EV Digest 4726
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: electric motorcycle performance
by "Mark Thomasson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Microturbine generator on eBay
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
3) Re: Solectria Force cars for sale in New Jersey
by M Bianchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
by Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Wire and connector sizing
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Microturbine generator on eBay
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Deka Batteries
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Fw: Prices OKA NEV KIT
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tires - Bridgestone B381???
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: EVILBUSQuestions
by Shawn Rutledge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Wire and connector sizing
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Microturbine generator on eBay
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Wire and connector sizing
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: FW: NEDRA Records for 2005
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: AGM's at rest vs Flooded
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Solectria Force cars for sale in New Jersey
by Jim Coate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: baldor motor
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: FW: NEDRA Records for 2005
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Challenges was voltage = speed? (newbie)
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Obvious Problem #1 - this relatively small motor takes up valuable space
that could be used for batteries.
Consider using a jack shaft where the motor is now, and remount the motor
higher and further back under the seat. This gives you 2 more sprockets and
another chain, with an efficiency penalty, but makes it easier to get the
sprocket ratio higher without installing a gigantic sprocket on the rear.
Also, how about twin ETEKs, mounted outside the frame with shafts pointing
inward. They might need to be mounted high to avoid interfering with the
foot pegs, in which case the jack shaft would also be necessary. The motors
would cool better out in the slipstream and could add a distinctive look to
the motorcycle.
Not so obvious Problem #2 - The motor is placed parallel to the rear axle
low in the rear of the frame to position the front sprocket in line with
the
rear sprocket. However this makes the motorcycle very right side heavy
with the
batteries centered in the frame.
My E-scrambler has the same configuration, but I have never noticed any
imbalance. Apparently, the 160 pounds of batteries shifted slightly to the
opposite side easily compensates for the 40 pound motor being off center.
Final motor related thought. The ADC seems quite durable, but my heavy
throttle hand causes the motor to smell very warm after a short ride (~12
miles)
at 45 to 65 MPH in very hilly territory. Keep in mind that this vehicle
is
geared too tall at the moment which may be contributing to this issue.
Mine got hotter to when it was geared 15/38. Now gear at 15/67 and operates
at less current draw and therefore cooler, but also lower top end speed.
Check the current to the motor, that will tell you if it's being overloaded.
New motor are often odorous in the first hours of operation. Mark T.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 9/16/05 5:40:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The seller is this guy in Ooltewah, TN a couple miles away from me who
ended up with all the AVS junk when they cleaned out the building to
sell it. He keeps listing this stuff for outrageous prices that never
sells. You'd think he'd learn. I need to stop down and have a chat
with him :-)
Do you know if any of the electric buses still complete and could be made to
run?
Were the buses able to run entirely on the electricity generated by the
turbines, or were they primarily battery powered with turbine generator assist?
Thanks,
V Harris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John Fiore tells me that as of this e-mail,
three vehicles are no longer available:
Vehicle # 2 VIN 2C1MR5291V6729961
Vehicle # 5 VIN 2C1MR5298V6720352
Vehicle # 6 VIN 2C1MR5294V6739870
--
Mike Bianchi
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The best LRR tires that are easy to come by are the tires that come stock on
the Insight and Prius. If they can be fit on your vehicle, I would go that
route. On the Insight they are the Bridgestone Potenza RE92, but is my
understanding that only the size (165/65-14) that come on these vehicles are
true LRR tires. It seems like they would work well for a small, light EV.
There are other LRR tires that people have been happy with, but these ones
are easy to get, and the only ones I personally have experience with.
damon
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 22:56:45 -0700
> I have wasted a lot of hours recently trying to find actual numbers for
> rolling resistance of currently manufactured tires. The only source I
> have found is the Green Seal report from 2003, which lists only one
> decent tire, Bridgestone B381 (R=0.0062). Does anyone know of any
> reliable sources for more measurements?
>
> I measured my rolling resistance last week at R=0.025; the tires could
> be more than half of that. The best way to find out is to replace them.
>
> Brian
> www.skewray.com/alfa
I've shopped based on that report, but some of the lowest RRs on the Green
Seal
list are winter tires. The Sumitomo entry is the cheapest, but some tire
sites
give it poor reviews. Other models on the list can be hard to find...and
no-one
in my area carries Nokian! Has anyone else got a RR listing for common
brands
and models?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The tires that come on the Prius are crap. They look like the same tires
that come on the Insite, but it's common for tires on a Prius to loose
pressure quickly, which leads to the outer edges wearing quickly. I tried
to monitor the tire pressure on my wife's Prius regularly, and usually had
to add air, but the edges wore out.
We've been through three sets of tires since buying the car new in 2001.
The first replacement was done by the dealer since they were having so many
people complaining about the tires wearing quickly. The latest set are from
Les Schwab and are some Asian brand whose name I can't remember (I can look
it up this evening). We've had them several months now, and I rarely have
to add air when I check the pressure. The appear to be wearing evenly, and
our mileage has increased 2-3 mpg since switching brands.
