EV Digest 4733
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Challenges was voltage = speed?
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Eliminating Chronic Battery Box Odors
by Mark Farver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) 60 Volt agm tickle
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: EVILBUSQuestions
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) necessity is the mother of invention.
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: 60 Volt agm tickle
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Uninformed (was: stupid) newby questions
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: wire and connector sizing
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: LRR Tires Continued
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) thanks
by "golfcart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: 60 Volt agm tickle
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Highway capable conversion on a budget?
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Highway capable conversion on a budget?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) Re: thanks
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: AGM's at rest vs Flooded
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: rewinding motors? (was "Re: voltage = speed? (newbie)")
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: EVILbus (was: e-meter type gadget)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Unsubscribe
by "Chateau Manzanillo Mexico" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Highway capable conversion on a budget?
by "Tim Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) K&W Chargers
by "Mark Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: LRR Tires Continued
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Source of Fishpaper?
by M Bianchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Challenges was voltage = speed?
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) RE: LRR Tires Continued
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: wire and connector sizing
by Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: EDM
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Roland Wiench wrote:
> My EV back in 1975 call Transformer I did 1024 miles
> in 24 hours back in Detroit.
What happened after that?
> It will be the highest cost project they will ever will attempt to do.
Because of the "cobalt batteries"?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mark Freidberg wrote:
"It sounds like you're overcharging, and may be reversing some cells on discharge. A
slight acid tang isn't unusual at finish, but odors during discharge are usually bad
news."
I didn't mean that my batts were misting, not that I know of anyway. I don't think overcharging is occuring as charging stops at pack voltage of 114-116v or avg. 2.38-2.42v per cell and batts seem pretty equal.
"unpleasent" battery odors are not normal and are usually the release of
sulfur compounds from within the batteries. The usual causes are
underwatered cells, overcharging, or reversed/over discharged cells.
I once had a building maintainence crew setting up to rip into walls
trying to find a overpowering and persistant sewer gas odor in our
commercial building. Tenants throughout the building were complaining
but the smell was difficult to trace.
Fortunatly we discovered the cause just as hammers were starting to
swing. A UPS in the computer room had failed and was cooking its Lead
Acid batteries.. the computer room AC (which is only sorta independant)
was circulating the smell.
Mark
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was starting to connect the batteries togather and got a tickle, I
thought what the heck? I don't even have it 1/2 connected.
I took my meter and measured from the body to the post I was touching
and it read 61 volts. 5*12? so I started searching back and 5
batteries back the negative post measured 1.8volts to the car body. I
undid the hold down bolt and the problem went away. These are new excide
orbitals and they are clean. I wiped it off and reinstalled the bolt
and it is ok now.
Is this an invisible dry acid trail? Could it be the fancy label on top
of the battery is foil based? (to get the reflective hologram) and
picking up from underneath, whatever the label covers?
I am gonna start by replacing all the fender washers with nylon washers.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Eric Poulsen wrote:
> That diagram <http://www.CasaDelGato.Com/EV/EvilBus.gif> says that
> it's the "non-echo" version, but as drawn, wouldn't the current flow
> through T2, R4, and pins 1,2 of IC1 during TX?
Correct; that's why it does not echo.
The EVILbus idle state is a "high" voltage (at least 9v) between P1 and
S1 of the phono jacks (I call P1=+Data and S1=-Data). This voltage
causes about 0.5ma of current to flow thru D1, IC1 pin 1-2, and R6. IC1
is thus on, and its phototransistor shorts pins 5-4. This holds T1 off,
so the RX line is high (idle).
When some other node transmits, it shorts the EVILbus wires together (to
some voltage under 1.5v). With only 1.5v, the LED in IC1 turns off, its
photransistor is off, and R2 turns T1 on. This pulls the RX line low
(active).
Now suppose *this* node transmits. It pulls its TX line low, which turns
on the LED in IC2. IC2's phototransistor shorts 5-4, turning on T2.
Current flows from the EVILbus +Data, thru D1, the LED of IC1, R4, and
T2. Thus the EVILbus voltage is reduced to about 1.5 volts.
Note that the LED in IC1 was on, and is *still* on, even when Tx is low.
