EV Digest 4477
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: JeepEV Drivetrain (was: Re: Oozing Motor?)
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: BRUSA NLG5xx max voltage
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Rules of thumb for engine, Generator Eff ...
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Rules of thumb for engine, Generator Eff ...
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: engine Generator question.
by "Stu or Jan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: engine Generator question. Re: Jerry
by "Stu or Jan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: JeepEV Drivetrain (was: Re: Oozing Motor?)
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Bearings for clutch motors, Re: JeepEV Drivetrain (was: Re: Oozing Motor?)
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: State of Charge calculations
by "Philip Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: State of Charge calculations
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Thunder-Sky Straps
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Almost Submerged the Heavy Metal Garden Tractor!
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Almost Submerged the Heavy Metal Garden Tractor!
by Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Almost Submerged the Heavy Metal Garden Tractor!
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Almost Submerged the Heavy Metal Garden Tractor!
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Another AC Motor Supplier? RaserTech
by "David C. Navas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Thunder-Sky Straps
by "steve ollerton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) KW BC250 charger for sale
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) 20 yr old 9" DC motor
by brian baumel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: engine Generator question. Re: Jerry
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Thunder-Sky Straps
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Thunder-Sky Straps
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Bearings for clutch motors, Re: JeepEV Drivetrain (was: Re: Oozing
Motor?)
by "Paul Compton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Warp 11" Torque/RPM graph
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: adapting MES motor
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: BRUSA NLG5xx max voltage
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: BRUSA NLG5xx max voltage
by Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Re: adapting MES motor
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29) RE: BRUSA NLG5xx max voltage
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
30) Re: Different types of AC drive systems
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
31) Re: State of Charge calculations
by Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
32) RE: Another PFC Caution? (was: PDF-20 design flaw) (long)
by "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I've often wondered whether the industrial and forklift DC motors we usually
use in conversions are really up to handling the considerable thrust exerted
parallel to the motor shaft when an automotive clutch is disengaged.
Years ago, I had an Opel Kadett with an ICE whose thrust bearing had worn so
badly that the flywheel rubbed against the engine block when I pushed in the
clutch. And that was >with< a thrust bearing. ADC motors don't >have<
thrust bearings, do they?
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to the "from" address above may not reach me. To
send me a private message, please use evdl at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 1 Jul 2005 at 16:44, Michael Hurley wrote:
> Interesting. I wonder what it's actually short
> for.
NLG == Neue LadeGeraet (?)
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to the "from" address above may not reach me. To
send me a private message, please use evdl at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 4 Jul 2005 at 5:20, jerry dycus wrote:
> Best probably would be a small water cooled MC, 4
> stoke snowmobile engine.
> Next an industural engine with OHV, higher
> compression, a good carb and ign advanced.
I realize that this isn't a priority for everyone, but I'd like to point out
that either option is likely to have appreciably higher emissions per mile
than an ICE powered automobile.
Most of these engines are subject to only minimal legislative regulation,
and they have only the most rudimentary emission control hardware. From
what I've read, industrial engines usually are not required to have ANY
emission control strategy. I'm not sure about snowmobile engines, but I'd
be very surprised if they implement any more stringent controls than
motorcycles do.
An uncontrolled or minimally controlled engine, used for a range extender,
will produce dozens to hundreds of times as much HC, CO and NOx per mile as
an automobile engine.
Certainly there are modifications that one could make to the engines to
clean them up and improve efficiency. But low emissions are literally
designed into automotive engines. I think that no matter what you do to a
MC, snowmobile, or industrial engine, you'll have a tough time even coming
within hailing distance of a recent auto engine.
I'll probably provoke some folks by saying this, so I apologize. But, IMO,
if you're contemplating using an uncontrolled engine for your range
extender, you're better off - from an emissions and energy efficiency
standpoint - to forget the EV altogether and get a Prius (or an Insight, if
you can use a two-seater). While you'd be giving up the ZEV mode, and the
challenge of building an EV, I think you'd come out ahead, even if your only
concern is operating cost.
In most cases, I suspect that an ultra-efficient, extra-clean ICE vehicle
such as a Prius or Insight would use less fuel and pollute less doing ^all^
your driving, than the range extender would use doing just part of it.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to the "from" address above may not reach me. To
send me a private message, please use evdl at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 7/5/05, David Roden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Certainly there are modifications that one could make to the engines to
> clean them up and improve efficiency. But low emissions are literally
> designed into automotive engines. I think that no matter what you do to a
> MC, snowmobile, or industrial engine, you'll have a tough time even coming
> within hailing distance of a recent auto engine.