I bought the Bridgestone Potenza RE92 directly from a Firestone dealer for
my Prizm EV and they held up pretty well while for the 10 mohtns or so that
it was on the road. We'll see if that continues once it's back in regular
use.
Ralph
damon henry writes:
>
> The best LRR tires that are easy to come by are the tires that come stock on
> the Insight and Prius. If they can be fit on your vehicle, I would go that
> route. On the Insight they are the Bridgestone Potenza RE92, but is my
> understanding that only the size (165/65-14) that come on these vehicles are
> true LRR tires. It seems like they would work well for a small, light EV.
> There are other LRR tires that people have been happy with, but these ones
> are easy to get, and the only ones I personally have experience with.
>
> damon
>
>
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Reply-To: [email protected]
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
> >Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 22:56:45 -0700
> >
> > > I have wasted a lot of hours recently trying to find actual numbers for
> > > rolling resistance of currently manufactured tires. The only source I
> > > have found is the Green Seal report from 2003, which lists only one
> > > decent tire, Bridgestone B381 (R=0.0062). Does anyone know of any
> > > reliable sources for more measurements?
> > >
> > > I measured my rolling resistance last week at R=0.025; the tires could
> > > be more than half of that. The best way to find out is to replace them.
> > >
> > > Brian
> > > www.skewray.com/alfa
> >
> >I've shopped based on that report, but some of the lowest RRs on the Green
> >Seal
> >list are winter tires. The Sumitomo entry is the cheapest, but some tire
> >sites
> >give it poor reviews. Other models on the list can be hard to find...and
> >no-one
> >in my area carries Nokian! Has anyone else got a RR listing for common
> >brands
> >and models?
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes you can, It is very common in electrical work to parallel conductors.
The two No AWG 2 with a 90 degree insulation is rated for 130 amperes each
would be good for 260 amperes connected in parallel and will run cooler.
A No AWG 2/0 is good for 195 amps
A No AWG 4/0 is good for 260 amps which is the same as two each AWG 2.
These ratings are for not more than three conductors in a conduit or wireway.
If it is a single conductor and not enclosed and is in free air, than the
ampere can be increase as listed.
No. AWG 2 is now rated for 190 amps
No. AWG 2/0 is rated for 300 amps
No. AWG 4/0 is rated for 405 amps
If you are installing cable in conduit or wireway threw your EV or bundle
together than the rating is as its in conduit, although I would say the ampere
rating will be more if its bundle together.
If the wire is used as connections across the battery and there is plenty of
air flow and the temperature does not get above 90 C. Then the amperage rating
is greatly increase over a wire in a conduit.
Even though the interconnections for each battery are short, you have to take
the entire length of all the connections and length of the loop run from motor
threw the batteries and back to the motor that will determine the rating of the
conductor.
I have about 80 foot circuit loop in my EV which does not count threw the
battery cells, So for me its closer to 100 feet of circuit path.
Try to used the reduced diameter type for on board installation. If you are
dragging a cable or wire across the ground, than used the thicker insulation,
as is normal on welding wire.
If I was to replace my 4/0 cable in my EV, I would used three each No AWG 2 or
maybe three No AWG 1 that all three ends of this wire will insert into a 4/0
cable terminal as a single connection.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: Rush<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: Wire and connector sizing
Roland,
I'm not sure I understand you - are you saying that I can substitute 3 - 2
AWG runs for a #2/0 run? And at the same time end up with a better amp rating
than a #4/0 run?
If yes, then all I have to do is make the 3 runs into one, I can wrap them
with elec tape (orange) and then put them inside a pipe/sleeve of some sort.
Would using 3 - #2AWG runs instead of #2/0 cable be an acceptable solution?
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org<http://www.ironandwood.org/>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
To: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: Wire and connector sizing
> Under Engineering Supervision, conductor ampacities shall be permitted to
be calculated for design lengths. This depends on conductor temperature,
ambient temperature, dc resistance of conductor and thermal resistance between
other conductors and surroundings.
>
> Lets, take this to the extreme. A engineering for a factory assemble
device that draws 4000 amps for 0.1 second on and 15 second off only required a
No. 2 Awg copper stranded wire with a 90 degree C. rating!!!!
> In there testing, this conductor never went above 60 degrees C. So the blue
prints for installation to commercial power show a 2 inch conduit with 4 No. 2
AWG 90 degree C. for a run of 100 feet from the mains.
>
> At the mains, was a 3 pole 480 volt LIMITRON circuit breaker that has a
CURRENT REGULATOR attach to it which is adjusted for 125 AMPS.
>
> A Fuse Disconnect switch is required next to this machine. This switch has
200 amp LIMITRON fuses in it that has a interrupting rate of 250,000 amps.
>
> This was put out for bid to electrical contractors, and only one contractor
bid on it. Others said, that it is not according to NEC and did not understand
the Engineering In Field Designs that ARE PERMITTED by the NEC. They said you
need conductors for 4000 amps.
>
> So a Engineer like Otmar can design the conductor sizes for his motor
controllers.
>
> The NEC is now getting into the EV conductor sizes and type required for
EV's for different voltages. These conductors are mark with EV and other
specifications as to voltage and temperature.