Thus, the local node does *not* receive its own data. This configuration
is useful when the local micro cannot deal with simultaneous transmit
and receive.
If you are using a micro that *can* simultaneously transmit and receive,
then swap R3 and R4. This has no effect on receive. But when the node
transmits, it will receive the data it is sending. This is useful for
error checking and collision detection, and is the "preferred
embodiment".
--
*BE* the change that you wish to see in the world.
-- Mahatma Gandhi
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The 1500Watt harbor frieght shrink gun made a short high pitched noise
like the motor ran away and then it went up in a spectacular cloud of
smoke not even 1/2 way thru the job.
Not wanting to let the day go to waste, I pushed on using the propane
torch, where I had to, to continue and just leaving the stuff loose, "to
be shrunk later" , everywhere else. I tried not to scortch things too much.
Then I ran out of propane :-(
So I carried a few cables into the house and sat down in front of the
stove and just rolled them around over the flame.
and... Wow!, that works really good. I guess the spread out lower
temperature and cleaner gas is more appropriate. It doesn't oxidize or
scortch. Of course, There isn't a "significant other" here to protest
:-) Attempt at your own descretion.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jeff Shanab wrote:
> I am gonna start by replacing all the fender washers with nylon washers.
If the car was upside down for some reason, would the nylon washers
keep the batteries in place? If the car came to an immediate stop
from 60mph, would the nylon washers hold the batteries in place?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Kludge
No such thing as a stupid person on this list - the truly stupid don't make
it this far! Uninformed until you have been informed is not illegal.
At 04:30 PM 18/09/05 -0700, Kluge wrote:
Okay, I read the response to "Why can't you connect your series motor in
parallel
(or vice versa) question, and it got me to thinking. In a series motor,
do the
field and armature each see 1/2 the nominal voltage?
No, The field sees a voltage that (I think) is purely to do with its' DC
resistance and the amount of amps flowing. The armature voltage is to do
with the RPMs of the motor and the strength of the magnetic field (from the
current in the field windings). So the field gets a few volts, the armature
the rest (which varies with speed).
If you connected two
controllers to a series wound motor - one to the armature and one to the
field -
would you end up with a motor that was seeing twice the amps or twice the
volts?
You would end up with a motor that was probably seeing the current limit of
each controller. The series field is very low resistance, I suppose a Zilla
*could* control the field at several hundred amps and a couple of volts,
but it wouldn't be efficient. The armature voltage and current would be a
function of how hard the field was driven, how hard the armature was being
driven and the RPMs.
(Everytime I think I'm starting to get something a question comes up
which makes
me realize that I really don't understand it as well as I thought I did.)
Welcome to the school of the real world, hope you graduate with a diploma
of EV technology.
Hope this helps
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 17 Sep 2005 at 19:49, Ralph Merwin wrote:
> My car has 12 pairs of Optimas (156v pack) ...
Thirteen volt batteries???
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 ---
Jerry, good point. Narrower but same diameter tires can help in these
ways:
Outright weight reduction
Reduction in rotating mass
Less aero drag
Less rolling resistance
Different diameters can also help reduce rolling resistance and
change the car's effective gearing.
In the Corvette's case, it went about 9% faster. Suppose the ground
clearance of the Corvette is 1/2 foot, and the narrower tires were
1/2 foot narrower. This means the frontal area was reduced by about
1/2 sq. ft. for the two front tires. This means the car had about 3%
less frontal area. Given that Power ~ v^3, we'd expect the speed to
go up only about 1%. So there was definitely more at work with the
narrower tires than just aero improvement.
--- jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi David and All,
> I'd bet the difference was air drag, not
> rolling drag.
> HTH's,
> Jerry Dycus
>
> David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There was a magazine article author that was trying to make his 1st
> gen VW Rabbit go as fast as possible on a race track. To his
> chagrin,
> his car was slower on the wider tires, and would go faster on the
> narrower stock tires. He surmised the car just didn't have enough
> power to overcome the additional rolling resistance of the wider
> tires.
>
> There was a Corvette on the Salt Flats that switched from wide
> tires
> to narrow tires, and the 1 mile speed improved from 128 mph to 139
> mph.