I'm considering a range extender using a Honda GC engine with a PM
alternator. The engine would be run on LPG. For me that's the only
reasonable compromise for using such an engine with no emission
control hardware.
> I'll probably provoke some folks by saying this, so I apologize. But, IMO,
> if you're contemplating using an uncontrolled engine for your range
> extender, you're better off - from an emissions and energy efficiency
> standpoint - to forget the EV altogether and get a Prius (or an Insight, if
> you can use a two-seater).
I do agree, and have since the weekend got a 2000 manual Insight to
use for long trips.
> In most cases, I suspect that an ultra-efficient, extra-clean ICE vehicle
> such as a Prius or Insight would use less fuel and pollute less doing ^all^
> your driving, than the range extender would use doing just part of it.
I think that this totally depends on the usage - "pure" electric
miles, especially if using renewable energy, are surely vastly
preferable even to the Insight's low consumption and emission. If the
polluting range extender is used for only 1 or 2% of the EV's annual
mileage, does this totally cancel out the rest of the time?
Maybe replacing your gas lawnmower with an electric one to offset your
range extender is an acceptible compromise :)
--
EVan
http://www.tuer.co.uk/evs2
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of toltec
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 9:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: engine Generator question.
>>Assuming that we have a 1,000 lb EV and we wish to augment the
>>batteries with an ICE/generator, is there anything out there
>>that would generate 10KW and burn less than 1 gallon per hour?
>
> Sure. The power plants in the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight are more
> efficient than this. Driving at 60 mph and getting 60 mpg means you are
> burning 1 gal. per hour. These cars use around 250 watthours per mile;
> at 60 mph that's 60 x 0.25 = 20 KWH. So they can generate 20 KWH from 1
> gallon of gasoline.
I know I keep harping on this, but the RotaPower (at
http://www.freedom-motors.com/ - [standard "I'm not affiliated"
disclaimer]) advanced wankle engines seem ideally suited for an on-board
genny... small, high power/weight ratio, few moving parts, multiple
fuels, pretty efficient, and relatively clean
4.5 gallons per hour for 50 hp IMHO is not efficient. Are they bragging?
Their calculations seem all screwed up.
What is the fuel efficiency of the Rotapower engine and how does it compare
to the original OMC engine design?
Answer: Fuel efficiency is much improved over the OMC design. They were
getting about .7 lb per HP-HR fuel consumption, where we have seen as low as
.47. Our "normal" range at near maximum HP is .56 and around .5 at 4500 RPM
and ~40 HP from our single-rotor 530cc engine. If the engine is producing 50
HP, the fuel consumption is .56 pounds per 50 HP per hour, or 28 pounds per
hour. Gasoline weighs approximately 6 pounds per gallon, so consumption is
about 4.5 gallons per hour. If you think in metric units, there are 3.79
liters per US gallon. Therefore fuel consumption of the Rotapower engine
producing 50 HP is estimated to be 17.25 liters per hour. We use 86 Octane
"regular" gasoline for all applications.
BoyntonStu
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart:
>> A generator is about 80-90% eff.
A *good* generator is this efficient. The cheap ones used in
consumer-grade stuff are only 60-70%.
We have an ICE, a *good* generator, and a *good* motor.
If we assume that the generator and the motor are each 90% efficient, we
have 81% combined efficiency. If we don't have the bucks, 64%.
What is the number for the ICE to multiply .81 in order to calculate overall
efficiency?
Would the ICE/GEN/Motor be more efficient or less efficient for range
extension than an ICE/drivetrain setup?
One advantage, no GEN weight.
BoyntonStu
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 1:39 AM
Subject: Re: JeepEV Drivetrain (was: Re: Oozing Motor?)
> I've often wondered whether the industrial and forklift DC motors we
usually
> use in conversions are really up to handling the considerable thrust
exerted
> parallel to the motor shaft when an automotive clutch is disengaged.
>
> Years ago, I had an Opel Kadett with an ICE whose thrust bearing had worn
so
> badly that the flywheel rubbed against the engine block when I pushed in
the
> clutch. And that was >with< a thrust bearing. ADC motors don't >have<
> thrust bearings, do they?
