EV Digest 6495
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Battery Woes
by David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Altairnano Ultimatum
by Sam Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Connector choices
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Nicad update
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: A few new KillaCycle photos (battery assembly)
by Ian Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Toyota pedal /plug in
by "C. Dreike, Advantage Automation, Inc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) EV's, Ewoody and safety,
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Golf Cart for $100 near San Francisco
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: Toyota pedal /plug in
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: EV's, Ewoody and safety,
by Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Nicad update
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Zilla for the newbie
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Nicad update
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Various Controller Thoughts (was RE: Contactor controller control?)
by "Randy Burleson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) RE: EV's, Ewoody and safety,
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
WARNING! You stated you are adjusting the voltage up when its hot and down
when its cold. It's backwards! Adjust the voltage UP when its cold and DOWN
when its hot. If you do otherwise, you are asking for thermal runaway during
the summer!
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: TiM M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 12:28:29 AM
Subject: Re: Battery Woes
OK, I followed the US battery recommendations for
charging my pack. I set the voltage for 2.583 Volts
per cell, plus .0028V per cell per degree above 80F,
and Minus .0028V per degree below 80F. I generally
started the charge at ~20 amps, after the voltage was
reached the current would taper to ~5 amps and shut
off after ~1 hour. I ran light cycles on the pack and
I programmed the voltage limit to 130V and the current
limit to 350, but seldom went over 250.
What do I need to do different to make a new pack
last longer? I'm supposed to kill my first pack,
apparently it's dead. I'm trying to figure out how I
killed it and what I can do to prevent the same thing
happening to a replacement pack. Would a set of zener
regs have helped? I was under the impression I could
get away with an occasional equalization charge. The
wet cells would use a little more water, refill and
all is well.
TiM
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for all of your input regarding Altairnano. It has prompted me
to tell them to "shit or get off the pot", although I am doing so in a
way that will not strain relations in the event that their developments
are valuable. Gawd, I'm starting to feel like a politician.
The following is text directly pasted from an email I sent to Al Gotcher
today:
_______________
"Congratulations to you and Altairnano on the breakthrough you have made
in the manufacturing process of your batteries. I spoke with Veselin
Manev yesterday and he informed me of the good news. I also resent him
the requested test parameters contained in the message below.
I have offered Altairnano a no-cost opportunity to prove the validity of
the technology you are developing, and that offer was accepted.
Following through with this test supports your responsibilities to
Altairnano's agenda, and there is no conflict of interest with your
exclusivity agreements with Pheonix in conducting this test. The
energy and transportation revolution opportunity we are faced with
cannot afford to be clouded with myths, and I am dead serious about
separating myth from fact.
I have to inform you that there are credible entities I answer to,
including investors in Altairnano. The ethical thing for me to do is
give you fair warning that if I haven't received a test pack by March
16, 2007, they are essentially going to "cry B.S.", which some are
already doing. My intention is to support your development, not
antagonize it. If Altairnano stands behind their product, Facilitating
this test will be an asset to the company."
________________
The ball's in their court, and the jury is still out, for a little
while. If they drop the ball, we can spread the truth. If they follow
through and the tests go well, we can spread the truth. Until then,
let's not speculate what the truth is.
Tastes like chocolate today.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
When I worked at Caterpillar (1989 to 1992) most of
the harness connectors for underhood transportation
and earth moving equipment used Deutsch connectors,
http://www.deutschipd.com/Products/DT_Series/dt_series.html
These offer excellent protection from contamination
and a unique patented crimping method that offers high
reliability.
I have one connector in the basement that is
rectangular and can accommodate up to 40 pins/sockets.
Since extraction force is high it uses a hex head bolt
in the center to pull the two halfs together or apart.
When I worked at GE-EVS (1993-96) we used these
connectors on golf cart and GEM EV controls.
The connectors with the orange inserts are also cool.
You don't need an extraction tool to get wires out.
Just use a small screwdriver to pop out the orange
piece, then use the screw driver to bend the plastic
finger out that locks in the 'collar' of the
pin/socket.
Rod
Rod
--- Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course, it depends...
>
> - voltage rating
> - current rating
> - weatherproof requirements
>
> People use Anderson for the high voltage/high
> amperage connections.
>
> For me, I like the low voltage connectors from
> waytek wire. OEM quality and
> weather proof. Reasonable price.
