EV Digest 5623
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: DC Motor torque calculations
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Electric 4X4 Roadster on an S10 Chassis
by Steve Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) K&W BC-20 problems
by "Brendan D. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Taurus EV
by Steve Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: SIP headers
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: SIP headers
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Batteries / Balancing (4 E Cobra)
by "Michael T Kadie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Electrics Wow the PIR Crowd Friday Night! (pt. 1)
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: DC Motor torque calculations
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Comparing batteries - was Re: Valence Technology Batteries
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: SIP headers
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: DC Motor torque calculations, choosing accessory motor
by Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: "DC Inverter" heat pump
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Hacked Old Mail Truck
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: DC Motor torque calculations
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: K&W BC-20 problems
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
17) Re: DC Motor torque calculations
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
18) Re: 'DC Inverter' heat pump
by "Martin K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Valence Technology Batteries
by "ProEV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Top Gear clip of Hy-Wire
by "Mike Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Top Gear clip of Hy-Wire
by "Mike Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Electrics Wow the PIR Crowd Friday Night! (pt. 1)
by "Mike Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
> Again, K is a constant for that particular motor.
By "that particular motor" do you mean that model, or the specific unit that
you bought. If you mean model, where does one find the K info for ADC
motors? I wasn't able to locate it on the ADC web site. If you mean that
particular unit, what tests does one need to run to determine it?
Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
An easier way to cut weight is just buy the fiberglass body that fits that
chasis with the same style as the chasis was originally. You can get entire
fiberglass bodies for several makes / models of cars.
http://www.usbodysource.com/
Some are just panels, but depending on the vehicle, you may be able to get a
whole body, bed only, front end, ...
One idea is an old Jeep 4X4. Put on a fiberglass body. And, run it as a
hybrid with ICE on one axle and an electric motor on the other. But, unless
you gear the thing, you are going to need a very big electric motor or dual
motors. I think two 7" motors or one 11" motor would do the trick for a light
vehicle like that with direct drive. The 7" would be less expensice, but more
complicated to mount / fit in place. I like the Jeep becuse it is a heavy duty
vehicle to begin with and parts are available.
There are probably other sources as well for the fiberglass parts.
Steve
Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Has anyone looked at or done any of these kit conversions on a small pickup
chassis? http://www.rodster.com/owners/4x4.htm An
S10 pickup seems like it would be a fairly sturdy chassis for an electric
conversion anyway. I wonder if the fiberglass body
would cut some of the overall wheight of the body/chassis combo and leave more
room and weight capacity for batteries and
electrics. Can anyone whose done an S10 comment on the chassis integrity and
ease to work with for mounting batteries? Too bad I
went with the Mitsu. Maybe my next will be some sort of stylish kit built on a
small pickup platform. Don't some rangers already
come with Ford 9" rear ends?
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
---------------------------------
Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just
radically better.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm having issues with the K&W BC-20 that came with my truck. At first it
would only charge at a few amps without shutting down, and now it just won't
charge at all - though all of the other AC parts seem to be in proper
running order. The current pot (or perhaps my multimeter) is about 20% out
of spec, but I doubt that's the issue. Everything else looks exceptionally
clean given its age, with the exception of one wire end that needed to be
re-crimped. Unfortunately that didn't help. The GFCI works fine and there
is no evidence of blown fuses, missing smoke, or any of the other usual
suspects. I didn't check every resistor or anything, but in general, things
look fine. The charger was mounted in the cab, so it's always been out of
the rain and away from battery acid.
Anyhow, unless I've missed something, I think I've exhausted my technical
savvy, so I need to send it elsewhere. Does anyone know if K&W is still in
business? I searched the posts and found several people saying that they
sent their units back and had them fixed in the past. But I can't seem to
find a phone number or any signs of contemporary existence. Or perhaps
there's someone on the list with a little more experience with this charger
who would be willing to fix it for appropriate compensation. I welcome any
contact info, personal experience, etc.
Thanks,
Brendan Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I would choose a Toyota Corolla, 1993 -> ? They are lighter, I think. They
also have a lot of parts availability. They are still everywhere on the road.
I can't go anywhere without seeing them. They are well built. Mine has 130k
miles, still running perfect, never had any issues at all. Also, it is a good
conversion candidate. That is what someone was converting in the 94-95 time
frame (but those were Geo Prisms - which just happens to be the exact same
car). There is history out there, and a proven design.
As for what people want in an EV. This is something I have given a lot of
thought to, so here is my opinion. I am sure other people have ideas as well.
This is based on the average consumer, not an EV enthusiest or hobby person who
may be building / buying for technical challenge.
1. Performance must be similar to a low end ICE car, acceleration / speed - 0
- 45 in about 10 sec, 0 - 60 in 15 sec, top speed 65 - 70 minimum.
2. They want comfort. In other words, they don't want to freeze in the
winter or burn up in the summer.
3. People like accys, but power brakes are most critical. People will live
with manual steering.
4. The car needs to look decent, presentable. People don't want to pay
$15,000 (or even $12,000) for a 15 year old junk yard car with 200,000 + miles
on it, even if it is electric. My story ... don't convert a $150 chasis, you
will regret it.