> Hi Dave an' All;
Good point! I have had a few sets of bearings wear out. Mine are noisy
NOW, gotta tear down the motor very soon. I made this point about clutch
thrust to the Warfield, Netgain guyz. I suggested that we could use beefier
bearings or just BIGGER ones. There IS a lotta thrust on the motor or ICE
shaft whenya push in the clutch. I shift and use the clutch alot, so I think
I have killed the bearings sooner. Wondering if there is a drop, or pound in
replacment bearing ya could buy to give better thrust resistance?
Seeya
Bob
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Bob and All,
--- Bob Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 1:39 AM
> Subject: Re: JeepEV Drivetrain (was: Re: Oozing
> Motor?)
>
>
> > I've often wondered whether the industrial and
> forklift DC motors we
> usually
> > use in conversions are really up to handling the
> considerable thrust
> exerted
> > parallel to the motor shaft when an automotive
> clutch is disengaged.
> >
> > Years ago, I had an Opel Kadett with an ICE whose
> thrust bearing had worn
> so
> > badly that the flywheel rubbed against the engine
> block when I pushed in
> the
> > clutch. And that was >with< a thrust bearing.
> ADC motors don't >have<
> > thrust bearings, do they?
> > Hi Dave an' All;
>
> Good point! I have had a few sets of bearings
> wear out. Mine are noisy
And a great reason not to use a clutch since you
will be rarely shifting gears anyways, though Nick
would need more shifting in his rather heavy EV.
> NOW, gotta tear down the motor very soon. I made
> this point about clutch
> thrust to the Warfield, Netgain guyz. I suggested
> that we could use beefier
> bearings or just BIGGER ones. There IS a lotta
> thrust on the motor or ICE
> shaft whenya push in the clutch. I shift and use the
> clutch alot, so I think
> I have killed the bearings sooner. Wondering if
> there is a drop, or pound in
> replacment bearing ya could buy to give better
> thrust resistance?
Yes there are, Just take your bearing to any good
bearing store and they can find you a replacement that
will take thrust loads, something everyone with a
clutched motor should do before assembling their EV.
Also most motors can come stock with these kind
of bearings on special orders so calling the
manufacture will usually get you the bearings or part
numbers for them to buy locally.
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
>
> Seeya
>
> Bob
>
>
____________________________________________________
Yahoo! Sports
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I responded to this earlier ( or, thought I did) , but it never appeared, so
here goes again.
Here's an application note written by Steve Kahle, who wrote the
software for the Cruising Equipment E-meter:
--
Practical Application of Peukerts Equation - by Steve Kahle
One of the most interesting new features implemented in the E-meter is
the treatment of Peukerts Equation. Peukert describes the effect of
varying discharge rates on a battery, but he neglected to document a
comprehensive description of both charge and discharge currents needed
to determine the state-of-charge of the battery. CECO engineers have
tried to complete the description of the cycle in a practical way that
will be described below.
Discharging
.
.
.
.
C = 200 Ahr N = 1.25
I20 = 200 Ahr / 20 hr = 10 A
Cp = (10 A)^1.25 x 20 hr = 355.6 Ahr
This last equation is wrong. The units on both sides of an equation MUST be
the same, for the equation to be correct. Here, we have Ah on the right
side, and (A) ^1.25-h on the left. No engineer would even write out an
"equation " like that. As I was glancing through this, just seeing a term
with units raised to a non-integer power raised a red flag for me.
Using this "equation" results in the answers being units-dependent. In the
above example, if you convert units of Ah to mAh (milli-amphours) and solve
the equation that way, and then afterwards convert back to Amp-hours, you
get a different answer compared to using A-h all the way through. So, you
can get any answer you like, by changing the units. Not very useful, and
certainly not correct.
Does this error mean that the algorithm used in this meter doesn't give
valid results? Not necessarily. The later calculations could make up for
this mistake ( and, probably does, since there are a lot of these meters out
there, and they seem to work) . But it does make me suspicious about the
whole thing. And, certainly, this intermediate, step, taken alone, is
wrong.
If someone is really interested, he or she could work through the entire
algorithm ( preferably with a few examples) and check it out.
As far as I can find, Peukert never raised Amps ( or, any other term with
units) to a non-integer power. He always applied his exponent to the ratio
of two currents. You can do that, since the ratios of two values with units
is dimensionless, and you don't end up with a units problem at the end.