>
> I ran all my motor interconnects to the Zilla and battery interconnects
with the new reduce size 2/0 multi strand copper cable, that is not a welding
cable type with the very fine wires, but is similar with a larger strands that
still ran into the hundreds or strands.
>
> I ran between my battery back to the Zilla with 4/0 cable because it became
a 25 ft run. In looking at ampere tables for conductors, I could have run two
No. 2 AWG in parallel that would have the same ampere capacity of the 4/0 cable.
>
> The following ratings are for a 100 foot run for a maximum of 3 percent
voltage drop at 90 degree C. insulation rating in a Conduit or Raceway.
>
> The ampere rating can be increase as the distances are reduce without
increasing the temperature rating.
>
> 4/0 AWG - 260 amperes
> 2/0 AWG - 195 amperes
> 2 AWG - 130 amperes
>
> I went back to the shop, and I found I can insert three No. 2 AWG into a
4/0 wire terminal. That would give 390 amperes and the wire should run cooler
too and would have been easier to install.
>
> Its is a required by the NEC, that parallel conductor runs shall end up to
a single terminal. This is because if one becomes loose, that the one
remaining cable goes into a fault.
>
> Roland
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ryan Bohm<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> To: Jeff Shanab<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> ; EV
List<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 10:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Wire and connector sizing
>
>
> Hi Jeff and Everyone:
>
> I think this page will answer most of your questions as to what is
> available:
>
>
http://www.evsource.com/tls_lugs.php<http://www.evsource.com/tls_lugs.php<http://www.evsource.com/tls_lugs.php<http://www.evsource.com/tls_lugs.php>>
>
> A wise EV expert (Otmar) told me once that 2/0 will be sufficient for
> most EV applications in the battery loop. Short 2/0 runs will suffice
> in the motor loop for a Z1K. Use 4/0 cable to the motor with the Z2K.
>
> -Ryan
> --
> - EV Source
<http://www.evsource.com<http://www.evsource.com/<http://www.evsource.com<http://www.evsource.com/>>>
-
> Selling names like Zilla, PFC Chargers, WarP, and PowerCheq
> All at the best prices available!
> E-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> Toll-free: 1-877-215-6781
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 08:19:45 -0400, Meta Bus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I am not authoritative on AVS or Capstone, but most of the news articles
>and test reports I've read have pointed to a wide variety of general
>problems with the buses (like "swimming" in the front suspension, or
>leakage through the windshield), and fleets had plenty of other reasons
>to reject AVS, besides the microturbine.
That's true. The hybrid was simply the last nail in the coffin and
the microturbine was the hammer that drove it in. At least that's
what I've heard from ex-employees.
>
>Capstones are still being built into hybrid buses (eBus in Cali).
>
>I have one of those in the back of my AVS bus, of the diesel variety. I
>have a parts bus that has an empty spot where the turbine used to be.
>Mmmm...
>
>John, if you stop by to see him, offer $600 for me.
OK :-)
>
>Yes the Capstone Digital Power Controller is an interesting piece of
>electrical engineering. I haven't opened the box yet, to get a look
>inside, but I am curious as to how the variable voltage and variable
>frequency are corralled and taken to a steady 60 hz.
I haven't had the opportunity to anything other than peek in the box
so keeping that in mind, about the only way they could do it is like a
conventional switch-mode power supply. Rectify and filter the
incoming AC, then chop the DC voltage to the appropriate waveform and
frequency.
The apparent wide range of output voltage presents circuit design
challenges but I don't think they're as bad as it looks. I sat in on
a presentation that AVS gave regarding this setup at an NTRC
conference a few years ago. This is from memory so don't shoot me if
I'm off a little. I seem to recall that the presenter said that the
turbine idled at around 60% of full throttle with the turbine and
generator turning around 85% of full speed. If true, that would
greatly narrow the range of voltage that had to be dealt with.
This high idle speed is typical of turbines and is why they never made
it to automobiles. The hybrid approach looks to me to be the only
workable method if the turbine can be started rapidly enough.
John
>
>Neon John wrote:
>> Yaaa right. I might think about giving $500 for it. That's the
>> microturbine that nailed the final nail in AVS's coffin. About as
>> reliable as a wet match. It's set up to run on compressed natural
>> gas, not terribly useful for an conventional car at this point.
>>
>> You'd have to be a pretty clever dood to use the output of the
>> generator. It's a three phase PM alternator, 4 pole I think. At
>> 96,000 RPM, that's 3200 hz. that will require some rather expensive
>> high speed, high voltage semiconductors to use. I'd not expect to be
>> able to do anything with the controller unless you're repairing an AVS
>> hybrid bus.
>>
>> Of course, it might be fun just to fire off to make your neighbors
>> think you're driving a turbine car :-)
>>
>> The seller is this guy in Ooltewah, TN a couple miles away from me who
>> ended up with all the AVS junk when they cleaned out the building to
>> sell it. He keeps listing this stuff for outrageous prices that never
>> sells. You'd think he'd learn. I need to stop down and have a chat
>> with him :-)
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 03:34:35 -0500, Danny Miller
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Capstone Microturbine on eBay for running a hybrid EV. In fact it came
>>>out of an EV.