>
> Does a wider tire really "deflect less"? It may not sink down as
> much, but there are more inches of width that are being bent.
>
> --- Phil Marino
> wrote:
> > ...
> > As far as the benefit of a narrower tire, there just doesn't seem
> > to be any
> > testing, one way or the other, that looks at rolling resistance
> vs
> > tire
> > width.
> >
> > I think wider tires would have lower RR - based on the fact that
> > narrow
> > tires deflect more (vertically) for the same load at the same
> tire
> > pressure
> > than wider tires. But, it's just an untested idea.
> >
> > Some people seem to think that wider tires mean higher RR ( I'm
> not
> > sure why
> > they think that way) .
> >
> > But, nobody seems to have done any real comparative testing, so
> we
> > just
> > don't know.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! for Good
> Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
signoff ev
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you put a nylon washer under the fender washer, it should work OK.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: 60 Volt agm tickle
> Jeff Shanab wrote:
>
> > I am gonna start by replacing all the fender washers with nylon washers.
>
> If the car was upside down for some reason, would the nylon washers
> keep the batteries in place? If the car came to an immediate stop
> from 60mph, would the nylon washers hold the batteries in place?
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks, Lee. My questions/comments below.
Lee Hart wrote:
>KISS = Keep It Small and Simple. Start with an
>electric bike, or scooter, or motorcycle, or NEV. If
>you need a roadworthy car as a minimum, aim low. Use
>surplus parts and used parts. Make your own,
>learning and making contacts in the process. You'll
>spend a lot less, get it done a lot quicker, learn
>more, and have a *much* higher chance
>for success. Best of all, after your first EV you'll
>have a far better idea of what's really important for
>your next one.
Well, I already know what's important, it's a matter of not
being able to achieve it until later. :-)
What's important to me is tire smoking, decent enough range
for the car to appeal to others, and the capability to kill
Porsches and embarass the local ricers, without using an
internal combustion engine to do it.
But, at this point, even a slug would suffice by the virture
of its cheap operating cost and (relative)cleanliness. I can
always keep adding to the conversion until I have it the way
I initially wanted it, sort of how like John Bryan did with
his Ghia, that started out with floodeds and ended up a
highly efficient tire smoker with 45 miles range highway to
80% and acceleration to match or beat most cars on the road.
>>as cheap as possible... 60 mph top speed... no
>>concern at all for acceleration... 30 mile range at
>>50 mph or so to 80% DoD.
>> Think this could be done for as little as $3k in EV
>>components? How about $2k? Less?
>Yes, this is possible. The 30-mile range at 50 mph is
>tough, because it means a high percentage of the
>vehicle's weight is in batteries.
What was the general formula on battery weight percentage
versus range? I looked in the archives for it and didn't
find it.
>>I have a 1969 Triumph GT6+...
>This is hopeful. It can do all you ask if you can cram >in
enough batteries.
>From when I measured, I have found multiple ways to fit up
to 25 Optimas. The real questions were whether the chassis
would be able to handle it without doing a weight reduction,
and whether the methods to fit them including accompanying
battery boxes would have posed a safety hazard. With a
fiberglass/lexan weight reduction, it could end up around
GVWR including driver. It is not uncommon for racers to get
their race GT6s down into the sub 1,500 pound range(those
that decided to forego the bare basics required to stay
street legal have gone below 1,400 pounds), while keeping
that hefty 403 pound engine and all its baggage!
>Your weight estimates may prove to be a bit off, but
>you can verify them before getting too involved. Weigh
>the car as-is, weigh the major parts as you remove
>them, and see.
Using four scales, I measured it at 1,780 pounds, with
radio, speakers, spare tire, tools, and other unessentials
stripped out with one gallon in the tank. I've stripped more
from it since including trim pieces and a 60 pound seat.
Curb weight is listed at 1,904 pounds, dry weight listed at
1,793 pounds.
I intend to take it up to a truck stop or some other place
where it can be weighed while it's somewhat stripped now.