Unit-cop Phil
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 7/5/05, Philip Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Does this error mean that the algorithm used in this meter doesn't give
> valid results? Not necessarily. The later calculations could make up for
> this mistake ( and, probably does, since there are a lot of these meters out
> there, and they seem to work) . But it does make me suspicious about the
> whole thing. And, certainly, this intermediate, step, taken alone, is
> wrong.
Just a thought, but if the description in the application note was
"reverse engineered" from a C code algorithm, it could well contain
ways of working that look a bit strange (although it presumably gets
the wanted result). This can be due to the number ranges available in
whatever micro is used, or the use of functions to provide exponential
operations, etc.
That said, you would normally expect the code to be based on a
specification document containing the *wanted* mathematical
expressions, and maybe the application note should be based on that
instead.. but sometimes projects "grow" in a less rigorously
documented way :)
Regards
Evan
--
EVan
http://www.tuer.co.uk/evs2
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
When I received my TS cells, the endplates came with long all-threads
holding them together. But I've noticed that other people have received
plates held together with metal straps. I think I'd like to switch to the
straps. Are they just something that I can pick up at a hardware store? Is
there anything special I need to ask for?
Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
David Roden wrote:
> Yikes! Now I know why the Elec-Trak has a deadman switch on the seat.
>
Yeah, good point. In my work life, the electric lift trucks all have seat
switches, brakes
switches, floorboard switches, etc., so I'm quite familiar with these devices
and why they
are there. The problem, is that I'm spoiled by the fact that over the 8 years
this little
tractor that's been my electric mule of a friend, is that I 'love' the way I
can be off
the machine, have it in a lower gear (being left in top gear was one of the
problems), set
the throttle, and be somewhere else while it tugs on whatever I need to move,
be it an EV
that isn't running and yet needs to be moved up and out my driveway, or
whatever....it's
very handy to be able to do this.
I'm thinking of a new plan now after the runaway tractor incident. A seat
switch, first
and foremost...geesh, I've got them everywhere! Second, a wireless remote
control that can
override the seat switch, but one that has to have the button held on for
travel and where
the minute it is released, the travel ceases. The remote could also select
forward or
reverse.
There's already a remote for the stereo, why not a second one to control the
tractor?
See Ya.....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm thinking of a new plan now after the runaway tractor incident. A seat
switch, first
and foremost...geesh, I've got them everywhere! Second, a wireless remote
control that can
override the seat switch, but one that has to have the button held on for
travel and where
the minute it is released, the travel ceases. The remote could also select
forward or
reverse.
If you do a seat switch, make sure it drops out the main contactor in a
way that the tractor will not come on again without doing something like
returning the speed selection to zero, applying the brake, or cycling
the switch.
Reason being if you're going up a hill and you bounce a bit on the seat
the tractor will stop pulling, then start right back up. This could lift
the front end, as all that torque will be applied at once.
When I am climbing hills in the E20 I always make sure to put it in
cruise control. And if it stops due to a seat bump or overload I let it
coast back down the hill on brake; never will try to restart it.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
Christopher Zach wrote:
> > I'm thinking of a new plan now after the runaway tractor incident. A seat
> > switch, first
> > and foremost...geesh, I've got them everywhere! Second, a wireless remote
> > control that can
> > override the seat switch, but one that has to have the button held on for
> > travel and where
> > the minute it is released, the travel ceases. The remote could also select
> > forward or
> > reverse.
>
> If you do a seat switch, make sure it drops out the main contactor in a
> way that the tractor will not come on again without doing something like
> returning the speed selection to zero, applying the brake, or cycling
> the switch.
Good point, thanks. The key switch has to be twisted to where a self latching
relay pulls in
the main contactor. It will be easy to tap into that relay circuit with the
seat switch, to
where if one gets bumped off, lifted off, or simply gets off, the key switch
would have to be
re-twisted again before travel could resume.
See Ya......John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There's already a remote for the stereo, why not a second one to control
the tractor?
See Ya.....John Wayland
That's easy, because everytime you want to adjust the stereo you will only
be able to find the remote for moving the tractor and everytime you want to
move the tractor you will only be able to find the remote for adjusting the
stereo :-)
Let's see there is Murphy's law and Moore's law, but no one seems to have
lent their name to anything having to do with remote controls. I can't be
the only one that will spend 20 minutes looking for a remote control so that
I don't have to take 3 steps to change the channel on the tv.
damon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave, it sounds like you had a bad experience with them.
> Care to detail?
