problem is that belts wear out and fail long before the car
itself wears out. Then, they have to be replaced.
It's bad enough when a fan belt breaks, and you lose the alternator or
power steering; at least you can still drive for a while. It's much
worse when a timing belt breaks, and the valves hit the pistons and the
engine is destroyed.
If they connect the starter/alternator with a belt, they will make this
problem *worse*. They will have added a new source of problems, and the
engine will be *less* reliable.
So, their goal is to eliminate the belt if possible. But, we all know
know that idealism gives way to cost -- if they can't find a way to do
it cheap enough without a belt, they WILL use a belt anyway!
--
"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 ---
Deuville's Rink wrote:
> Thanks Lee, I checked my charger voltage with another analog
> meter and received the same voltage as my digital meter. But
> the voltage was 112 volts after the charger was left on for
> over an hour...
If the voltage goes this high, then my guess would be that this charger
is nothing but a crude transformer-rectifier with no voltage regulation.
Because if it *does* have a regulator, then it is broken and not
working!
> it is an old charger, could it be putting out a peak voltage
> that may be throwing the meters off? I believe that it is a
> pulsating dc with perhaps quite a ripple that may be showing up?
All chargers apply pulsating DC. The batteries don't care; in fact there
is some evidence that it helps. The pulsations are at a 120 Hz rate
(double the AC line frequency because of the full-wave rectification).
Such pulses won't bother any normal meter, because they are so common
that meters have to be designed to tolerate them without errors.
> In any case if I watch the charging voltage and don't let it pass
> the 107 volt mark will that be satisfactory?
Yes. It is perfectly acceptable to manually control charging. Basically,
the battery is "full" when the current falls to about 2% of its amphour
capacity (i.e. 4-5 amps for a 200-250 amphour golf cart battery) at
about 2.5 volts per cell (7.5v per 6v battery). If the current doesn't
fall this low (and it won't with an old or hot battery), then stop
charging when the voltage stops rising.
Your charger has a safety timer -- this will "cover your ass" in case
you forget to check. Basically, you will learn to guesstimate how long
it will take to recharge, and then can just set the timer to a time just
a little longer than that.
--
"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 ---
Bill just caught one comment from Matts post so this is sort of directed to
him.
(don't have his post on this machine to reply to).
Regarding the use of aluminium for building boxes you might want to look at
just using a good pull rivet like a Avex 1400 or 1600 series and about a
1.125
rivet spacing inplace of welding. As long as you use the right spacing and a
good pull rivet the joints are as strong as the parent sheet metal. Then all
you
might need for tool is a drill, a #30 or a 1/8" drill bit and any cheapy pop
rivet
tool. Would also be much faster than welding.
Dave
> Woo-hoo! TS batteries arrived today. Building battery boxes
> tomorrow!
>
> Bill Dennis
>
> Bill,
>
> That sounds exactly like where I was just a few months ago. I debated this
> issue for the four battery boxes in the Nissan 240SX conversion
> I'm working
> on for holding 25 Orbitals. I found that after exhaustively working on all
> the design details of sheet metal boxes and incorporating features for all
> the strength-adding ribbed supports, I didn't have the tools and technical
> expertise to do it myself, and for the life of me, couldn't get anyone to
> quote the job for me.
>
> So, I ended up going with the angle iron approach. Easy to weld,
> but hard to
> look at. Of course my preference (and I assume yours) would be to have
> beautiful, perfectly incorporated sheet metal boxes. In the end,
> my decision
> was really based on what I could get done in the interest of
> getting the car
> on the road sooner rather than later. I've always planned on improving on
> this aspect in the future by ripping out the angle iron and installing
> professional sheet metal boxes. Of course, after a visit with John Wayland
> in Bend a couple weeks back (story to follow later) I've been absolutely
> shamed into moving that higher up in my list of priorities.
>
> That said, I expected to use 18GA steel for my boxes when I
> considered doing
> it myself. (Later, I was leaning towards aluminum, done
> professionally) With
> Dutch bends and ribs for support, it should be pretty sturdy. Of course,
> thicker gauge might be necessary for other reasons--namely your welding
> equipment and skills. I've had difficulty MIG welding 20 GA, and sometimes
> 18, even when using Argon. Then again, my welding experience is very
> limited.
>
> Let us know what you decide!
>
> Matt Graham
> 300V Nissan 240SX (STILL in progress!)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:48 PM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Battery Box Advice Sought
>
>
> I'm getting ready to build my rear battery box and have made a mockup. I
> could make the box out of angle iron, or sheet metal (not
> aluminum; I don't
> have TIG welder). If I use sheet metal, I'd like some advice on how thick
> (gauge) it needs to be to safely support the weight of the TS cells.
> There's a 3-part image at:
> http://www.fredrickgroup.com/ElectricCarConversion/Mockup3Fold.jpg .
>
> The first image shows the cutout of the gas tank hump. It measures 36 x
> 10.5 inches. The battery box won't drop down into it, but will span it.