>
>
>
>
>
> Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> See the New Beetle EV project
> www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
>
> Check the EVDL Archives:
> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archive
>
> Check out the EV FAQ: www.evparts.com/faq
>
> Check out the EV Photo Album: www.evalbum.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 1, 2007 12:46 PM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Re: Connector choices
>
> I see lots of types of connectors for use in various
> EV applications like
> Molex, Anderson, Deutsch etc for high and low
> voltage connectors and
> harnesses etc. Is there a streamlined way to figure
> out the best for each
> application?
>
> Those with experience with these connectors, can you
> please share your
> wisdom, thanks JJ
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
When I wrote the software for the Dodge TEVan
chargers, I looked for the knee of the voltage spike
on the SAFT STM-180 batteries. I drove 30,000 miles
in TEVans and always seen this knee. 3 where 30 6V
STM-180 batteries for a nominal 180V pack weighing
1500 lbs.
At around 228 Volts and 20 amps, the voltage would
climb quickly (like less than a minute) to 280 Volts.
At this point I would do constant voltage charging.
I also did amp*hour counting so I would know how much
more charge needed to go into to the batteries before
finishing the charge. Watering occurred 20 minutes
after the end of charging.
I also never charged the batteries if they were over
40 degrees Celsius (I would wait until they dropped
below 35C).
Rod
--- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These cells at least have held a tight bandwidth. I
> have checked them
> several times at full charge and other states of
> charge. They hang
> very close to each other. There is a difference
> between the redtops
> and the greentops however. But above say 40% soc or
> higher the redtops
> don't seem to get too low on voltage.
>
> Besides, isn't looking for a knee with cells in
> parallel alot harder
> than cells in series? Series would tend to multiply
> the effect of the
> knee.
>
> Mike
>
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lee Hart
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> I'm not sure why you say that voltage is a bad
> indicator. Nicads have
> > >> a very pronounced knee. Many nicad chargers
> depend on that knee.
> >
> > Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> > > When you have 200+ cells in series, that don't
> ALL hit the knee at the
> > > same time, it might get a bit obscured. I.e how
> do you see one
> cell knee
> > > over when 199+ other cells are still climbing?
> >
> > You're correct. The knee gets less visible as the
> number of cells
> > increases. It isn't very reliable for over 20 or
> so cells.
> > --
> > 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 ---
These are the ones with A123Systems Lions in them, correct?
http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-DeWALT-DC9360-36V-Li-Ion-Battery-
Pack_W0QQitemZ220087783449QQihZ012QQcategoryZ20794QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
So a 36v pack I assume means 10 or 11 cells in there, ~$10/cell is
about right. But $10 for 7.6Wh = $1.30/Wh.. ouch, that's almost 3x
the cost of mainstream lithiums!
Although I guess since they can deliver 50C+, you could argue that
the power per dollar is not too bad.
-Ian
On 02/03/2007, at 2:14 AM, damon henry wrote:
That's easy since you can buy them. In Dewalt tool packs they cost
~$10 a cell or you can buy the new A123racing RC packs
(www.a123racing.com) which are priced at ~$15 a cell. Since this
is the only way we can get them, this is the cost to get started.
Add on top of that, assembly, BMS, and charging and you can see
that if this is what you really really really want for Christmas
you can have it, but for most on this list it is still just too
expensive.
damon
From: "C. Dreike, Advantage Automation, Inc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Subject: Re: A few new KillaCycle photos (battery assembly)
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:51:45 -0800
I'm sure the A123's are not cheap. Could you give us a flavor for
the cost of 800 batteries?
Thanks,
Chris Dreike
_________________________________________________________________
With tax season right around the corner, make sure to follow these
few simple tips. http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/
PreparationTips/PreparationTips.aspx?icid=HMFebtagline
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Knowing that a very fit human body is good for about 1/4hp for a short
period of time, this looks a bit impractical to me.
I built a man powered race vehicle in the late 70's early 80's. With 2
really strong guys it did 61.04mph over 600 feet with a 1+ mile run up.
Current technology is now near or a bit over 70 with 1 guy.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 2:41 PM
Subject: Toyota pedal /plug in
http://tinyurl.com/23xenu
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.5/707 - Release Date: 3/1/2007
2:43 PM
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Doug, Mark, Don and All,
Are we here for arguement or helping make EV's
better?
Mark brought up this red herring and said things I never did
like it's safe because I guess he's mad at me. Otherwise he
would have changed the EV bashing subject line many posts
ago. There is no such thing as safe, only relative safety
including Mark's EV.