5. The car needs to be sustainable. Parts have to be out there, available,
and not cost a fortune. If you don't see other people driving that make /
model don't do it. Parts won't be available in the future.
6. The car needs to be simple to repair so someone has a way to get it fixed
when there are issues.
7. People will pay on the order of $6500 - $12,000 for a conversion,
depending on what it is. People have a hard time spending a lot of money on
something unproven, i.e. a home made conversion. Something like a production
RAV4, S10, ... is different.
8. People will not settle for anything less than a usable daily range of
about 35 miles. They may only drive it 6 miles a day, but if you try to sell
someone a car with a 20 mile range, the general population won't buy it.
9. People don't want to shift a lot. Either stick with direct drive, an
automatic, or only 2 gears. If it has 2 gears, keep the clutch.
10. Make sure the batteries are reasonable in cost. If the battery pack
costs $20,000, people won't buy the car.
11. Don't undersize the motor - see item #1 above.
I still think the best bet is the dual mode hybrid conversion that is pure
electric for the first 25 miles and then has "unlimited" range in ICE mode. It
still has to have the same performance in both modes .... If I had it, I
probably would never even run it in ICE mode, but I sure would feel better
about driving it knowing that I would never get dtranded. For most people 25
miles would be acceptable if they knew they would never get stranded.
That is just my 2 kW worth. Other people may have different opinions, so I
welcome feedback.
Steve
Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Taurus is basically unchanged from '86 to present, 20 years of cars to
pick from. Prone to engine and trans failures. A big trunk. Boring
normal car with lots of standard features. Styling is always
subjective, given Taurus is one of the most popular cars in the USA, a
lot of normal people must like them.
Hey, they run them in Nascar, that frontal area can't be that big an
issue.. ;)
An alternative is the New VW Beetle, but not too many available.
If you've got another idea, put it forward..
Best Regards,
Jack
Death to All Spammers wrote:
>>The plan is to do 100's of Taurus conversions, seeking out used parts
>>from other cars would not be viable. Ultimately the question is what
>>electric car will average people buy, what features do they want.
>>Look at manual vs automatic trans cars. The vote on that is pretty
>>clear, even corvettes have more automatic trans sold.
>>Air Conditioning? Votes are in. Power windows? Power door locks?
>>Power seats? Tilt steering?
>>
>>Jack
>
>
> Is this plan to do 100's of Taurus conversions based on an actual
> business plan? You'd need financial resources to take on that
> many...or even 10 of these!
>
> Do you have some emotional or logical reason to choose the Taurus?
> While there are plenty of conversions in this size range, current
> professional converters tend to choose smaller cars (or small pickup
> trucks for their higher GVWR). I'd never want something this large in
> frontal area, and many others find its styling boring -- the latest
> Jaguar sedan looks like a Taurus with a change in grill and hood, so
> Ford blandness seems to be contageous.
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Molex,
http://www.molex.com/cgi-bin/bv/molex/jsp/products/datasheet.jsp?ProductID=62542&BV_SessionID=@@@@2125624999.1152187065@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdaddifejkdjjcflgcehedffgdfmk.0&channel=Products&Lang=english
PN, 22-23-2021
--- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I need these connectors/sockets (SIP) for the boards
> I'm working on.
> They have a tiny 'MX' on each one. I cannot for the
> life of me fine
> them on the web. Help?
>
> Here's a pic.
>
> http://www.rotordesign.com/s10/sipconn.jpg
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> Here's to the crazy ones.
> The misfits.
> The rebels.
> The troublemakers.
> The round pegs in the square holes.
> The ones who see things differently
> The ones that change the world!!
>
> www.RotorDesign.com
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I copied the wrong part from my datasheet, it should
be
Molex 70553-0042
I use these on my 5A Brushless DC controls.
Rod
--- Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Molex,
>
http://www.molex.com/cgi-bin/bv/molex/jsp/products/datasheet.jsp?ProductID=62542&BV_SessionID=@@@@2125624999.1152187065@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdaddifejkdjjcflgcehedffgdfmk.0&channel=Products&Lang=english
> PN, 22-23-2021
>
> --- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I need these connectors/sockets (SIP) for the
> boards
> > I'm working on.
> > They have a tiny 'MX' on each one. I cannot for
> the
> > life of me fine
> > them on the web. Help?
> >
> > Here's a pic.
> >
> > http://www.rotordesign.com/s10/sipconn.jpg
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's to the crazy ones.
> > The misfits.
> > The rebels.
> > The troublemakers.
> > The round pegs in the square holes.
> > The ones who see things differently
> > The ones that change the world!!
> >
> > www.RotorDesign.com
> >
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So I'm still kind of thinking about using a123 batteries, but am open to
suggestions. I talked with the guys there and they told me for my small
application (less than 100k cell) I'm going to have to come up with my
own balancing system.
This is definitely outside of my experience (strangely the rest of
building this car isn't so far) and I could use some advice / help here.
Thanks,
KD
Hybrid Electric Cobra Project
http://sinc.us/kitcar
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'll confirm that as you go faster, it gets harder and
harder to carve away any more. Each additional tenth is a lot harder.
(I used to race all by myself, now it takes a whole team!)