>
> The second image shows a particle board mockup of the battery
> box. Box has
> two levels (rear level about 4 inches higher than front) and is 45-1/8
> inches at its widest point. The 18 inches from front to back,
> divided into
> 10.5-inch front section and 7.5-inch rear section.
>
> The third image shows my (artistically poor!) attempt at
> demonstrating what
> the TS cell arrangement will look like in the box.
>
> The front part of the box will hold around 275 pounds of TS cells, and the
> rear part of the box will hold around 190 pounds of TS cells.
>
> All advice appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bill Dennis
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why doesn't anyone braze their battery boxes, or braze them into the
car?
--- Bill Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Woo-hoo! TS batteries arrived today. Building battery boxes
> tomorrow!
>
> Bill Dennis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Matthew D. Graham
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 4:31 PM
> To: 'Electric Vehicle Discussion List'
> Subject: RE: Battery Box Advice Sought
>
> Bill,
>
> That sounds exactly like where I was just a few months ago. I
> debated this
> issue for the four battery boxes in the Nissan 240SX conversion I'm
> working
> on for holding 25 Orbitals. I found that after exhaustively working
> on all
> the design details of sheet metal boxes and incorporating features
> for all
> the strength-adding ribbed supports, I didn't have the tools and
> technical
> expertise to do it myself, and for the life of me, couldn't get
> anyone to
> quote the job for me.
>
> So, I ended up going with the angle iron approach. Easy to weld,
> but hard to
> look at. Of course my preference (and I assume yours) would be to
> have
> beautiful, perfectly incorporated sheet metal boxes. In the end, my
> decision
> was really based on what I could get done in the interest of
> getting the car
> on the road sooner rather than later. I've always planned on
> improving on
> this aspect in the future by ripping out the angle iron and
> installing
> professional sheet metal boxes. Of course, after a visit with John
> Wayland
> in Bend a couple weeks back (story to follow later) I've been
> absolutely
> shamed into moving that higher up in my list of priorities.
>
> That said, I expected to use 18GA steel for my boxes when I
> considered doing
> it myself. (Later, I was leaning towards aluminum, done
> professionally) With
> Dutch bends and ribs for support, it should be pretty sturdy. Of
> course,
> thicker gauge might be necessary for other reasons--namely your
> welding
> equipment and skills. I've had difficulty MIG welding 20 GA, and
> sometimes
> 18, even when using Argon. Then again, my welding experience is
> very
> limited.
>
> Let us know what you decide!
>
> Matt Graham
> 300V Nissan 240SX (STILL in progress!)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:48 PM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Battery Box Advice Sought
>
>
> I'm getting ready to build my rear battery box and have made a
> mockup. I
> could make the box out of angle iron, or sheet metal (not aluminum;
> I don't
> have TIG welder). If I use sheet metal, I'd like some advice on
> how thick
> (gauge) it needs to be to safely support the weight of the TS
> cells.
> There's a 3-part image at:
> http://www.fredrickgroup.com/ElectricCarConversion/Mockup3Fold.jpg
> .
>
> The first image shows the cutout of the gas tank hump. It measures
> 36 x
> 10.5 inches. The battery box won't drop down into it, but will
> span it.
>
> The second image shows a particle board mockup of the battery box.
> Box has
> two levels (rear level about 4 inches higher than front) and is
> 45-1/8
> inches at its widest point. The 18 inches from front to back,
> divided into
> 10.5-inch front section and 7.5-inch rear section.
>
> The third image shows my (artistically poor!) attempt at
> demonstrating what
> the TS cell arrangement will look like in the box.
>
> The front part of the box will hold around 275 pounds of TS cells,
> and the
> rear part of the box will hold around 190 pounds of TS cells.
>
> All advice appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bill Dennis
>
>
>
>
=====
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee wrote:
>>Modern pickups like the Chevy S-10 or Toyota Xtracab are
pretty heavy (4000-5000 lbs), but have pitiful stock load-carrying
capacities (typically 1000-1500 lbs).<<
[snip]
>>As an extreme, the early Datsun and Toyota mini-pickups are unbeatable. My
1974 Datsun pickup weighed 2700 lbs and had a 4000 lbs GVWR.<<
I'm confuzzled Lee. It sounds more like you are describing a new Pickup
here. Aren't the old Datsuns alot lighter? My '04 Tacoma (single cab,
5-speed) weighs 2775lbs and has a GVWR of 4250lbs (1475lbs load capacity.)
Paul G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Damon wrote:
>>I've always liked the way NEON did his VW buggy. It looks like he just
flipped the rearend and mated the motor directly.<<
That is just a stock VW swingaxle transaxle for a 40hp Bug. Well, I cut the
pilot bearing part off the input shaft to make a thinner adapter. The Buggy
is based on a 1964 Beetle with 14 inches removed from the center of the
frame. New and old Buggies are still available. They make fun EVs but tend
to have terrible freeway range because of their areo qualities. The latest
pictures of the buggy online are at <http://paul-g.home.comcast.net> (the
Pickup has been sold). There is a motor closeup shot.
Neon
--- End Message ---