I've never said the Ewoody was safe, in fact
aways have said it was a mistake, just illustrating on A
safety aspect that other 3wheeler EV's might find useful in
their designs which is the rear raising up from hitting the
rear wheel so the car crashing in the rear slides under it,
thus lowering forces greatly, allowing me to walk away
unharmed in what could have been a fatal accident. Now had
the other car been taller like an SUV instead of a compact
car, it would have been different probably. I was going 40
mph and estimated the car was going 65mph when it hit me as
I watched it happen, thought he would go around me.
If you could have seen the damage to the other
vehicle, you would have been amazed, I was. You can take
this for whatever you want but it proves at least 1 good
result. But it's these kind of things that are needed to
build a archive of methods to chose from and what this list
is for. Without such 1 data point data, you could never get
enough to learn anything as you have to start somewhere.
But as a MC which it is, it is diffenitely
safer than other MC's and I call it a safety MC. I did
design in as much safety as I could and did well considering
it was my first design of a 3wh car 12 yrs ago. And if one
compares it to early and even some newer SUV's, pickups,
which regularly kill people all by themselves in 1 car
rollover accidents simply from their very bad handling. It's
not that unsafe comparatively if driven correctly. And it
has proven almost impossible to rollover, unlike many 'safe'
vehicles. If a car driving under it won't make it roll, not
much will. Now add it's excellent handling, braking makes
even better.
My experience with it, my experience building
high tech boats, stresses, composites, studying many
crashes, crashed vehicles, ect has I believe allowed me to
design a fairly safe vehicle. I've never said anything but I
think it is, as I only have my judgement on that. But I'm
betting my life on it just like Mark bets his life on his EV
and his MC driving skills.
Personally I'll take the Freedom EV safety wise
with it's good crush zones, 4 point seat belts, fantastic
handling, braking, composite roll cage, ect over Marks
overweight, can't get out of it's way, fairly bad handling
pickup EV.
Have you crash tested your EV Mark? Why not? You
infer that it's not safe or you can't say it's fairly safe
unless you do. And no way you can consider your EV the same
safety as a stock ICE one as they are very, very different
vehicles, and the stock one isn't that safe anyway, in some
ways better, but others worse as an EV.
More weight just means a vehicle hitting it just
goes deeper into it, hitting it harder, where my Freedom EV
just gets knocked around being light and strong like a
bumper car. A vehicle only needs to be as as strong as it's
weight to avoid getting crushed unless it gets between two
objects.
I think front airbags are not that safe for many
reasons, much better to use a 4 point seatbelt though I'm
looking for side airbags that can be useful and not kill
people, especially small adults, kids like front airbags do
regularly.
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker Shock
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 10:07:31 -0700
>On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:02 AM, Mark Brueggemann wrote:
>
>> When the EWoody passes a crash test, I'll be
>> a believer.
>
>The eWoody *did* pass a crash test. Someone rear-ended him
>, and Jerry was unhurt and the eWoody was easily and
>quickly repairable, even though the other car was badly
>damaged (totalled?).
Exactly. My point though was one can design safety
in a light vehicle and one way to do it amoung many. And
certain materials are very inexpensive, easy to repair.
In Japan, the Kei cars, the old Honda 600, Subaru
360 from the 70's were that class, are the safest cars in
Japan!! Not because they stand crashes well, but because of
the way and the places they drive. So safety comes in many
forms.
>
>No, this is not the same as a DOT certification, but it's
>real-world data. Jerry designed the eWoody to survive
>this type of crash, and it did.
Yes.
>
>When he can afford it, he may get an official crash test.
>On the other hand, if he can afford it, it means that he
>has made millions of dollars selling FreedomEVs that
>haven't been officially crash-tested.
I do plan on crash testing it. But some of the
safest vehicles out there are the F1, Indycars, ect, that
are built much like mine and use the same methods for crash
safety at up to 220 mph. Only I have much larger crush zones
added to their methods like using the tires as energy
absorbers, foam, racing seatbelts, ect.
>
>We'll just have to see how many Americans will buy vehicles
>without crash certifications and air bags. Certainly,
>some of them will. Jerry doesn't need or even want to
>sell to Joe Sixpack and Susie Soccer Mom at this time.
>He's only planning to build tens of cars per year at this
>point.
Exactly. But look at how many drive MC's? I only
need to sell 1% of car buyers to be rich beyound my wildest
dreams. And I think 1% would easily want to drive a Freedom
EV! But I won't sell to others that EVer's until I get a
good handle on it and design a whole new Freedom EV for them
from what I learn.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
>
>--
>Doug Weathers
>Las Cruces, NM, USA
>http://www.gdunge.com/
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Found on Craigslist.