I noticed you mentioned that you were sagging your batteries
to as low as 5.5 volts. You should set your Zilla to never take the
pack below 1/2 the open-circuit voltage of the pack. Drawing more
amperage, but sagging the batteries below 6.3 volts each results in
less HP, not more. It puts you on the "backside" of the power curve.
Strange, but true. :^)
I'd suggest that you set the minimum pack voltage to 189
volts on your Zilla and you should get more HP and lower ETs.
>>> Theory (for those that might be interested) <<
Based on Thevenin's theorem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thevenin's_theorem
The load resistance must equal the Thevenin resistance of
the source for maximum power transfer. When this is true, the load
voltage equals 1/2 of the open-circuit voltage of the source.
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_10/11.html
See, I don't just make this stuff up. ;^)
Bill Dube'
At 08:02 AM 7/5/2006, you wrote:
<big snip>
(2) Strong as they are, I'm close to extracting the max possible
power from the battery pack. According to the graphs Mark Farver
made off Zilla info, at the beginning of a run, each 12V battery
falls to about 8.2V at 1000 amps giving about 246 kw (330 hp) of
initial power. Near the end of the 12 second run, each battery has
fallen as low as 5.5V with the pack making just 165 kw of power (221 hp).
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jack Murray wrote:
> A separate accessory motor can be:
> - geared appropriately
Yes. Accessories don't need to work at a wide range of speeds as they do
if run from the traction motor.
> - is more efficient
That depends heavily on the exact loads. Electric motors have a broad
efficiency peak, so the loss in efficiency at different speeds is low.
You mainly lose efficiency by running at excessively low or high
*torque*. The motor is inefficient if being run at high speed but very
light load.
If the car spends a lot of time stopped, and you need high accessory
power during that time (hot day so A/C is at full blast, parallel
parking so power steering demands high power, etc.) then a separate
accessory motor will be more efficient than using the traction motor.
But if you spend a lot of time driving with low accessory power needs
(straight ahead so minimal power steering load, cool outside so A/C is
off, etc.), then driving accessories from the traction motor is more
efficient.
> - placed anywhere convenient
Yes, that's an advantage.
> - makes accessories an independent system from the traction setup
Yes, sometimes that helps (like being able to run the air conditioning
at full blast even when stopped).
> - costs a lot less to replace than the traction motor, why increase
> its wear to idle, even if slight.
No; I think you'll find separate motors cost more, and will be less
reliable (two failure points instead of one). And assuming you don't
abuse them, electric motors basically don't wear out; using the traction
motor to run accessories has an insignificant effect on life.
> - the added weight is not significant compared to a transmission.
If you are designing an EV from scratch, eliminate the transmission and
use a bigger motor and controller -- it will be cheaper and lighter
overall. But if you are converting a vehicle that already has a
transmission for "free", use it; it allows a smaller motor and
controller to be used.
> The plan is to do 100's of Taurus conversions, seeking out used parts
> from other cars would not be viable.
You should be able to buy just about any part for a Taurus new.
> Ultimately the question is what electric car will average people buy,
> what features do they want. Look at manual vs automatic trans cars.
> The vote on that is pretty clear, even corvettes have more automatic
> trans sold.
You rarely need to shift electric cars, so the disadvantages of a manual
transmission are much less. Given a choice, go with a manual.
But if you are converting existing cars, they will already have an
automatic transmission. The path of least resistance is to use it.
(Actually, the same is true for all the other engine-driven accessories;
using the existing A/C compressor, power steering pump, alternator, etc.
is simple and cheap).
> Air Conditioning? Votes are in. Power windows? Power door locks?
> Power seats? Tilt steering?
I understand. The average car buyer is accustomed to lots of luxuries,
and a car seems "stripped" without them. But here's the challenge; the
average person *won't buy an electric car*, no matter what you do,
because it is so "different" from what he's used to. It's outside his
comfort zone. Even hybrids like the Honda Civic and Toyota Camry have a
hard time selling to average buyers, even though Honda and Toyota have
bent over backwards to make the drive exactly the same, just because
people's perception is that it is "different".
So, you may find that your customers are NOT normal car buyers. That
means they may NOT have the same tastes in what accessories they like or
dislike.
> The stock Taurus transmission IS a weak point, and my intention is to
> eliminate it.
What exactly goes wrong with the transmission? It's important to know
before trying to fix it! If the problem is related to the heat or
vibration from the ICE, or failures in 1st or 4th gear, then changing to
an electric motor may solve them anyway.
In most newer cars, the transmission and differential are integrated
into one inseparable unit. And, this transaxle is integrated into the
suspension and motor mounting in such a way that it is very difficult to
change to a different unit.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jody Dewey wrote:
> Has anyone ever bought the Link 20 for two battery packs? Where did
> you put your shunt? I am thinking on the negative battery lead next
> to the battery.
The Link-20 has a twin shunt, with a single negative for loads, and two
separate terminals to go to each battery's negative. Thus the two
batteries must have a common ground.
The Link-20 is also missing the high-voltage prescaler functions, and
other EV-related features. You can still use it with a prescaler; but
"12.5v" is really 125v. You can use it to monitor the current in two
separate strings of batteries, as long as both strings have their
negatives tied together.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I see now. Molex SL series for male and Molex C-Grid series for
female. Now I'll look up the dual row group as well.