Well, not really. They are very explicit on their site -- they
do not sell motors, they are not interested in selling motors, they
want to partner with motor-producing companies.
When they announced their latest monster, I sent an email along
the lines "name your price". I heard nothing.
They are a public company, that, last year, had sales of $32k.
That's gross income, not net. Nevertheless, the company is "worth"
nearly $1B dollars.
<shrug>
IMO, they sell stock, not motors.
-Dave
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My only comment is the straps have to be strong and tight.
One of cells slipped so I had to undo the straps to realign it. It was a
bugger of a job to get them there straps back on!
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:32 PM
Subject: Thunder-Sky Straps
> When I received my TS cells, the endplates came with long all-threads
> holding them together. But I've noticed that other people have received
> plates held together with metal straps. I think I'd like to switch to the
> straps. Are they just something that I can pick up at a hardware store?
Is
> there anything special I need to ask for?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bill Dennis
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
In my conversion 'package' that I recently got there is a K&W BC250 120/240vac
input, configured for a 140vdc battery pack. I'm going to have a 180 vdc pack
and so the charger is of no use to me.
It has never been used, the orig owner bought if for $1500 plus and I would
like to get $1300 for it.
It will be going up on the EV Trading post site, but I'm giving the list first
chance at it.
Go to
http://ironandwood.org/KW250/KW250charger.htm for a full description of it.
Thanks
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
Just need some quick advice. I have a 9 GE motor that
has been sitting in an EV is some guys back yard in
Arkansas for about 20 yrs. The motor runs great, Ive
taken the car around the block already, but I figured
there may be some sort of maintenance that should be
done to it after sitting so long. So I took the serial
number into a local motor repair shop and they want to
charge me $510 for some work they feel should be done
to it. So my questions are:
-if I dont take it in for maintenance what sort of
regrets may I have in the next year? (I plan on taking
it in eventually maybe in 1-2yrs)
-is there any way I can check its condition w/o
tearing it apart myself?
-if I really do need to take it in some where, does
anyone have a suggestion where? (I live in Madison, wi
)
Thanks for your input,
Brian B.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Stu or Jan wrote:
> What is the number for the ICE to multiply .81 in order to calculate
> overall efficiency? Would the ICE/GEN/Motor be more efficient or
> less efficient for range extension than an ICE/drivetrain setup?
The peak efficiency is better if you mechanically connect the ICE's
power to the drive wheels. A transmission's efficiency can be 95% or
better.
However, the ICE's efficiency varies dramatically depending on load.
Unless you load it at its "sweet spot" speed, efficiency suffers. In
contrast, electric motors have a wider range of power levels at which
they still provide high efficiency.
So, while the peak is higher with a transmission, the average is better
with the electric motor/generator setup.
--
The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
-- Harlan Ellison
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bill Dennis wrote:
> When I received my TS cells, the endplates came with long all-threads
> holding them together. But I've noticed that other people have received
> plates held together with metal straps. I think I'd like to switch to
> the straps. Are they just something that I can pick up at a hardware
> store? Is there anything special I need to ask for?
Mine came with the straps, and frankly, they are rather poor. In a stack
of 4 cells, the center two were basically loose and free to slide out.
They have the look of something thrown together with what was available,
rather than an engineered solution. I needed to take them apart, re-bend
the "L" at the ends of the strap, and reassemble them.
--
The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
-- Harlan Ellison
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Perhpas a couple of drops of hot glue between cells would keep them from
shifting?
David C Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
"The Bush administration's priorities are "a little bit different now
and veterans aren't a priority,"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: Thunder-Sky Straps
Bill Dennis wrote:
When I received my TS cells, the endplates came with long all-threads
holding them together. But I've noticed that other people have received
plates held together with metal straps. I think I'd like to switch to
the straps. Are they just something that I can pick up at a hardware
store? Is there anything special I need to ask for?
Mine came with the straps, and frankly, they are rather poor. In a stack
of 4 cells, the center two were basically loose and free to slide out.
They have the look of something thrown together with what was available,
rather than an engineered solution. I needed to take them apart, re-bend
the "L" at the ends of the strap, and reassemble them.
--
The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
-- Harlan Ellison
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not this old chestnut again!