No batteries, no charger and a molten wire due to wiring problems,
ran fine before (I have not seen it, this is according to the owner)
It has headlights, a top and windshield.
See the ad below to contact the owner.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
Golf Cart needs - $100 (lafayette / orinda / moraga)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2007-02-28, 10:01PM PST
Club Car electric, 4 wheel,golf cart. Needs batteries, and wiring work. Has
top.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For walking speeds, this is probably enough.
Especially if it is electric assist, so you provide
only part of the power and the batteries still need
to supply only a few hundred Watts to move you. If
I drive real slow with my EV, I have a hard time seeing
the amp meter move - just a matter of a well tuned EV.
In addition:
How many cars can you legally drive up a sidewalk or a trail?
In pedal mode, it may be allowed everywhere a bicycle is allowed.
How's that for a gridlock killer?
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of C. Dreike, Advantage Automation, Inc
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 4:56 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Toyota pedal /plug in
Knowing that a very fit human body is good for about 1/4hp for a short
period of time, this looks a bit impractical to me.
I built a man powered race vehicle in the late 70's early 80's. With 2
really strong guys it did 61.04mph over 600 feet with a 1+ mile run up.
Current technology is now near or a bit over 70 with 1 guy.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 2:41 PM
Subject: Toyota pedal /plug in
> http://tinyurl.com/23xenu
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.5/707 - Release Date: 3/1/2007
> 2:43 PM
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jerry, I am not sure of Mark's motivations. But as I stated in my
postings, I was not at all criticizing or commenting on the safety of your
vehicle (one way or the other), nor was I commenting about your work with
E-woody or freedom EV. All I was pointing out was Doug's comment stating
that it did pass a "crash test", which I wholeheartedly disagree with. He
also implied that this "real world data" demonstrated a level of crash
worthiness - not in the least. It could have been luck. This was an
accident in completely uncontrolled environment. Proof of anything is
purely speculation.
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
---------------------------------------------------
See the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
Check the EVDL Archives: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archive
Check out the EV FAQ: www.evparts.com/faq
Check out the EV Photo Album: www.evalbum.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jerryd
Sent: March 1, 2007 5:13 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: EV's, Ewoody and safety,
Hi Doug, Mark, Don and All,
Are we here for arguement or helping make EV's better?
Mark brought up this red herring and said things I never did like it's safe
because I guess he's mad at me. Otherwise he would have changed the EV
bashing subject line many posts ago. There is no such thing as safe, only
relative safety including Mark's EV.
I've never said the Ewoody was safe, in fact aways have said
it was a mistake, just illustrating on A safety aspect that other 3wheeler
EV's might find useful in their designs which is the rear raising up from
hitting the rear wheel so the car crashing in the rear slides under it, thus
lowering forces greatly, allowing me to walk away unharmed in what could
have been a fatal accident. Now had the other car been taller like an SUV
instead of a compact car, it would have been different probably. I was going
40 mph and estimated the car was going 65mph when it hit me as I watched it
happen, thought he would go around me.
If you could have seen the damage to the other vehicle, you would
have been amazed, I was. You can take this for whatever you want but it
proves at least 1 good result. But it's these kind of things that are needed
to build a archive of methods to chose from and what this list is for.
Without such 1 data point data, you could never get enough to learn anything
as you have to start somewhere.
But as a MC which it is, it is diffenitely safer than other
MC's and I call it a safety MC. I did design in as much safety as I could
and did well considering it was my first design of a 3wh car 12 yrs ago. And
if one compares it to early and even some newer SUV's, pickups, which
regularly kill people all by themselves in 1 car rollover accidents simply
from their very bad handling. It's not that unsafe comparatively if driven
correctly. And it has proven almost impossible to rollover, unlike many
'safe'
vehicles. If a car driving under it won't make it roll, not much will. Now
add it's excellent handling, braking makes even better.
My experience with it, my experience building high tech boats,
stresses, composites, studying many crashes, crashed vehicles, ect has I
believe allowed me to design a fairly safe vehicle. I've never said anything
but I think it is, as I only have my judgement on that. But I'm betting my
life on it just like Mark bets his life on his EV and his MC driving skills.
Personally I'll take the Freedom EV safety wise with it's good
crush zones, 4 point seat belts, fantastic handling, braking, composite roll
cage, ect over Marks overweight, can't get out of it's way, fairly bad
handling pickup EV.