Thanks Rod and Cor!
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I copied the wrong part from my datasheet, it should
> be
> Molex 70553-0042
> I use these on my 5A Brushless DC controls.
> Rod
> --- Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Molex,
> >
>
http://www.molex.com/cgi-bin/bv/molex/jsp/products/datasheet.jsp?ProductID=62542&BV_SessionID=@@@@2125624999.1152187065@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccdaddifejkdjjcflgcehedffgdfmk.0&channel=Products&Lang=english
> > PN, 22-23-2021
> >
> > --- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I need these connectors/sockets (SIP) for the
> > boards
> > > I'm working on.
> > > They have a tiny 'MX' on each one. I cannot for
> > the
> > > life of me fine
> > > them on the web. Help?
> > >
> > > Here's a pic.
> > >
> > > http://www.rotordesign.com/s10/sipconn.jpg
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Here's to the crazy ones.
> > > The misfits.
> > > The rebels.
> > > The troublemakers.
> > > The round pegs in the square holes.
> > > The ones who see things differently
> > > The ones that change the world!!
> > >
> > > www.RotorDesign.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Accessories don't need to work at a wide range of speed
I'm looking to run my AC and power steering off an accessory motor. We know
that the AC may cycle
on and off, but I'd like to configure the power steering pump cycle also, only
run at slow road
speeds. (Maybe use an AC type clutch on the PS pump that is only energized
below 10-20 mph.) In
this setup I have two separate loads cycling independently off one motor. If I
know the max power
I need, (both AC and power steering running) what is the best motor/controller
for the job? Is
there a type of DC motor that, if I supply it the right voltage, will run at a
specific speed
(maybe 1500 rpm) and try to hold that speed under load? Do I need a PWM
controller and some kind
of governor? I'd also like to shut off the accessory motor if neither the AC
nor power steering
are in use.
Thanks
Dave Cover
PS I have a treadmill motor I'd love to use, just not sure how to control it.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Martin Klingensmith wrote:
> FWIW it says it uses an "Active filter" on the power side. This leads me
> to believe it has active PFC, which it probably should for being a motor
> load. If this is the case, it probably runs on a universal input as well
> though it only says 115VAC/60Hz.
I would guess that "active filter" is not PFC, but rather a simpler
noise filter to get past EMI regulations. Inverters generate a lot of
electrical noise. A brute force LC filter is large and expensive. So, it
is common to look at the EMI regulations, and devise an active filter
that nulls out specific harmonics so they just barely squeak past the
test. For an example, google the "valley fill circuit", which just uses
capacitors and diodes.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee, I have often fantasized about a hot rod City Car being the ultimate
sleeper on the street. Any Vette blown away by one would have a hard time
living it down. Of course it would have the words "Electric Car" very big on
the sides, the front and the rear. You would have room enough to run a high
voltage string of Hawker 16 amp/hr batteries. You could get a narrowed 9"
Ford from a Taylor Dunn golf cart. These are so narrow they would allow for
a tubbed type rear with the rear tires almost touching each other on the
inner sides of the tires. Since it is so light you would not need a
transmission. Hey Lee, when are we going to get started on yours :-)
Roderick Wilde
"Suck Amps EV Racing"
www.suckamps.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Hacked Old Mail Truck
Rich Rudman wrote:
You were stuck with using the same layout that the Van came with...
The point is... When doing twin 500 Hp drive trains, inventing them
is a really hard thing to do... If we really were hunting for sub
10 seconds like we were bragging about... what to use and where to
get it would have been different.
Ok, just for fun...
What would have happened if you started with something small and light
to begin with, like my old ComutaVan? It was an "old mail truck", too.
But it weighed under 1000 lbs without batteries. And already had a rigid
pipe space frame, solid front and rear axles, with tons of room for even
a huge Ford 9"er.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>> K is a constant for that particular motor.
Bill Dennis wrote:
> By "that particular motor" do you mean that model, or the specific
> unit that you bought. If you mean model, where does one find the K
> info for ADC motors? I wasn't able to locate it on the ADC web site.
> If you mean that particular unit, what tests does one need to run
> to determine it?
The design of the motor defines K. It will change very slightly between
motors of the same model, due to normal manufacturing variations, but
not enough to matter.
K is a published spec for servo motors, or motors in applications where
someone needs to know the torque vs. current relationship. But Advanced
DC doesn't specify it; I suppose they don't think their customers are
that sophisticated.
You can calculate the value of K yourself from the data sheets. Read the
torque and current at two points near rated current, and find the value
of K (and the exponent to raise the current to) by trial and error.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
K&W still responds to telephone support problems.
Mike Bachand
Denver Electric Vehicle Council (DEVC)
Kawasaki Ninja EV
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is this the same k & n that Ueve's motor calculations figure out? If so, then
it should be easy to calculate what we're looking for...
-Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, July 6, 2006 11:31 am
Subject: Re: DC Motor torque calculations
> Lee Hart wrote:
> >> K is a constant for that particular motor.
>
> Bill Dennis wrote:
> > By "that particular motor" do you mean that model, or the specific
> > unit that you bought. If you mean model, where does one find the K
> > info for ADC motors? I wasn't able to locate it on the ADC web site.