I've been shaving off as much weight as possible just to see
how fast it can be as a gas guzzler. That engine is not
stock. It'll be both a shame and a blessing to remove it, as
I rather like how it is loud enough to set off car alarms if
driven by parked cars. Maybe this car could sound like
Silver Bullet in the future as a hi pro EV. One can hope...
>>So, lets say I decide to try to do a conversion on a
>>$3,000 parts budget...
>Ok; let's start with the 2350 GVWR. For a shot at your
>30 mile range at 50 mph, let's aim for 40% batteries.
>0.4 x 2350 lbs = 940 lbs of batteries and a glider
>weight of 1410 lbs -- possible if your numbers are
>good.
Wouldn't 40% in batteries give more range?
The TZero did 80-100 miles @ 60-65 mph with 50% its weight
in batteries. Of course it used sealed batteries and an AC
drive with a high voltage setup to drastically curtail
Peukert's effect. But the kit car the TZero used wasn't
aerodynamic in the least.
Blue Meanie could do 25-30 miles @ 60 mph with 25% weight in
batteries.
This Triumph isn't much heavier than a Datsun 1200(depending
on figures used), has a much smaller frontal area, and the
drag coefficient is about the same, if not better, than a
1200.
I guess 30 miles going 50 with 40% weight in batteries would
be a worst case scenario?
>Golf cart batteries are the cheapest, and weigh about
>60 lbs each. 940 x 60 = 15.7; call it 16 batteries. 16
>x 6v = 96v system. They cost about
>$50 each, so you'll spend $800 for batteries.
>
>96v is a good voltage for a "bad boy" charger. You can
>build your own out of an old 12v 15amp car battery
>charger ($50). The charger supplies
>the case, transformer, and ammeter. You'll add a
>bridge rectifier ($5), mechanical timer ($20), GFCI
>($10), 15amp AC circuit breaker ($5), 15amp
>output fuse ($2), a fan ($5), and a couple toggle
>switches for high/low selection ($4). Total cost is
>about $100.
I am considering a bad boy charger, but how reliable have
they usually been? With a proper timer, is it reasonable to
expect to be able to set it and forget it on a pack of
floodeds? Just in case the parents decide to operate the
car.
>The ADC L91 6.7" motor ($850, 96vdc 150amps 13hp
>continuous) will readily reach 60 mph, and be able to
>maintain that power as long as your batteries can
>supply it.
13 motor hp would in theory allow this car to hit 65 mph if
I'd later implement all the aero improvments planned. I am
curious to see how it will turn out in practice.
>The Jack & Heinz 30v 500a aircraft generator I used in
>my first EV would match the ADC motor, and is lighter
>and half the price. However, you'd
>have trouble getting the range due to the lower
>efficiency. You'd also need a heck of a blower to cool
>it.
And if I found one used, what price could I get them for?
>You'll need an adapter plate and coupler. These will
>run anywhere from $50 to $500 depending on whether you
>can make it yourself or buy one.
My university has the tools needed for me to make one. I
intend to go that route for the first conversion and for all
later upgrades to it, including when it comes time to drop
in that WarP 9'' and build new battery boxes for that set of
AGMs, complimented by an HV Zilla 1k.
>There are lots of things you can do for a controller.
>The simplest is probably to buy a used or rebuilt
>Curtis 1221 ($500 or so). It will work
>for now, and you can resell it later for most of what
>you paid for it. Or, build a contactor controller;
>cheaper, but more work.
>You could also take the route you described; a
>lower-voltage system with an Alltrax controller. But
>it may lead to a bit higher cost in the end.
The Cursit does sound nice. I don't want a contactor setup,
so as to keep from murdering my batteries, blowing my motor,
or shredding my transmission. Although the possible low end
performance with a contactor setup would be nice.
>Yes! You need at least a voltmeter and ammeter even to
>begin with. An E-meter or some equivalent is a good
>next step up.
I initially intended an E-Meter, but given its utility, I
may just have to buy one right from the start even for a
budget strapped conversion. How reliable are the Curtis
gauges and what are they going for?
>I'm also leaving out the battery boxes and associated
>parts. I assume you'd build these yourself.
Yes.
>If you have winters where you live, I'd put the
>batteries in closed boxes that you can insulate.