Have you crash tested your EV Mark? Why not? You infer that it's
not safe or you can't say it's fairly safe unless you do. And no way you can
consider your EV the same safety as a stock ICE one as they are very, very
different vehicles, and the stock one isn't that safe anyway, in some ways
better, but others worse as an EV.
More weight just means a vehicle hitting it just goes deeper into
it, hitting it harder, where my Freedom EV just gets knocked around being
light and strong like a bumper car. A vehicle only needs to be as as strong
as it's weight to avoid getting crushed unless it gets between two objects.
I think front airbags are not that safe for many reasons, much
better to use a 4 point seatbelt though I'm looking for side airbags that
can be useful and not kill people, especially small adults, kids like front
airbags do regularly.
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker Shock
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 10:07:31 -0700
>On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:02 AM, Mark Brueggemann wrote:
>
>> When the EWoody passes a crash test, I'll be a believer.
>
>The eWoody *did* pass a crash test. Someone rear-ended him , and Jerry
>was unhurt and the eWoody was easily and quickly repairable, even
>though the other car was badly damaged (totalled?).
Exactly. My point though was one can design safety in a light
vehicle and one way to do it amoung many. And certain materials are very
inexpensive, easy to repair.
In Japan, the Kei cars, the old Honda 600, Subaru 360 from the 70's
were that class, are the safest cars in Japan!! Not because they stand
crashes well, but because of the way and the places they drive. So safety
comes in many forms.
>
>No, this is not the same as a DOT certification, but it's real-world
>data. Jerry designed the eWoody to survive this type of crash, and it
>did.
Yes.
>
>When he can afford it, he may get an official crash test.
>On the other hand, if he can afford it, it means that he has made
>millions of dollars selling FreedomEVs that haven't been officially
>crash-tested.
I do plan on crash testing it. But some of the safest vehicles out
there are the F1, Indycars, ect, that are built much like mine and use the
same methods for crash safety at up to 220 mph. Only I have much larger
crush zones added to their methods like using the tires as energy absorbers,
foam, racing seatbelts, ect.
>
>We'll just have to see how many Americans will buy vehicles without
>crash certifications and air bags. Certainly,
>some of them will. Jerry doesn't need or even want to
>sell to Joe Sixpack and Susie Soccer Mom at this time.
>He's only planning to build tens of cars per year at this point.
Exactly. But look at how many drive MC's? I only need to sell 1%
of car buyers to be rich beyound my wildest dreams. And I think 1% would
easily want to drive a Freedom EV! But I won't sell to others that EVer's
until I get a good handle on it and design a whole new Freedom EV for them
from what I learn.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
>
>--
>Doug Weathers
>Las Cruces, NM, USA
>http://www.gdunge.com/
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rod,
That's similar to how the BB600's are behaving. At around 350v the
voltage climbs very quickly to 400v. Maybe taking 10 minutes. The
charger is in constant current mode up to about 380v. At about 380v
the charger moves into constant voltage mode. Rate never exceeds 8
amps into the pack. At 400v the rate goes down to around .1 amps in a
few minutes. When the pack hits 400v the internal timer allows only
.24 kwhrs of overcharge and shuts the charger off.
Watering is suppose to occur not sooner than 1/2 hour after reaching
400v per the BB600 manual, but inside of 2 hours. The problem with
watering is logistical. So many caps to remove. So many cells to
water, that the cell voltages fall, lowering the electrolyte level
substantially between the first cell watered and the last cell
watered, 3-6 hours later. So I water them with the charger holding the
pack at 400v. They are watered at a much higher electrolyte level than
the aircraft specs require. This allows them plenty of electrolyte
left in the cell as the voltage level drops, and lowers the pack
watering frequency.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When I wrote the software for the Dodge TEVan
> chargers, I looked for the knee of the voltage spike
> on the SAFT STM-180 batteries. I drove 30,000 miles
> in TEVans and always seen this knee. 3 where 30 6V
> STM-180 batteries for a nominal 180V pack weighing
> 1500 lbs.
> At around 228 Volts and 20 amps, the voltage would
> climb quickly (like less than a minute) to 280 Volts.
> At this point I would do constant voltage charging.
> I also did amp*hour counting so I would know how much
> more charge needed to go into to the batteries before
> finishing the charge. Watering occurred 20 minutes
> after the end of charging.
> I also never charged the batteries if they were over
> 40 degrees Celsius (I would wait until they dropped
> below 35C).