>>>Comes with a generator and controller, puts out 30KW of electricity. Neat!
>>>http://cgi.ebay.com/CAPSTONE-MICROTURBINE-30KW-GENERATOR-W-CONTROLLER_W0QQitemZ4405164771QQcategoryZ46412QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>>>
>>>Sadly I don't have $6k to blow on this sort of thing right now.
>>>
>>>Danny
>>>
>>
>> ---
>> John De Armond
>> See my website for my current email address
>> http://www.johngsbbq.com
>> Cleveland, Occupied TN
>>
>>
>
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 09:04:43 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>John and Ryan,
>
>I was just at my local Deka outlet here in Nashville and the manager there
>gave me a copy of the article.
Where is that outlet? I might just drive over and take a look.
>Incidentally, he said that when the company was trying to figure out a name
>for them, he won the prize when he submitted the Intimidator name.
For me, that name is enough of a turn-off that I'd have never looked
at them had I not been on this list.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seems you could modify this to your own tastes. Lawrence Rhodes..
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Prices
OKA NEV KIT car DOT certified for NEV use
$5,000 FOB Las Vegas (body, suspension, brakes, electrical, interior,
glazing, tires, all except power unit).
Transmission/differential 4 speed $450
Dive shafts FWD $65.00 each
Sunroof - $175.00
Air Horn Kit $25.00
Power door lock kit $45.00
Alloy 13 " wheels with DOT tires 155/70R13 $280.00 (replaces 135R12 stock
rims and tires
Delivery $1.00 per mile from Las Vegas, or if you pick up in Nevada 7.5%
sales tax needs to be added.
Miro Kefurt
OKA AUTO USA
PS: If you have experience in building and registering self made cars in
California then you should have no problems.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Insight OEM tires are available at the Tire Rack, and would fit my car (
Echo) and would have enough load capacity, but would be a size smaller than
original. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem, but I would rather stick
with the same size, if I could.
Also, the RE92's don't appear at all on the only collection of actual test
data I've seen ( The Green Seal Report). Anyone have actual data for these?
What were the OEM Prius tires that you are also suggesting? They are
probably about the same size as the OEM Echo tires.
And, does anyone have any knowledge or experience about the Green Seal
Report's lowest-tested LRR tire, the Bridgestone B381?
Phil
From: "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The best LRR tires that are easy to come by are the tires that come stock
on the Insight and Prius. If they can be fit on your vehicle, I would go
that route. On the Insight they are the Bridgestone Potenza RE92, but is
my understanding that only the size (165/65-14) that come on these vehicles
are true LRR tires. It seems like they would work well for a small, light
EV. There are other LRR tires that people have been happy with, but these
ones are easy to get, and the only ones I personally have experience with.
damon
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Low Rolling Resistance Tire Numbers
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 22:56:45 -0700
> I have wasted a lot of hours recently trying to find actual numbers for
> rolling resistance of currently manufactured tires. The only source I
> have found is the Green Seal report from 2003, which lists only one
> decent tire, Bridgestone B381 (R=0.0062). Does anyone know of any
> reliable sources for more measurements?
>
> I measured my rolling resistance last week at R=0.025; the tires could
> be more than half of that. The best way to find out is to replace
them.
>
> Brian
> www.skewray.com/alfa
I've shopped based on that report, but some of the lowest RRs on the Green
Seal
list are winter tires. The Sumitomo entry is the cheapest, but some tire
sites
give it poor reviews. Other models on the list can be hard to find...and
no-one
in my area carries Nokian! Has anyone else got a RR listing for common
brands
and models?
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 9/15/05, Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone thought of implementing an isolated "1-wire" interface
> (Dallas Semiconductor 1-wire, that is)? Dallas makes 1-wire compatible
> temperature sensors and A/D convertors (to be used to measure voltage)
> that could be addressed via the bus. Only downside is that a particular
I have some experience with it and it doesn't seem like a 100%
reliable bus even when there isn't interference, especially if your
wires aren't short and your topology isn't just a single run of
twisted pair with sensors on it. If there are branches, you need a
hub, and I don't have one yet, so just end up using separate
interfaces to the computer for each branch whenever combining them
presents a problem. I can imagine that it could be somewhat
interference-prone. But at least it's got 5v between 0 and 1, not
like RS-485 that we were talking about. And the maximum rate for
polling a lot of sensors on the same bus is not that fast, and depends
on how smart the computer interface is. The USB one can do it a lot
faster than the simpler serial-port ones, for example.
There are things that are very cool about it though.
It would be interesting if Lee could try it with that controller
interference simulator.
> battery would have one of each (temp / voltage) sensor, and each sensor
> would have it's own unique address, meaning that you don't have a single
> unique address per physical measurement node. Makes automatic battery
> monitor discovery difficult.
You could try to use devices that have EEPROM on them so you can
program each device with the metadata about what it's connected to.