At first, simple insulation would suffice.
In the long term after I upgrade to AGMs, I intend to have a
battery heating/cooling system to keep the batteries at
optimum temperature year round(90-100 degrees or so to
maximize range).
>Heating is not really necessary if you drive every
>day, as the boxes will trap the waste heat from
>driving and charging.
Will the affect on range be about 40% loss or so?
>Yes; these are good sources of discount parts.
Only problem is finding one for cheap now with these gas
prices.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I am considering a bad boy charger, but how reliable have
> they usually been? With a proper timer, is it reasonable to
> expect to be able to set it and forget it on a pack of
> floodeds? Just in case the parents decide to operate the
> car.
>
At least with floodeds, you can boil off water and not cause damage (within a
reasonable time period).
If you go low-budget on the pack and charger, will you be doing that for all the
initial components? Investing in the "final" motor may save adapter construction
tim.
If you have more time than money, just make sure upgrades in individual
components don't require more "redevelopment" (e.g - size differences from a
Jack & Heinz to a WarP, tucking a Curtis in where a Zilla won't fit, etc). They
say "proper planning prevents piss-poor performance", but at some point you've
got to get started! Hope to see pics in the EV album!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 18 Sep 2005 at 22:31, golfcart wrote:
> signoff ev
>
I apologize to the list for sending this reply to the entire list, but at
least it has information that some folks may want to save.
"golfcart" wishes to unsubscribe, and sent a request with incorrect syntax
to the wrong address. Normally I reply privately to such folks explaining
how to accomplish what they want to do. Regrettably, though, "golfcart" has
elected to require that those who want to email him privately fill out a
form to be placed on his "whitelist." I don't take part in that scheme,
sorry.
= = = = =
To "golfcart":
To unsubscribe from the EV discussion list, please send the command
signoff ev
to the email address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please note that this command will not work if sent to the posting
address. Therefore, do not try to unsubscribe by replying to a list
post.
Thank you.
David Roden
Assistant EV list administrator
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 ---
Danny Ames wrote:
> Question, are AGM's better suited for an EV that may sit for days
> on end vs floodeds.
If they will only sit for days or even weeks, it doesn't matter --
floodeds or AGMs are both fine. For months, then AGMs are preferred.
They have a lower self-discharge rate.
As for a loss of capacity and needing to be "exercised", all types of
lead-acid batteries have this issue.
--
*BE* the change that you wish to see in the world.
-- Mahatma Gandhi
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tim Stephenson wrote:
> To save money, could I get a toasted motor and rewind it?
I don't know if *you* could; but it is certainly possible. It takes some
know-how and slightly specialized tools and parts, but it's not nearly
as bad as rebuilding an ICE engine.
In most towns there are motor rewinding shops that have, or can get all
the parts needed. So your best bet is to take your salvaged motor to
them. Either have them do it, or ask to help :-)
--
*BE* the change that you wish to see in the world.
-- Mahatma Gandhi
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My thought is to use ASCII, not binary for EVILbus. The messages
>> would be in plain text, so you can figure out what they mean. For
>> example, an E-meter might send:
>>
>> V=123.4v I=50.1a A=-100.8ah T=22.5c
Shawn Rutledge wrote:
> Well if you assume you can always get by with single characters,
> pretty soon it will start to get illogical when you start running
> out of them. There are a lot of voltages present in an EV, that
> you might want to measure, but you've only got one letter V.
We've tossed this around a lot. If there is only one voltage, all you
need is "V=123.4v". If there are lots of voltages, then each is
numbered; "V1=12.4v", V2=12.3v", V3=12.5v" etc.
> <source seq="346" ID="emeter" version="1.23" sn="321461">
> <batt ID="0">
> <read type="inst" unit="V">123.4</read>
> <read type="inst" unit="A">50.1</read>
> <read type="integ" unit="Ah">-100.8</read>
> <cell ID="5">...
[snip]... If bus bandwidth, speed, and computing horsepower were
unlimited, you could use a verbose protocol like this. But I don't think
its justified in this case.
> Another optimization which I would try is to quit trying to say
> everything every time, and do a query/response handler...