> Rod
> --- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > These cells at least have held a tight bandwidth. I
> > have checked them
> > several times at full charge and other states of
> > charge. They hang
> > very close to each other. There is a difference
> > between the redtops
> > and the greentops however. But above say 40% soc or
> > higher the redtops
> > don't seem to get too low on voltage.
> >
> > Besides, isn't looking for a knee with cells in
> > parallel alot harder
> > than cells in series? Series would tend to multiply
> > the effect of the
> > knee.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lee Hart
> > <ev@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> I'm not sure why you say that voltage is a bad
> > indicator. Nicads have
> > > >> a very pronounced knee. Many nicad chargers
> > depend on that knee.
> > >
> > > Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> > > > When you have 200+ cells in series, that don't
> > ALL hit the knee at the
> > > > same time, it might get a bit obscured. I.e how
> > do you see one
> > cell knee
> > > > over when 199+ other cells are still climbing?
> > >
> > > You're correct. The knee gets less visible as the
> > number of cells
> > > increases. It isn't very reliable for over 20 or
> > so cells.
> > > --
> > > 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 ---
If you have a large storage tank or a smallish heat exchanger, you don't
need to pump much fluid.
How much power are you running ot the motor on average? 20kW?
The efficiency in a controller means that somewhere in the order of 1 or 2
kW cooling capacity is needed.
Normal ICE needs to get rid of more than 4 times the delivered energy due to
more than 80% loss.
So even at moderate power levels, you are looking at 100kW or more of waste
heat. No comparison!
My truck already had a radiator, so they used that to run the water through,
even though it is way oversized.
I disabled the fan, because the temp would always be pegged at cold anyway,
even without fan.
Someone suggested to use the windshield washer bottle and keep it topped up.
Sounds like a plan.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of xx xx
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 2:16 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Zilla for the newbie
A thought I had on cooling: You can use a large enough heat exchanger that
you would not need a fan, saving power and weight, but then you'd need to
pump more fluid, which would require more energy as well as carry around
that extra fluid. In the end, would it all equal out energy wise? Smaller
heat exchanger with fan = larger heat exchanger and no fan?
John
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know.
Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rod, Mike and All,
-Jerry,
-Have you have problems with liquid nicad cells not peaking
at the same
-time?
They do fairly to very well but knee very quickly
so if there is a just a little imbalance, it can be obscured
with some still rising while others fall.
-Mike
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Nicad update
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 16:27:08 -0800 (PST)
>When I wrote the software for the Dodge TEVan
>chargers, I looked for the knee of the voltage spike
>on the SAFT STM-180 batteries. I drove 30,000 miles
>in TEVans and always seen this knee. 3 where 30 6V
>STM-180 batteries for a nominal 180V pack weighing
>1500 lbs.
>At around 228 Volts and 20 amps, the voltage would
>climb quickly (like less than a minute) to 280 Volts.
>At this point I would do constant voltage charging.
>I also did amp*hour counting so I would know how much
>more charge needed to go into to the batteries before
>finishing the charge. Watering occurred 20 minutes
>after the end of charging.
>I also never charged the batteries if they were over
>40 degrees Celsius (I would wait until they dropped
>below 35C).
>Rod
Sounds like a great plan Rod. It's good as long as
you have the amphr in/out as a backup though SAFT just wants
the amphr in/out to buy their batts.
>--- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> These cells at least have held a tight bandwidth. I
>> have checked them
>> several times at full charge and other states of
>> charge. They hang
>> very close to each other.
They do that very well I found. I've been amazed at
just how well they come together, almost self balancing.
There is a difference
>> between the redtops
>> and the greentops however. But above say 40% soc or
>> higher the redtops
>> don't seem to get too low on voltage.
I'd even expect better than that as I mixed 12 and
14 amphr ones for a while and as long as you didn't go below
the 12 amphr ones capacity, they worked well but their knees
varied much more.
>>
>> Besides, isn't looking for a knee with cells in
>> parallel alot harder
>> than cells in series? Series would tend to multiply
>> the effect of the
>> knee.
I wouldn't parallel them !! At least not while
sitting idle, charging, discharging on balanced strings is
ok.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Lee Hart
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> I'm not sure why you say that voltage is a bad
>> indicator. Nicads have
>> > >> a very pronounced knee. Many nicad chargers
>> depend on that knee.
>> >
>> > Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>> > > When you have 200+ cells in series, that don't
>> ALL hit the knee at the
>> > > same time, it might get a bit obscured. I.e how
>> do you see one
>> cell knee
>> > > over when 199+ other cells are still climbing?