That's one advantage of their stuff. Or just keep the mapping on the
device that's doing the reading.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 08:17:39 -0600, "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I went back to the shop, and I found I can insert three No. 2 AWG into a 4/0
>wire terminal. That would give 390 amperes and the wire should run cooler
>too and would have been easier to install.
>
>Its is a required by the NEC, that parallel conductor runs shall end up to a
>single terminal. This is because if one becomes loose, that the one remaining
>cable goes into a fault.
I've certainly never seen that practice. In fact, according to the
training I received from Amp for nuclear grade (Class IE) wiring
prohibited placing more than one wire in a terminal.
I know that the one terminal-per-wire practice is still current
because I was in a new plant a couple of weeks ago setting up a 400hp
DC drive. The 480 feed to the MCC was 4 cables per phase, bolted
individually to the buss bar.
I haven't looked at the NEC lately. Is that something new they
slipped in or something? If it is, it's not enforced here.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:03:21 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>In a message dated 9/16/05 5:40:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>The seller is this guy in Ooltewah, TN a couple miles away from me who
>ended up with all the AVS junk when they cleaned out the building to
>sell it. He keeps listing this stuff for outrageous prices that never
>sells. You'd think he'd learn. I need to stop down and have a chat
>with him :-)
>
>
>Do you know if any of the electric buses still complete and could be made to
>run?
I can't see any from the road. He has about half a dozen shells minus
the glass. There are a couple of very large buildings on the site
that could hold completed buses, I guess. Maybe I will pay a visit
next week.
>
>Were the buses able to run entirely on the electricity generated by the
>turbines, or were they primarily battery powered with turbine generator
>assist?
I only know about the prototype that I got to drive at the NTRC
conference. It had no provision for plug-in charging. All turbine
powered. Don't know what they did with the "production" units.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry it doesn't list numbers, but some of the drag skinnies (front
tires on a drag race car) claim to be low rolling resistance.
http://www.jegs.com. If nothing else, you know they are narrow! These
would also give secondary benefits of reducing rotating mass, and a
little bit less frontal area for aero drag.
--- "Brian M. Sutin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have wasted a lot of hours recently trying to find actual numbers
> for
> rolling resistance of currently manufactured tires. The only
> source I
> have found is the Green Seal report from 2003, which lists only one
> decent tire, Bridgestone B381 (R=0.0062). Does anyone know of any
> reliable sources for more measurements?
>
> I measured my rolling resistance last week at R=0.025; the tires
> could
> be more than half of that. The best way to find out is to replace
> them.
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Wire gauges work like this: each increase in size has 1.26 times the area
the smaller size. And, if you go up three sizes, the area is double. ( 1.26
x 1.26 x 1.26 = 2 [about])
That means that 2/0 wire has exactly twice the area of copper as size 2. (
2/0 is three sizes larger than # 2.)
So, if you substitute two number 2 cables for a single 2/0, you would get
the same area of copper,same weight of copper, same resistance, same
voltage drop, same power loss, and same total heat generation in the
cable(s).
If you use three #2 cables, you have less resistance, voltage drop, heat,
etc. ( but, more weight)
Roland - you substituted 2 no 2 cables for a single 4/0. Two no 2 cables
might have the same "ampere capacity" as a single 4/0 cable, but the area of
copper will be only 63% of the area of a single 4/0.
So, you'll have more voltage drop, more power loss, and more total heat
dissipation. The reason the "capacity" is the same is that two smaller
cables have more surface area and can dissipate more heat than a single
large cable. For EV's , usually temperature rise is not as important a
factor as voltage drop (and power loss) . And, if you bundle the two small
cables together, you may lose the extra surface are and end up with hotter
cables anyway.
Phil
From: Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Roland,
I'm not sure I understand you - are you saying that I can substitute 3 - 2
AWG runs for a #2/0 run? And at the same time end up with a better amp
rating than a #4/0 run?
If yes, then all I have to do is make the 3 runs into one, I can wrap them
with elec tape (orange) and then put them inside a pipe/sleeve of some
sort.
Would using 3 - #2AWG runs instead of #2/0 cable be an acceptable solution?
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: Wire and connector sizing
>
> I ran all my motor interconnects to the Zilla and battery interconnects
with the new reduce size 2/0 multi strand copper cable, that is not a
welding cable type with the very fine wires, but is similar with a larger
strands that still ran into the hundreds or strands.
>
> I ran between my battery back to the Zilla with 4/0 cable because it
became a 25 ft run. In looking at ampere tables for conductors, I could
have run two No. 2 AWG in parallel that would have the same ampere capacity
of the 4/0 cable.
>
_________________________________________________________________
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just like boxing you can move up but not down unless you lose some weight or
in our case voltage. LR........
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Merwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: FW: NEDRA Records for 2005
Dean,
I think vehicles should be allowed to register in a higher voltage
division than the actual pack nominal. This is what helps drive
innovation. The scenerios you mention are possible but not likely
the norm. More likely is someone that has a new idea they want to
test and they already know they beat the snot out of their (nominal)
voltage division peers.