> > If you mean that particular unit, what tests does one need to run
> > to determine it?
>
> The design of the motor defines K. It will change very slightly
> betweenmotors of the same model, due to normal manufacturing
> variations, but
> not enough to matter.
>
> K is a published spec for servo motors, or motors in applications
> wheresomeone needs to know the torque vs. current relationship.
> But Advanced
> DC doesn't specify it; I suppose they don't think their customers are
> that sophisticated.
>
> You can calculate the value of K yourself from the data sheets.
> Read the
> torque and current at two points near rated current, and find the
> valueof K (and the exponent to raise the current to) by trial and
> error.--
> Ring the bells that still can ring
> Forget the perfect offering
> There is a crack in everything
> That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
> --
> Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377,
> leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The operation of PFC is such that the current drawn is proportional to the
voltage. A constant voltage should create a constant current into the PFC
stage. It's a moot point, I don't think anyone's seriously going to buy
this A/C and try to run it on DC. You're right though that it could blow
up, but I don't think it "should". It depends on their method of control.
--
Martin K
On Thu, July 6, 2006 3:13 am, Danny Miller wrote:
> But active PFC strategies generally wouldn't work with a DC input.
> First off PFC has no meaning at all on a DC input.
>
>
> PFC is a switching scheme that senses points on the waveform- and there
> is only one voltage point on the input. It may burn up, may not even turn
> on, or may work fine. There's no telling.
>
> Now note PFC and doing a variable DC/DC conversion to provide an optimum
> motor voltage for a given load and/or be insensitive to input voltage
> variations are two different things. Now that conversion will almost
> certainly have a output that controls the PFC filter.
>
> Danny
>
>
> Martin Klingensmith wrote:
>
>
>> FWIW it says it uses an "Active filter" on the power side. This leads
>> me to believe it has active PFC, which it probably should for being a
>> motor load. If this is the case, it probably runs on a universal input as
>> well though it only says 115VAC/60Hz. So who knows? Regarding the Mr Slim
>> units, I've heard they aren't all that reliable. --
>> Martin K
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris,
<but changing the spec was too much work. >
Ummm<G>. One thing you might do to minimize the possibility of problems is
plan your battery racks with lots of cooling. When we ran the Kokam's at a
higher current than they were designed for (10C - 700 amps vs. 8C - 560
amps), they got hot. Using a fan, we could keep them within their
temperature operating range and they worked fine. Running them too hot can
kill the cells and probably hurts cycle life.
Since the Valence BMS includes temperature sensors, it should help you by
letting you know if the batteries are getting too hot. Does the system allow
you to set the temperature warning level? Would you be able to see which
module is having high temperature problems to tune your cooling?
I'm not sure what you mean by thermal stability.
>Could you post some more information?
According to Valence, common lithium ion polymer
batteries have cobalt oxide that freely gives up their
oxygen, so in the event of thermal runaway they can
catch on fire and not be extinguishable.
Oh, I saw their famed 'bullet in the battery pack' video. It made me wonder
what Valence had been doing to make people want to shoot at them <G>.
Kokam's pass the impact test, nail penetration test, over heating test,
crush test, over charging test
http://www.kokam.com/english/product/kokam_safety_02.html. Personally, I've
crunched them, short circuited them, run 600 amps through a dead cell for
several laps, all without any fire.
I have had a number of people approach me at car shows and say that they
would never risk driving in a car full of lithium batteries. "It's too
dangerous!" And most of these people drove to the show with 10 gallons of
highly explosive liquid sloshing around their car while holding a lithium
polymer cell to their head while chatting on their cell phone. Which, by the
way, a recent study claims is more dangerous than driving while legally
intoxicated!
Sorry. <Deep Breath> Got carried away for a moment.
This problem was not started by Valence, so it is unfair to blame them. I
just do not think a sales strategy of fear is a very good one.
The
Kokams at 1400 cycles at 100% DOD to 80% capacity at
25C sounds great -- much better than the 500 cycles I
got from somewhere when I was shopping last year.
Yes. The old cells were rated >500 cycles. Kokam brought out the new cells
in January of this year after two years of testing.
Each battery module has cell voltage, temperature and
current sensors, and automatic shunting circuitry
around each of the 4 cells during charging.
How much current can they shunt?
My plan for now is to have it drive my
Brusa charger over CANBus,
Will you have to do any programming or is it pretty much 'plug and play'?
Cliff
www.ProEV.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 7/4/06, Bill & Nancy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Repalce that fuel cell with a good set of batteries aaand.....!
Bill
That was my thinking exactly! :)
-Mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lol!
Sorry, I forgot the link. That wasn't the same place I found it, but
it was the same clip.
-Mike
On 7/4/06, Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Link?
I found a video linked here:
http://www.ecogeek.org/
Also features the (electrical!) Pivo.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Mike Ellis
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 10:20 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Top Gear clip of Hy-Wire
The article at this page is pretty blah, but there is a video clip of
the GM Hy-Wire being test driven, explained, and disassembled.
This is what I would like to do with my conversion.
-Mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rod,
Does this video exist anywhere?