>> >
>> > You're correct. The knee gets less visible as the
>> number of cells
>> > increases. It isn't very reliable for over 20 or
>> so cells.
I agree with Peter, Lee on that.
Jerry Dycus
> --
>> > Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377,
>> leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Answered last year Aug 29, see the copy from the archives
> below Randii's question.
Thanks for digging, Cor.
> The 1912 Detroit uses a large drum with heavy copper contacts
> and carbon brushes. As the drum is rotated by the throttle lever
> (not peddle) it changes the battery configuration.
So basically, it is was just a simplified mechanical way of making and
breaking contacts...
Obviously a pulse-width modulating controller is more linear and gentler
to all parts of the circuit, but *IF* the driver avoids "shifting" under
power, is a contactor controller otherwise robust (assuming a redundant
emergency shutoff)?
As I research more into controllers, I am pleased at the prices and
functions that I see for lightweight vehicles -- I guess the number of
golf carts is pretty useful in terms of economies of scale.
http://www.electricvehiclesusa.com/category_s/156.htm
Are there rules of thumb for pack size vs. vehicle weight vs.
controller? If I stay at or near 1K pounds (plus 40% for passengers), am
I being realistic to think of a 48V pack, pushed through a simple 300A
controller?
Randii
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hmmm,
I find this discussion a little ridiculous, for I have seen
very few crashes that complied to DOT specs, on the Highway.
The statistics on a single sample are not good enough to draw
general conclusions from, it is indeed just a single occurrence
and it may have been luck that it stayed together the way it did.
But you can have a DOT compliant crash-tested vehicle that is still
very unsafe and kills 10x more passengers per crash than the average
new family sedan. In fact, such vehicles are promoted for their safety
and robustness, which is misleading at best and to my opinion
bordering on a crime, but many automanufacturers do this.
Since the ONLY place where it matters is in an actual crash and
the crashes that you and I (hopefully not) will be involved in
do not follow DOT regulations, there is _only_ anecdotal evidence
of _each_ individual crash.
When several actual crashes have occurred, a statistic can be drawn
to see if the passengers are more likely to be injured or die in
the crash with such a vehicle or not, but for small series this
does not happen until many years after the production.
DOT crash testing is just a model, which will tell you the relative
*expected* safety of a vehicle, compared to test standards.
Like other standards, it does not give you the actual picture,
though they do their best to approach it, same as with EPA
mileage classification.
So, until Jerry builds a batch of e-woody's and they all get into
a crash on a bad day, we will never know if it was a generally
safe vehicle or that Jerry was just lucky.
The fact that you are going to die if your truck flips, is that on
your mind every time you get on the road?
Do you think all those concerned moms and dads who buy the
biggest SUV they can afford to protect their kids, care enough
to investigate the actual kill rate on SUV accidents and worry
about their rate of rubber-side-up fatal crashes?
The number of obese vehicles on the roads tell me otherwise.
/rant off
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
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
Second Life: www.secondlife.com/?u=3b42cb3f4ae249319edb487991c30acb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Don Cameron
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 5:34 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: RE: EV's, Ewoody and safety,
Jerry, I am not sure of Mark's motivations. But as I stated in my
postings, I was not at all criticizing or commenting on the safety of your
vehicle (one way or the other), nor was I commenting about your work with
E-woody or freedom EV. All I was pointing out was Doug's comment stating
that it did pass a "crash test", which I wholeheartedly disagree with. He
also implied that this "real world data" demonstrated a level of crash
worthiness - not in the least. It could have been luck. This was an
accident in completely uncontrolled environment. Proof of anything is
purely speculation.
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
---------------------------------------------------
See the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
Check the EVDL Archives: http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archive
Check out the EV FAQ: www.evparts.com/faq
Check out the EV Photo Album: www.evalbum.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jerryd
Sent: March 1, 2007 5:13 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: EV's, Ewoody and safety,
Hi Doug, Mark, Don and All,
Are we here for arguement or helping make EV's better?
Mark brought up this red herring and said things I never did like it's safe
because I guess he's mad at me. Otherwise he would have changed the EV
bashing subject line many posts ago. There is no such thing as safe, only
relative safety including Mark's EV.