I agree. We had a looooong series of discussions/debates/arguments on
all this between the various EVILbus parties. It didn't lead to a
consensus, but did help me to get a clearer idea of how I think we can
proceed.
What I'd like to do is have each device on the EVILbus work like the
"monitor" mode in a simple computer. There are a few very basic
commands, like examine or change memory; examine or change I/O; run a
program; and reset. With these, you can do *anything* the computer is
capable of. These commands are all human-readable ASCII.
We define data tables in the memory of each device with standardized
contents; for instance, the first 16 bytes might be ASCII to identify
what the device is. Subsequent memory locations have different meanings
depending on what the device is; they might turn various options on or
off, etc. You'd look at the device's manual to see what they do (like
the E-meter with all its F-functions). For instance, you might ask Node6
to read bytes 0-15; it sends "E-meter #1234567".
There would be a standardized set of pre-loaded programs that each
device can run. Most of them would simply transmit the data they know.
For instance, byte#17 in the E-meter might tell it to repetitively send
the voltage; thereafter it sends "V=123.4v" once per second (until you
tell it to stop).
But you can have multiple devices on the bus (up to 32). Each has its
own node number, which gives it its own time slot to send/receive data.
There would be a "heartbeat" pulse to synchronize everyone; after the
heartbeat, node#0 reports, then node#1, then node#2, etc. This way there
are no collisions, and you know who is talking by the time.
If you need to do something special, like download a new program, you
can tell all the other nodes to "shut up for a while", and then send
some long compressed binary or other proprietary format to one
particular node.
--
*BE* the change that you wish to see in the world.
-- Mahatma Gandhi
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Unsubscribe
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I rather like how it is loud enough to set off car alarms if driven by
parked cars.
>Maybe this car could sound like Silver Bullet in the future as a hi pro EV.
One can hope...
John,
You know, you could have an awful lot of fun with an electric hot rod if you
put in a really good stereo, some big speakers under the hood, and had a
sound effects CD or mp3 player to drive it with...
Imagine playing the Model-T wheeze-clunk-sputter-cough as you blow their
doors off!
Or the sound of a lot of squirrels twittering at each other, along with the
scrape of the wheel they're playing in?
A cow mooing?
The Jaws theme? Opera? Alexander's Ragtime Band?
And don't forget the "ta-DAA" fanfare and thunderous applause for the finish
line!
-Tim
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Were K&W chargers considered to be good? I don't seem to find a website for
them and some used ones are around.
Mark Ward
St. Charles, MO
95 Saab 900SE "Saabrina"
www.saabrina.blogspot.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It certainly sounds like the particular narrow tires this Corvette driver
used had lower rolling resistance than the previous wide tires he used.
But this could be due to a difference in pressure ( he may have used higher
pressure for the narrow tires) or, even more likely, they may not have been
the exact same tire except for width.
Just because one particular narrow tire has lower RR at one pressure than a
different type of wide tire at a ( perhaps) different pressure doesn't show
that, in general, narrow tires have lower rolling resistance.
I'm sure there is anecdotal data that shows that someone once drove on a
wider tire and went faster. That, similarly, wouldn't be conclusive proof
that "wide tires have lower RR".
What would really answer this question would be for some actual controlled
testing of different tire widths of the same tire model.
Although I am not, in general, a fan of government regulation, I think the
only way we would have the rolling resistance information we ( and the
public, in general) needs to make intelligient decisions about tires, is if
tire manufacturers were required to test ( and supply) rolling resistance
data for every tire they sell. It could be added to the existing sidewall
information, along with the wear rating, traction, etc.
That would also provide some incentive for all tire makers to work towards
lower rolling resistance for all tires.
Phil Marino
From: David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: LRR Tires Continued
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Jerry, good point. Narrower but same diameter tires can help in these
ways:
Outright weight reduction
Reduction in rotating mass
Less aero drag
Less rolling resistance
Different diameters can also help reduce rolling resistance and
change the car's effective gearing.
In the Corvette's case, it went about 9% faster. Suppose the ground
clearance of the Corvette is 1/2 foot, and the narrower tires were
1/2 foot narrower. This means the frontal area was reduced by about
1/2 sq. ft. for the two front tires. This means the car had about 3%
less frontal area. Given that Power ~ v^3, we'd expect the speed to
go up only about 1%. So there was definitely more at work with the
narrower tires than just aero improvement.
--- jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi David and All,
> I'd bet the difference was air drag, not
> rolling drag.
> HTH's,
> Jerry Dycus
>
> David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There was a magazine article author that was trying to make his 1st
> gen VW Rabbit go as fast as possible on a race track. To his
> chagrin,
> his car was slower on the wider tires, and would go faster on the
> narrower stock tires. He surmised the car just didn't have enough
> power to overcome the additional rolling resistance of the wider
> tires.
>
> There was a Corvette on the Salt Flats that switched from wide
> tires
> to narrow tires, and the 1 mile speed improved from 128 mph to 139
> mph.
>
> Does a wider tire really "deflect less"? It may not sink down as
> much, but there are more inches of width that are being bent.
>
> --- Phil Marino
> wrote:
> > ...
> > As far as the benefit of a narrower tire, there just doesn't seem
> > to be any
> > testing, one way or the other, that looks at rolling resistance
> vs
> > tire
> > width.
> >
> > I think wider tires would have lower RR - based on the fact that
> > narrow
> > tires deflect more (vertically) for the same load at the same
> tire
> > pressure
> > than wider tires. But, it's just an untested idea.
> >
> > Some people seem to think that wider tires mean higher RR ( I'm
> not
> > sure why
> > they think that way) .
> >
> > But, nobody seems to have done any real comparative testing, so
> we
> > just
> > don't know.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! for Good
> Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________________
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart,
So I'm about to do a PbA Transplant on the Solectria Force (replacing 10 year
old batteries, 23,000 miles) and clearly the fishpaper offered by McMaster-Carr
is not the best choice, due to it's sensitivity to acid.
Do you have a recommended source? Many thanks!
--
Mike Bianchi
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, they cost $100.00 a cell in 1975. The total cost into the car was
$42,300.00. The outboard 300 amp 3 phase 280 VDC charger cost $5000.00.
I did not pay for any of the electrical installation in this EV. I just had to
purchase the car as was received from General Motors which at the time was
about $3300.00.
There was a optional motor-generator, that I did not get at the time that cost
$8000.00 which extended the range to about 600 miles. It also can be used as a
emergency generator for your home by tapping the AC 120/240 volt circuit of the
37.5 KW alternator.
I drove this car for 10 years on these sets of batteries going up a steep 2
mile grade everyday at 60 mph at any temperature of -43 below to 108 above.
When the roads were glare ice, this car can walk right up this hill, while all
other ICE's where slipping and sliding all other the place.
The maximum range that I was able to attain in Montana was 87.5 miles of roller
coasting hills. Down hill speeds were up to 90 mph that allow the EV to propel
3/4 of the distance up the next. There was no speed limit at the time.
After 10 years, I broke down all the components for maintenance and upgrades.
Sent the controller back to Cable Form for all new replacement of components.
Upgraded the on board battery charger from 30 amp to 100 amp. Had the motor
clean and re enamel. Paint the inside metal housing of the motor with epoxy
type enamel paint so brush dust will blow out better.
Rewire the entire car with all wires with the correct voltage rating and
install each class of voltage in separate conduits or wireways.
Install a complete instrument package that included a E-Meter and separated
volt and amp meters for the battery pack, for the motor circuit, for the DC-AC
inverter, and 12 voltage systems.
Also install temperature indicators for the hot water electric heater and
resistance electric heating.
A control panel of 42 switches with a separated display panel that displays the
status of every circuit and device in the EV. A backup bank of switches is
used for switching to a standby circuit, if one fails.
A blown fuse display is used, indicating when a fuse is blown, which can be
switch to a spare unit.
Replace all point to point wire connections using industrial set screw terminal
blocks at the end of each buss runs which are install in a water tight cast
aluminum enclosure. Then take off from the terminal blocks to each device
using black plastic flexible conduit with water tight box connectors.
Replace the batteries with a lower height type 12 inches high instead of 18
inches high, so the battery box would not drop below the car body. Increase
the insulation R-factor from 5 to 25 for the battery box.