The motors we use have single row deep groove bearings at both ends of the
armature. These are quite capable of taking thrust loads although the comm
end bearing is usually able to 'float' in its housing to accomodate thermal
expansion. The axial rating is approx 25% that of the radial loading. To
give you an example the Prestolite MTC2001 uses a 6206 2RS1 at the drive end
which has a dynamic radial load rating of 20,300 Newtons (approx 4500 lb)
which means it can handle over 1000 pounds of thrust load. This is the load
it can carry for its entire design life of 1,000,000 revolutions, so the
short term capacity is higher.
Clutch release bearings are in some cases ordinary single row deep grove
bearings with adaptors fitted and they're a lot smaller that the motors
output bearing. The only problem you might have is that the bearing housings
might not be able to take the thrust load and thebearings and armature will
shift, but I've yet to see a motor constructed this way.
P.S. Yes, it really is a Metric bearing in the Prestolite. The designers
weren't stupid and knew that Metric bearings are less that half the price of
Imperial sizes on the world market.
Paul Compton
www.sciroccoev.co.uk
www.morini.mania.co.uk
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Anyone have a torque/RPM graph of a netgain Warp 11" motor?
thanks
Don
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Charles Whalen wrote:
I mean, you know, well sure, Siemens has a 10-year warranty,
but one has to wonder how they're going to honor, service, and support that
warranty (if any customer ever needs it) when their surplus over-stock is
all used up, as is apparently now the case with the 5133 motor.
Of course spare motors and inverters meant for parts/replacements exist
for replacement or parts and those will never be offered for sale.
We know the rate of the failures and estimate how much spare hardware
is needed for 10 years of support of the last inverter or motor sold.
BTW I have never heard of a motor failure (because it was defective)
yet.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have it translated for me somewhere, I'll dig up that email.
Victor
Michael Hurley wrote:
At 11:27 AM -0700 on 7/1/05, Victor Tikhonov wrote:
NG or NLG stands for "charging equipment" in German, it is generic
for this type of gear, not the model. I don't speak German so cannot
quote you.
Interesting. I wonder what it's actually short for. "Charging Equipment"
is "Ladeeinrichtung" and "Battery Charger" is "Ladegerät" Probably short
for some technical jargon I don't know.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Roden writes:
>
> On 1 Jul 2005 at 16:44, Michael Hurley wrote:
>
> > Interesting. I wonder what it's actually short
> > for.
>
> NLG == Neue LadeGeraet (?)
According to a German-speaking coworker, this means "New charger",
or "New charge unit".
Ralph
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don Cameron wrote:
Charles,
I am interested in MES motors for my next project as well. I have yet to
investigate mating options, but I was thinking that metric splines might be
more available in europe for the MES motor.
> As Siemens 5105WS12 with involuted splines, they meant to mesh
directly with the splined input shaft coming from the gear box
(clutchless). Can't get any cleaner than that.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
FYI, Babelfish, the translator from Altvista, calls this a "New Battery
Charger"
http://babelfish.altavista.com
...not bad for a computer, I thought it would say "new one drawer
equipment"
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 Ralph Merwin
Sent: July 5, 2005 10:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: BRUSA NLG5xx max voltage
David Roden writes:
>
> On 1 Jul 2005 at 16:44, Michael Hurley wrote:
>
> > Interesting. I wonder what it's actually short for.
>
> NLG == Neue LadeGeraet (?)
According to a German-speaking coworker, this means "New charger", or "New
charge unit".
Ralph
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, Siemens and MES inverters employ vector control.
Lee Hart wrote:
Chris Zach wrote:
Are there different types of AC motor control, like standard AC and
Vector control AC, or are they one and the same?
Oh, yes! There are *many* control strategies. Vector control is only one
of them (and rather fashionable at the moment).
If there is a difference, then are the Siemens motor/controllers
vector control? Do the Solectras use vector controllers?
Others can answer this with confidence, but I would guess that they are
vector controls.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Wow, very informative, thanks.
Lee Hart wrote:
Eric Poulsen wrote:
I'm wondering about the SOC algorithm... Lee, I'm looking at you! =)
Here's an application note written by Steve Kahle, who wrote the
software for the Cruising Equipment E-meter:
--
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry to resurrect this thread - responses today as promised.
Rich Rudman wrote:
> No load power up.
>
> It's a switcher... If it cycles ... and there's no place for the juice to
> go. BANG! We have just enough caps on the DC side to keep it alive.
> Clearly at times this is not enough.
>
> It was most likely damaged while doing your Dc/DC testing.. and then died
> at
> a later date.
Very likely true.