I've never said the Ewoody was safe, in fact aways have said
it was a mistake, just illustrating on A safety aspect that other 3wheeler
EV's might find useful in their designs which is the rear raising up from
hitting the rear wheel so the car crashing in the rear slides under it, thus
lowering forces greatly, allowing me to walk away unharmed in what could
have been a fatal accident. Now had the other car been taller like an SUV
instead of a compact car, it would have been different probably. I was going
40 mph and estimated the car was going 65mph when it hit me as I watched it
happen, thought he would go around me.
If you could have seen the damage to the other vehicle, you would
have been amazed, I was. You can take this for whatever you want but it
proves at least 1 good result. But it's these kind of things that are needed
to build a archive of methods to chose from and what this list is for.
Without such 1 data point data, you could never get enough to learn anything
as you have to start somewhere.
But as a MC which it is, it is diffenitely safer than other
MC's and I call it a safety MC. I did design in as much safety as I could
and did well considering it was my first design of a 3wh car 12 yrs ago. And
if one compares it to early and even some newer SUV's, pickups, which
regularly kill people all by themselves in 1 car rollover accidents simply
from their very bad handling. It's not that unsafe comparatively if driven
correctly. And it has proven almost impossible to rollover, unlike many
'safe'
vehicles. If a car driving under it won't make it roll, not much will. Now
add it's excellent handling, braking makes even better.
My experience with it, my experience building high tech boats,
stresses, composites, studying many crashes, crashed vehicles, ect has I
believe allowed me to design a fairly safe vehicle. I've never said anything
but I think it is, as I only have my judgement on that. But I'm betting my
life on it just like Mark bets his life on his EV and his MC driving skills.
Personally I'll take the Freedom EV safety wise with it's good
crush zones, 4 point seat belts, fantastic handling, braking, composite roll
cage, ect over Marks overweight, can't get out of it's way, fairly bad
handling pickup EV.
Have you crash tested your EV Mark? Why not? You infer that it's
not safe or you can't say it's fairly safe unless you do. And no way you can
consider your EV the same safety as a stock ICE one as they are very, very
different vehicles, and the stock one isn't that safe anyway, in some ways
better, but others worse as an EV.
More weight just means a vehicle hitting it just goes deeper into
it, hitting it harder, where my Freedom EV just gets knocked around being
light and strong like a bumper car. A vehicle only needs to be as as strong
as it's weight to avoid getting crushed unless it gets between two objects.
I think front airbags are not that safe for many reasons, much
better to use a 4 point seatbelt though I'm looking for side airbags that
can be useful and not kill people, especially small adults, kids like front
airbags do regularly.
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: EV bashing, RE: T-105 Sitcker Shock
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 10:07:31 -0700
>On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:02 AM, Mark Brueggemann wrote:
>
>> When the EWoody passes a crash test, I'll be a believer.
>
>The eWoody *did* pass a crash test. Someone rear-ended him , and Jerry
>was unhurt and the eWoody was easily and quickly repairable, even
>though the other car was badly damaged (totalled?).
Exactly. My point though was one can design safety in a light
vehicle and one way to do it amoung many. And certain materials are very
inexpensive, easy to repair.
In Japan, the Kei cars, the old Honda 600, Subaru 360 from the 70's
were that class, are the safest cars in Japan!! Not because they stand
crashes well, but because of the way and the places they drive. So safety
comes in many forms.
>
>No, this is not the same as a DOT certification, but it's real-world
>data. Jerry designed the eWoody to survive this type of crash, and it
>did.
Yes.
>
>When he can afford it, he may get an official crash test.
>On the other hand, if he can afford it, it means that he has made
>millions of dollars selling FreedomEVs that haven't been officially
>crash-tested.
I do plan on crash testing it. But some of the safest vehicles out
there are the F1, Indycars, ect, that are built much like mine and use the
same methods for crash safety at up to 220 mph. Only I have much larger
crush zones added to their methods like using the tires as energy absorbers,
foam, racing seatbelts, ect.
>
>We'll just have to see how many Americans will buy vehicles without
>crash certifications and air bags. Certainly,
>some of them will. Jerry doesn't need or even want to
>sell to Joe Sixpack and Susie Soccer Mom at this time.
>He's only planning to build tens of cars per year at this point.
Exactly. But look at how many drive MC's? I only need to sell 1%
of car buyers to be rich beyound my wildest dreams. And I think 1% would
easily want to drive a Freedom EV! But I won't sell to others that EVer's
until I get a good handle on it and design a whole new Freedom EV for them
from what I learn.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
>
>--
>Doug Weathers
>Las Cruces, NM, USA
>http://www.gdunge.com/
>
--- End Message ---