Ralph
Grannes, Dean writes:
Folks,
An interesting situation came up at Woodburn that caught the NEDRA board
off guard, and we've been discussing it at length the past several days.
First a bit of background. NEDRA categorizes its vehicles into classes
and voltage divisions. "Classes" are vehicle classes, and include
things like (DR=dragster, MC=Modified Conversion, etc.). "Divisions"
are voltage divisions, based on the nominal voltage of a battery pack.
The whole motivation for this was so that like vehicles competed with
like vehicles. A 336V motorcycle is in a different category (both class
and division) than a 96V street-legal conversion. This increased
"fairness" so that vehicles could race against similar vehicles.
Note that for classes, some vehicles could fall into multiple classes.
For example, a street-legal conversion could compete in either SC or MC
(modified conversion). The only difference is that MC is not
necessarily street-legal (though could be). Typically, we expect the MC
class to be a more competitive class (with quicker times) than the SC
class, since it is less restrictive and allows things like non-DOT
tires. However, a driver in a street-legal car can choose to compete in
the MC class if s/he so chooses, because it is a "harder" class.
Recall, too, that it has always been a rule that at NEDRA events, a
vehicle is registered in a specific class and division, and must race in
that division for the duration of the event. That is, if a street-legal
car is registered in MC, it must stay there all day, and cannot change
to SC. Nor can it be reconfigured to change voltage divisions. So,
essentially what this means is that at most one record can be set per
vehicle per event.
Now, what happened at Woodburn is that a racer wanted to register his
vehicle for a _higher_ voltage division than the car's nominal voltage.
This seemed at first glance to be a request similar to the
SC-running-in-MC scenario above, in which the racer essentially wanted
to put himself at a disadvantage by running in a harder category, only
this time it was a harder (higher) voltage division rather than a harder
vehicle class.
Though this makes sense in theory to allow this (if the racer wants to
race in a harder category, let him/her), the way the rules are currently
written prevents this from occurring. The rules currently do not allow
racers to race in higher voltage divisions. We have discussed this with
David Cloud, and he graciously agreed with this ruling. The posting on
the web site was a mistake and will be corrected.
However, the issue raises a valid question. Should the rules be changed
to allow racers to race in a higher voltage division? There are some
valid scenarios in which this occurs. If a racer registers for a given
division at the beginning of the day, say 132V (division E), and during
the course of the day, blows up a 12V battery. Now the car is at 120V
(division F). Since the car cannot be re-registered, there are two
options. One is that it's done racing for the day and can no longer set
any records. The other is that it can continue to run in division E,
but at the reduced voltage of 120V. This latter option seems
reasonable--it clearly is at a disadvantage against other division E
cars. However, this option is disallowed under the current rules.
Another similar scenario is one in which a car is 132V but develops a
bad battery on the way to the track. Someone is sent to get a
replacement. At the time of registration, the car sits at nominal 120V,
but the racer hopes that before the end of the day, the bad battery can
be replaced and it can run at its designed 132V. So, the racer
registers at 132V (division E) because the racer hopes to run at that
voltage. Can the racer run at 120V in the meantime? Again, not
according to the current rules.
So, the proposed rule change that the NEDRA board is considering, to
take effect beginning in 2006 is the following: vehicles may register
for any voltage division corresponding to their traction pack's nominal
voltage _or_higher_ (underline added for emphasis). There is still the
restriction that a vehicle must be registered for a particular class and
division at the beginning of the race, and that the vehicle stay in that
class/division for the duration of the event. Thus, each vehicle still
can only set at most one record per event.
We welcome feedback from the EV community. If appropriate, we can
discuss it on this list, or you can send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Either addressee will forward opinions to the full
board.
Dean Grannes
NEDRA board member
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Paul G.
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 7:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: NEDRA Records for 2005
On Sep 12, 2005, at 5:50 PM, Brian D.Hall wrote:
> MC/F 1999 Geo Metro 96 volts
> Driver: Steve Nash
> Owner:Dave Cloud 14.531 92.13 Woodburn Nationals
> September 5,2005
>
Why do you list him as holding the 120v class when he raced at 96v? Do
classes mean nothing?
Paul
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sep 15, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Danny Ames wrote:
I hate having to charge cycle (retrain) or exercise flooded batteries
to keep up their range.
Yes deep cycle do need to be exercised to keep up their energy
capacity but are AGM's better suited for sitting and need less
training.
Optimas need less training than GC batteries. For up to 2 weeks sitting
there seems to be no temporary loss of capacity. For the 5 months the
Buggy sits over the winter (charged before, once during, and before the
first spring drive) there is a temporary loss of about 20% of their
available capacity but it only takes about 4 cycles to bring them back
to full available capacity.
Remember that Optimas don't pack nearly as many amp hours as GC
batteries. Small parasitic loads (like my Todd) left on during short
storage (in the summer driving season for the Buggy) can take a
significant hit on the available amp hours. If the buggy has been
sitting for more than 2 days I generally slap the charger on it for a
little bit before taking off. For longer storage I have to remove all
load from the Optimas by pulling a fuse and the precharge light bulb.