-Mike (fast-ev video addict)
On 7/5/06, Roderick Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Way to go John! We do need much more positive coverage of EVs. The general
public still doesn't understand the potential. With the new Lithiums coming
on they surely will. At least the other racers will find out :-) The Reality
Shows of course do not show reality. I did do one good show about seven
years ago. It was called "The New Edge" and the host was Ryan Seacrest. Some
here may have heard of him because of hosting "American Idol" and "American
Top 40". He rode with me in the "Maniac Mazda" as we blew the doors off a
Dodge Viper and the action was all caught on film including his uncontrolled
excitement from the cam inside the car. John, I sure hope your filming gets
out there in the public realm.
Roderick Wilde
"Suck Amps EV Racing"
www.suckamps.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wayland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 7:02 AM
Subject: Electrics Wow the PIR Crowd Friday Night! (pt. 1)
Hello to All,
What a great night of electric drag racing Friday night was! No, White
Zombie did not achieve the goal of busting into the 11s, but the night
was still a big one as far as advancing the notion that electrics are
nothing to laugh at anymore. Many of my EV friends came to take in the
excitement. Of course, the usual suspects were there...Marko Mongillo,
Rich Rudman down from way up north in Washington state, and Damon Henry
(also from Washington across the river) who once again arrived on his
NiCad powered electric motorcycle. In addition to these guys, we were
also accompanied by Steve Kiser and Duane Gergich who brought their
electric drag bike down from Washington. Many from the OEVA (Oregon
Electric Vehicle Association) gang came too...Greg, Gary, Jay and others
I'm sure I've forgotten, and many of my forklift wrench work buddies
came, too. Members of my family also showed up. I appreciate all the
support!
Man, those 11's are hard to get! White Zombie did the usual job of
stunning those unfamiliar with today's level of electric car
performance, and yes, I toasted a built El Camino muscle car, beat
another muscle car, beat a 12 second 4 wheel drive turboed Sube ricer,
and held my own (but lost) with two pro stock cars, but nope, no
11-anything...just low 12's. I guess having an electric street legal
sedan that 'only' runs 12.3 @ 100+ mph consistently (all 5 runs were
100+ mph, with the average at 103 mph) aint all that bad :-) Still,
being honest in my assessment, I failed to hit my goal. No excuses this
time. Absolutely perfect weather, good (not great) track conditions, a
fully charged and fully heated up battery pack, and ultra-fast recharge
turn-around times were all on hand setting the stage for 11's, but it
wasn't o be.
There are, however, two reasons that seem to be validation for why the
car seems to have hit another performance wall.
(1) As Tim reported to me on the 2nd pass the only other time we've been
able to make runs at PIR this year (we got rained out after the third
run back in early June), that old bugaboo vibration issue is back...BIG
TIME. The car accelerates like crazy, with a great 60 ft. time and a
strong 1/8th mile time, but at between approximately 90 - 100 mph the
vibration begins and ramps up so strong, it feels like the car is going
to shake apart. The acceleration simply ceases as the car's power
appears to be totally absorbed by the vibration. Then, after what seems
to be maybe two l-o-n-g seconds, suddenly the vibration vanishes, the
car becomes turbine smooth again, and it resumes a fairly decent pull as
the speed goes higher again where the car gains those extra 3-4 mph to
where the trap speed comes out at 103-104 mph. If the vibration wasn't
there and those two seconds of stalled acceleration were replaced with
mild continued high mph acceleration, it's pretty clear to me after
driving the car, that the average ET of 12.3 @ 103-104 mph would have
dropped into high 11's @ 107-108 mph. Oh well, that wasn't the case
Friday night :-(
I suspect we've cracked the Ford nine inch casting again :-( The
instantaneous torque from the Siamese 8 fed with 2000 amps off line is
huge, and the series-to-parallel shift also at 2000 amps around 80 mph
is also brutal. In fact, on the last run Friday night, the car broke
traction at the shift-over point bad enough that the rear end got loose
and the rear tires squealed and chirped with wisps of smoke coming off
both tires (video captured)....this, at near 80 mph! I also noticed lots
of extra 'noises' from the rear end that got worse as the night went
on...not good! The last rebuild of the rear end revealed that we had
been dealing with pinion bearing wobble due to a full split across the
casting of the massive rear end, and that this was the source of the
vibration issue. After another perfect condition 9 inch casting was
found, a pro Ford nine inch rebuilder installed a new Richmond Gear set,
all new bearings, etc., and the vibration was totally gone. Now, it's
back :-( Guess I'm gonna be pulling the rear end out soon to see what's up.
(2) After repeated hard runs and fast recharges, the pack got so hot
that touching the aluminum case nearly burned my hand. The last run of
the night vented the batteries and lifted the pop-on top covers on
several. No squirting liquid and no pooled electrolyte, but they did
vent and make a very light fog that lasted maybe 30 seconds on the
inside of the Lexan compartment cover. This model battery is rated at
925 amps for 5 seconds, and I'm pulling 1000 amps for an average of
double that amount of time, so the batteries are performing well above
their specs.
With the vibration halting top end acceleration and with very hot
stressed-out batteries, I made the decision after 5 strong runs to cut
my losses and stop racing for the night to save the pack. Four days
after the races, all the batteries measure good and the pack rests at
390V, the same it usually does at 75-80 degrees. If any damage was done,
it seems to be minimal, so I'm glad I didn't keep punishing the pack.