> The quick breaker trip was a sure sign that something really Bad was
> taking
> place. Like your ouput was grounded to the case of the charger. You got a
> shoot through from the charger's output to the AC grid. In effect it was
> shorted out to AC grid.
Highly unlikely. Even I know better than that. Our test setup was checked
out before we switched anything on.
<snip
> So for all swticher power supplies... always set the current to Zero
> before
> turning them on, and always have some kind of load attached to the output.
> Even a light builb helps.
>
> Or just don't power them up until you have them installed and wired to the
> pack.
>
> The first sheet on the shipped manual has all the don't and DO NOTs on it.
> Reading might help.
When you're an electrical dummy like me in a hobby like this, you tend to
get very anal about reading stuff. The shipped manual that I received (May
2003, unit #84) says absolutely nothing about no load power-up. It warns
about ground faults, polarity and use with other non-isolated chargers. It
does say to turn the amps knob to minimum before switching on, but a reason
or possible consequences are not given. I wonder how many people actually
do that? I wonder how many will now, knowing why it's important?
I'm not bringing this up to get in your face. I'm bringing it up because it
looks like I'm one of many who didn't know and weren't told that no load
power-up is a bad thing. Like I said, documentation is difficult to make
complete and current, and you've had *plenty* on your plate in bringing the
PFC to market. Thanks for including such a warning in the current shipped
manual. My point here is to let *everyone* know of this issue so they can
deal with it.
In another post Rich wrote:
> Your risk of it coming unglued depends on a LOT of things.
> If the Amps knob is all the way counter clockwise, your risk is almost
> nill.
>
> If you have it dialed full amps and you do a few hundred on off cycles,
> Good
> chance you will be giving me a phone call.
Just for the record, my charger had a total of maybe four cycles on my 120V
pack before this came up. Everything worked fine. When I removed it to do
my tests at work, the AMPS knob was left at its usual mid-scale position.
It is possible but unlikely that the knob was inadvertently turned to full
scale before my tests. The test consisted of two tries, both of which
tripped the breaker. The power stage failed shortly thereafter.
David Roden wrote:
[copied from the archive, as not all posts are coming through in the digest]
***************
On 1 Jul 2005 at 10:24, Chris Tromley wrote:
> I see the very real potential here for a thermal
> runaway in my flooded lead-acid pack. Sure, it's a rare occurrence in
> general, but *it happens*. And apparently the current PFC chargers will
> *allow* it to happen. Sorry Rich, this sounds like an "oops".
I don't know that I agree. As I implied in a post before, the PFC is indeed
not
a foolproof product. I don't pretend to speak for Rich, but from what I can
tell,
it wasn't supposed to be!
It's a charger designed for hobbyists - indeed designed BY hobbyists, since
Rich asked what people on this list wanted in a charger. It assumes that you
have some bit of experience in EV design and construction, have an idea of
what you want and need for your project, and have control over how it will
be
used.
<snip>
The EV hobbyist should make an informed choice. I wonder if some people
on this list have chosen the PFC chargers the way we chose Lesters 25
years ago: because it seemed as if lots of other people we knew were using
them.
***************
David, you wrote a very thoughtful post that I agree almost completely with.
I do appreciate the efforts of those who provide these components, and
follow the list in part to understand how I can make them fit my needs. I
tried to make an informed choice. Sometimes that's not possible. So I'm
pointing out a situation of which other users are not aware, but should be.
I do disagree with your assertion that since the PFC wasn't intended to be a
foolproof charger, the lack of a latch on the timer feature is acceptable.
If you're going to include a timer, the difference in cost or difficulty
between latch or no latch is trivial. The need for a latch to stop a
thermal runaway makes it an easy decision.
But maybe not your first decision. My guess is that it was simply omitted
on the first board layout, and more pressing issues kept it from being
implemented later. I fully accept that from a small company that is trying
to fill a need for all of us. I have a pretty good idea of the challenges
Rich is up against.
But before we users can make an informed choice, we must be informed.
That's why Bill posted about his experience, and why I posted about mine. I
am not trying to imply that Rich is irresponsible in any way. I doubt that
Bill is either. I don't even object to Rich's somewhat frosty responses to
these posts. It's his pride that produces the products he sells - that's a
good thing. Bill and I are simply trying to inform. Hopefully there will
be fewer expensive incidents in the future.
Bottom line, I'm all for keeping Rich's business healthy. But until he can
afford to produce a seamless product, we need to know where the weak points
are.
Chris
--- End Message ---