Paul "neon" G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
These Force's probably use a set of 13 of the Deka Dominator gel 8G27s
batteries?
Anyone happen to know what pricing is like on such batteries these days?
(and to prenet (or add) confusion, it is my brother that has the Escort
with the Deka Intimidators, not me...)
M Bianchi wrote:
TransOptions will be offering Solectrica Force Electric Vehicles for sale.
<snip>
--
Jim Coate
1970's Elec-Trak's
1998 Chevy S-10 NiMH BEV
1997 Chevy S-10 NGV Bi-Fuel
http://www.eeevee.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sep 15, 2005, at 11:10 PM, Jim Husted wrote:
Baldors seem to me to have small brushes compaired to ADC and
Prestolites designs. I've always found the parts harder to find with
a bit more bite on costs. On a pro side it should have a variable
time brush ring built in. My feeling is you might have brush issues.
What size, diameter is this?
Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
what do you folks think a baldor forklift 2 HP 36 volt 53 amp 2800
rpm motor would do in a volkswagen beetle with gears?
That is good to know Jim. I would guess that if any car could get away
(in a pinch) with small brushes it would be the old VW Beetle.
Depending on the year first gear is either 3.6:1, 3.78:1, or 3.8:1. The
final drive ratio is either 4.43:1, 4.375:1, or 4.125:1 (or 3.875:1 if
Super Beetle.)
The trick would be to *use first gear*! (and avoid Super Beetle
transaxles)
A motor that small sounds to me like it would only make a city-Bug.
Give the motor a little extra voltage and avoid 3rd and 4th gear.
Paul "neon" G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Grannes, Dean writes:
...
Thus, each vehicle still
can only set at most one record per event.
You mean set record(s) at most in one class (not
one record per event)?
A vehicle sure can set multiple records per event
by beating its own record runs several times during the day.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sep 16, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Ralph Merwin wrote:
The tires that come on the Prius are crap. They look like the same
tires
that come on the Insite, but it's common for tires on a Prius to loose
pressure quickly, which leads to the outer edges wearing quickly. I
tried
to monitor the tire pressure on my wife's Prius regularly, and usually
had
to add air, but the edges wore out.
First, I think the Prius uses P175/65R14 while the Insight uses
slightly smaller 165 tires. I'd check but my wife is at work right now.
Second, we have 36,500 miles on the original Bridgestone Potenza RE92
tires (2002 Prius.) Perhaps some of those tires where short lived but
ours seem just fine. I have been running them at 44psi front, 40psi
rear. I don't think I'll quite make it to 40k miles, but that is mostly
because WA requires 3/32nd inch tread instead of 1/16th inch. That
reminds me - I need to rotate them one last time.
They are certainly a tire that I would consider for an EV, YMMV
Paul "neon" G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Bill, and all
You know, Im up to just about anything. Although my course of action will be
in much smaller increments to allow adapting thoughts and ideas to build a base
for newer and better goals. To quote Rich Rudman you dont go after a record
you sneak up on it. I feel this is the same for any new approach to obtain an
untried goal. Over the years Ive done some pretty weird / crazy modifications
to those who didnt say it was, but I knew was an attempt at perpetual motion.
Not because I thought it would succeed but that I might hone my skills and
learn something practical while doing it. Those acquired skills were put to
practice on Johns Twins , and Doug Weathers brush ring. Right now my focus is
in the racing area so that I can start a data base of successes vs. failures.
Face it they kill stuff faster.
One area Im looking at is the flash-over we all saw at Woodburn. John Wayland
and I got some pieces to the puzzle. I had a chance to speak a little to Otmar
on this a bit who said I might be on to something. What we noticed is that
although the brush ring was damaged there was no equal and opposite damage to
the comm. (no zap mark). Upon further inspection we noticed the very edge of
the comm. bar on one side was rounded. At first I just thought they were under
cutter imperfections. My thought now is that, what we all saw as 1 or 2 zaps
actually was a series of multiple electrical machinegun blasts as each bar ran
across that holder until every bar discharged. Resulting in small little zap
marks to each comm. Bar. Otmar has actual video of this happening that I would
like very much to see.
Ive been graced to have fallen into the midst of some very notable Eves. It
is through their works (as well as you all) that I am able to launch from a
higher platform of proven methods. Know that many ideas are being talked about
concerning the next course of action. As we continue I will document and link
as much as I can for those to build there own ideas on (unless directly told
not to by the customer). This group has given me a new purpose in that I might
just be part of something special, something world changing. Im a man who
likes to do his homework and I have spent many of my entire evening learning
who you all are as I link to your sites, reading and learning. This new world
that has opened up to me has made the effort of what it took to get here
rewarding. Its close to having God say see this is what I wanted you to do,
but you had to do this first. I know that upon my death I will be able to say
that I did what I could, with what I had, for who I am, and That!
I
enjoyed the ride.
As to the rebuilt motor posts.