Conclusions...
(1) Until I can fix the problem and eliminate the vibration, I don't
think the car is going to hit the 11's...it simply robs too much power.
(2) Strong as they are, I'm close to extracting the max possible power
from the battery pack. According to the graphs Mark Farver made off
Zilla info, at the beginning of a run, each 12V battery falls to about
8.2V at 1000 amps giving about 246 kw (330 hp) of initial power. Near
the end of the 12 second run, each battery has fallen as low as 5.5V
with the pack making just 165 kw of power (221 hp).
I'm rethinking the current stack of 30, 26 ahr, 24 lb. Hawker
Aerobatteries. I remember back to 2000 when I ran a 378 lb. 336V pack of
the half-sized Hawker 16 EP models, 16 ahr 13.5 lb. little bricks of
power that could deliver 750 amps during low 13 second runs, over, and
over. At 750 amps each battery would sag to ~6.9V (going off analog
gauges in the car). A double string of 30 of these for 60 total
batteries would make a 360V pack that weighs about 90 lbs. more. This
pack would sag less than the current packs does at 1000 amps, while
cranking out a whopping 1500 battery amps! Assuming a conservative 6.5V
per battery of initial sag, the pack would kneel to 195V at 1500 amps
for 295 kw (395 hp) of power giving 65 more hp than the current pack of
26 ahr batteries do. It's possible that the overly beefy intercell
straps inside the smaller 16 ahr models contain heating under high loads
better than the larger 26 ahr units the car currently has. Back when we
were racing in the 90's, the earliest versions of the 16 ahr batteries
would fuse open their internal cell straps. After sending destroyed
batteries to Hawker engineers, they redesigned the batteries with
beefier straps...cool. Perhaps the strapping of the bigger 26 ahr models
aren't as proportionately beefy, and with 1000 amps passing through them
(250 amps more than when using their smaller batteries) the inter-cell
straps are a limiting factor...they probably get pretty hot inside the
battery. This would explain the rapid heat build-up and subsequent
venting. On the flip side, it's also possible that with the vibration
eliminated and thus the power robbing issue gone, the car might just
crack the 11's with the current pack. No decision has been made here,
I'm just blabbing my thoughts...
OK, enough post racing analysis...on with the fun parts.
The big show of the night came from Steve Kiser and Duane Gergich with
their electric drag bike. Formerly Father Time's 'Dragon Rose', at the
Sept. '04 Woodburn drags with Duane doing the driving, this gorgeous
156V bike set a NEDRA world record for the MT/D class when it ran an
impressive 12.497 @ 100.7 mph! Steve and Duane now own the bike and have
it in pristine condition these days, with lustrous cherry red paint and
the thing detailed to the max...it's beautiful to look at! They had it
on display at the June 24th SEVA Gasless on Greenwood car show, where I
brow beat them, shamed them, and downright taunted them into bring the
machine south to Portland to join me for Friday night electric drag racing.
I had written:
> As a bonus for EV racing fans, Duane Gergich and Steve Kiser will be
joining us with their Father Time-built outrageous drag bike
> that has run 12.4 @ 100 mph. I twisted their arms yesterday at the
SEVA Greenwood car show.
Well, came they did!
The bike's now nearly 5 year old Hawker batteries, 13 of the little 13
ahr models that weigh just 10.5 lbs. each, had sat un-charged and
un-loved for the past 1.5 years since the record was set...argghh! Yet,
after being charged, driven on, and charged a few times the batteries
shed their sulfation and flexed their electro-chemical muscles and made
some serious power! Can you say 12.5 @ 100 mph? Can you say that, twice?
Before these two great runs though, Duane had a tough time getting his
act together :-) His first run netted an embarrassing 63 mph at 14
seconds....wait...how do you only get 63 mph with a 14 second run?
Easy...you get confused and let off the throttle at the 1/8th mile
marker! Boy, we had Duane hanging his head in shame over this one, and a
certain Plasma Boy took advantage of the moment and really rubbed it in.
Duane took it in stride and laughed along with the rest of us (at
himself), then turned around and stuck it to everybody! After the track
announcer told everyone there was an electric motorcycle in the burnout
pit, Duane decided to shut up the snickers over a 63 mph motorcycle, and
with Steve out on track setting up the burnout perfectly with staging
help, he gave a dramatic go-ahead hand motion, signaling Duane to do the
most scorching bike burnout I've ever seen! It was awesome.
I had also written:
> I can hardly wait to see the crowd's reaction to their quick very red
electric bike with it's BIG electric motor clearly visible, and the fat
>drag slick and long wheelie bar extension making quite statement.
>
The crowd indeed, went nuts cheering and hooting. Then, after expending
a lot of power into the burnout, Duane made the Hawkers puke out even
more power and jammed the bike down the track running a 12.8 second
blast! Hawkers rock! Yeah, this wiped away all those snickers! After
that run, came the 12.5 second 100 mph runs back to back...very
impressive for a non-advanced 8 inch ADC motor, just 156V worth of 5
year old Hawkers, and a Raptor controller. Imagine the motor properly
advanced, 192V of brand new Hawkers, and a Zilla Z1K? Can you say 11's?