This time I drove the EV 15 years.
Completely recondition this EV again which this time was mostly complete
replacements of the suspension system, axils, brakes, flywheel and clutch.
Sandblasted the entire car and painted the underside and motor bay with epoxy
paint. Painted the car with the original type of lacquer paint and color sand
and compound it 14 times.
This car is now in storage and only driven once every two weeks, or used as a
back up car for my other EV which is the 1977 El Camino which has the Zilla,
Warp 9, PFC-50B and Trojan-145 batteries.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: Ryan Stotts<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: Challenges was voltage = speed?
Roland Wiench wrote:
> My EV back in 1975 call Transformer I did 1024 miles
> in 24 hours back in Detroit.
What happened after that?
> It will be the highest cost project they will ever will attempt to do.
Because of the "cobalt batteries"?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi David and All,
David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jerry, good point. Narrower but same diameter tires can help in these
ways:
Outright weight reduction
Reduction in rotating mass
Less aero drag
Less rolling resistance
Different diameters can also help reduce rolling resistance and
change the car's effective gearing.
In the Corvette's case, it went about 9% faster. Suppose the ground
clearance of the Corvette is 1/2 foot, and the narrower tires were
1/2 foot narrower. This means the frontal area was reduced by about
1/2 sq. ft. for the two front tires. This means the car had about 3%
less frontal area. Given that Power ~ v^3, we'd expect the speed to
go up only about 1%. So there was definitely more at work with the
narrower tires than just aero improvement.
I had though of why beside your list above right after I had hit the
send key is also probably the narrower dia tire takes less energy to flatten
the salt under it's tires making up the rest of the drag saving.
I'll probably go with the Insight tires as they are available,
slightly over 6" wide and very light at 13lbs each.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
--- jerry dycus wrote:
> Hi David and All,
> I'd bet the difference was air drag, not
> rolling drag.
> HTH's,
> Jerry Dycus
>
> David Dymaxion wrote:
> There was a magazine article author that was trying to make his 1st
> gen VW Rabbit go as fast as possible on a race track. To his
> chagrin,
> his car was slower on the wider tires, and would go faster on the
> narrower stock tires. He surmised the car just didn't have enough
> power to overcome the additional rolling resistance of the wider
> tires.
>
> There was a Corvette on the Salt Flats that switched from wide
> tires
> to narrow tires, and the 1 mile speed improved from 128 mph to 139
> mph.
>
> Does a wider tire really "deflect less"? It may not sink down as
> much, but there are more inches of width that are being bent.
>
> --- Phil Marino
> wrote:
> > ...
> > As far as the benefit of a narrower tire, there just doesn't seem
> > to be any
> > testing, one way or the other, that looks at rolling resistance
> vs
> > tire
> > width.
> >
> > I think wider tires would have lower RR - based on the fact that
> > narrow
> > tires deflect more (vertically) for the same load at the same
> tire
> > pressure
> > than wider tires. But, it's just an untested idea.
> >
> > Some people seem to think that wider tires mean higher RR ( I'm
> not
> > sure why
> > they think that way) .
> >
> > But, nobody seems to have done any real comparative testing, so
> we
> > just
> > don't know.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! for Good
> Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Roden writes:
>
> On 17 Sep 2005 at 19:49, Ralph Merwin wrote:
>
> > My car has 12 pairs of Optimas (156v pack) ...
>
> Thirteen volt batteries???
Ack... I meant 13 pairs.
Ralph
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 9/18/05, Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeff Shanab wrote:
> > Mill a u shaped slot and press/lay in a piece of copper tubing.
> > Where it sticks out the end, put on compression fittings. Then
> > fill with epoxy.
>
> Yes, this is my Plan B. I can saw a slot in the edges of the aluminum
> plate with my table saw and a carbide blade. With a few passes, I can
> make a wide enough slot on 3 edges to press aluminum or copper tubing
> into.
If you can get the heatsink hot enough, you could also try soldering a
piece of aluminium tube or hollow box section to the back of your
plate, no machining necessary...
--
EVan
http://www.tuer.co.uk/evs2
--- End Message ---