Please by all means use those old cores. This could not only decrease your cost
but also keep a little in your local economy, and maybe spread a little EV
fever in your area. My goal is to get a site up showing what to look for, how
to test, ways to improve them, etc. As to this being easy as some have posted I
say come spend a day at my shop, hehehe. Or was that a motor rebuild challenge,
maybe
LMAO. The rewards would be great for those willing though. Anyone looking
at doing this contact me with data, pics, etc. I will do my best to help you
through the process. One mans junk is another mans treasure is so very true
here.
Recently Ive been asked to serve as a guest speaker at the Oregon EV assoc. in
Portland on the 13th of OCT. Matt and I will drive over with some show and tell
items and will Im sure learn new things as well. I also cant wait to meet
more like minded people.
There has been much talk as to the EV vs. ICE abilities. This has got me
thinking that an EV vs. ICE build off would be a challenging and educational
process to both parties, as well as to the general public. Give each groups a
budget. Let them choose their own make and model, but the cars start off
stripped of all existing parts, including wiring. If they want a gas tank they
will need to install one, as we would have to install battery boxes, etc. Use a
series of tests to compare the two, buck for buck, in speed, stopping,
handling, etc. Do you think Monster Garage, Discovery, etc. would be interested
in such a real world comparison? Would in fact any of you be interested in such
an event?? For an unfair advantage we could insist they make their own gas, at
the very least make them take the costs from their budgets, hehehe. I could see
this as a tool to educate a great many people as to where EVs are at here in
the present.
As to the posts to costs vs. paybacks, I say what may not be as efficient today
will be more so as things advance. I know that the modification I make today
will not take as long to repeat. On those few that are acting as my Guinea pigs
I am trying to charge on a learning curve. In some cases just covering parts,
as I donate my time to learning what, and how, to modify a motor to a
particular need. To quote Star Trek sometimes the good of the many out way the
good of the few. Those out there putting their time and money to prove others
have options are in fact paving the way for those to follow with ever
decreasing costs and better efficiency.
Ive always been taught that there are no stupid questions, so if you see me
making a mistake by all means correct me Im an adult I can take it (which
keeps my interest up), just dont belittle me as it serves no purpose (and
makes a newbie feel stupid). This should be how all posts are formatted. I
direct new people here every day. I would hate to see them make a post and have
it shredded as asinine by someone with no regard to them as a person. I know
that many of you are long members here who do much of this as jest, but some
feels very much like a ( how do I say this) well a pissing contest. Everyone
starts at a beginning, my journey started a few months back. As a few have
posted Im like a puppy looking to stick my nose into every butt, I can, Im
like that, Hands on, get dirty, lets have fun and play kind of guy. As to those
who keep saying Im infectious I assure you the Doctors say that although Im a
bit crazy in the head he could find no infections!
Sorry this was long, but to again answer your question Sure Im up to the
challenge. I ask you (and the others out there) are you?? If man never chose to
dream we would still be beating stuff with rocks and sticks.
Just my 2 amps
Thanks for listening
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Newbie EVer
Bill Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Lee,
About a year ago, someone on the EVDL asked if it would be possible to use
a single TS 10000Ah cells in an EV instead of a series string of smaller Ah
cells. You may have been the one who replied, but I couldn't find it in
the archives. Do you think a DC motor could be wound for 3.6V and still
drive an EV? To reach 10kW in normal driving, you'd have to pull about
3000A continuous. Lots of thick wire for that baby. Would such a high
amperage waste too much power?
If you think such a motor is possible, then hey, Jim Husted, want a
challenge? :)
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 8:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: voltage = speed? (newbie)
>> So why can´t I get the same speed with a low voltage+high amp system
>> that I get with a high voltage + low amp?
STEVE CLUNN wrote:
> Well this could be done, would need a bigger motor, or one not
> being used by anyone on the list :-)
No, not quite. A motor can be rewound for almost any voltage. Basically,
there is a certain amount of room for the windings. You can fill it with
many turns of small wire for high voltage, or a few turns of heavy wire
for low voltage.
The motor works exactly the same regardless of the voltage/current you
wind it for. Same torque, same speed, same horsepower, same efficiency
-- all that matters is the *power* that goes in.
There are a few limitations. First, you can't go below the voltage at
which the winding becomes a single turn. This is only likely to be a
limitation for very low voltages like 12v. Second, you can't go to such
a high voltage that the wire size gets impractically small or the
insulation needed gets impractically thick. This is only a problem over
1000 volts.
Third, if there is a commutator, it needs to be correct for the basic
voltage and current. The total area of the brushes limits the maximum
current; the number of commutator bars and the spacing between them
limits the voltage.
The commutator is hard to change; so it sets a real-world limit to how
far you can change the voltage of a motor. You can probably leave it
as-is for a 2:1 change in voltage up/down; but would have to change it
to get outside this range.
But for a manufacturer, anything is possible. Low-voltage high-current
motors have long commutators to get enough brush area. High-voltage
low-current motors have large-diameter commutators with lots of bars to
get the voltage between bars low enough.
AC motors don't have commutator, so these limitations don't apply. Thus
you can get anything from 1 volt to 10,000 volt AC motors!
--
If you would not be forgotten
When your body's dead and rotten
Then write of great deeds worth the reading
Or do the great deeds worth repeating
-- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