How 'bout 300+V of hi current LiIons, a Zilla, and the same motor
prepped by Jim Husted? Can you say 'Hello, Bill Dube?"
Much of the credit for the bike's strong showing has to go to Madman
Rudman, as he had charging the bike down, big time! After I had argued
with him about getting us all hooked into the AC mains at the track so I
could shut off the damn stink'n generator in the back of my service
truck, and after he found a maintenance shack where the power pigtail
box equipped with the Cam Lok connectors was stored, and after he made a
special run to a local home improvement type store to get more
electrical parts, he had us wired! Gone was the noise and stink,
replaced with silent and abundant AC power! Using my PFC50x, during
Zombie recharging, ~12 kw of power was rapidly sent into the hungry
pack, 29.8 amps @ 401V, and the turn-around time was about 7
minutes...every bit as good as I used to get with a dump charge pack!
Madman repeatedly charged the bike up to 80% in 3 minutes and it was
fully charged and ready to run again in 5 scant minutes...a 5 minute
turn-around! Of course, the mighty Hawkers simply took in the power,
dished it out, then took it in again...remember, they are nearly 5 years
old, and sat for 1.5 years uncharged and unused...incredible batteries!
Did I say, Hawkers rock?
Back to White Zombie...The night was bitter sweet, with the first run
one of the most exciting, for sure. Normally, the first run comes in at
around 13 flat, with the second run a high 12, then subsequent runs
getting quicker as the battery pack heats up. Friday started off much
better though. For the first attempt, White Zombie was lined up next to
a very loud V8 muscle car, a green Chevy El Camino with a built 350 cid
V8. This bad ass machine had fat drag slicks in back and its heavily
cammed V8 lumped and thumped at idle in true muscle car fashion. At the
burnout pits the Chevy did a ferocious burnout that had the crowd's
attention immediately...all the while I drove around the water pit and
waited for him to end his testosterone fueled display of power. I had
figured that with a wimpy first run going to be in the low 13s, why
bother to do a burnout? The El Camino driver was serving notice that the
little 'ol Datsun next to him was going to get blown away, and he was
jabbing the throttle making the car jump...the car acted much like a
bull does as he snorts and claws the dirt. The best part, is that this
whole showdown was captured by a professional camera crew that had come
down from Seattle to do a special on 'White Zombie vs the muscle cars'.
I had previously written:
> there was a reporter/camera crew covering the Greenwood EVent....the
reporter/camera crew are heading to Portland to film both >electrics
running against the gassers this Friday, and to hopefully capture White
Zombie cracking the 11s.
So, why were these guys so pumped about coming to the drags to get this
on tape? It goes back to the Seattle car show on June 24th. The
interview guy is a hoot, and goes by the nickname 'Pixel'. Pixel had
talked with me about having seen both the 'Sucking Amps' show featuring
Rod Wilde, his crew, and 'Gone Postal', and the 'Monster Garage episode
featuring the build crew that included Mad Man Rudman and Shawn Lawless.
He commented that for him it was disappointing that in both shows, the
electrics didn't actually win their races and that cool as they were, in
the end they underperformed for this reason or that, and they got beat
by the gas cars. He then said to me, "So, you actually 'win' races
against the gassers?" I said, "Sure, I beat them all the time. I also
loose to them as well. There's always faster cars. But in general, White
Zombie is very competitive with the cars it runs against, and it wins
more than loses the heads up matches it gets into." Pixel then said,
"Cool, then the world needs to see this. There needs to be a show where
the electric beats the gas cars. Note....I'm not trying to diss any of
my EV buddies or their hard earned accomplishments here, these comments
are direct quotes from Pixel.
Back to the track....Frankly, I was a bit concerned that this first
battle might not turn out so great for the cameras, as the El Camino
'did' sound and look as if it could kick my Datsun's butt. I would later
hear that some of the younger dudes who knew my car had put their money
on the Zombie. We staged as the announcer told everyone that the little
white Datsun was an electric car. Then the tree's lights sequenced
down...yellow, yellow, yellow....FLOOR the
ACCELERATOR!!!!....Green.....Wheels lift, nose in the air, my neck
snapped back, and the race was on! The El Camino's V8 roared and shook
my guts, but the sound faded as he couldn't stay with the Zombie. The
run felt strong and the Zombie pulled hard, then the parallel up shift
happened accompanied by a brief rear end swing as the drag radials broke
loose then grabbed. I could still hear the El Camino at full boil, but I
could also see him in my rear view mirror :-) The best part for me, is
that this poor muscle head dude had to read the 'SUCK AMPS' plastered
across the Zombie's rear window all the way down the track as he was
getting whupped by a little 'ol tin can Datsun (as Rudman calls it) with
a bunch of batteries! The finish line reader boards said it all....El
Camino 13.091 @ 100.75 mph - White Zombie 12.524 @ 101.76 mph, all
captured by a professional film crew! Never, had White Zombie been
driven to the track to run a mid 12 out of the box...an incredible first
run for the night, and we were all convinced the car was poised to rip
into the 11s. Of course, it felt great knowing the camera crew had
already got what they came for....filming an electric car take on and
beat muscle cars.
To be continued....
See Ya.....John Wayland
>
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
--- End Message ---
