EV Digest 4994
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Plasma Boy's School of Charger Repair
by "karmann_electric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Hybrid n body was RE: Setting up a Direct Drive
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Cooling in cold climate
by Osmo Sarin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Motor control for direct drive setup
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: pair of ev's on ebay...
by Jim Coate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Motor control for direct drive setup
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Cooling in cold climate
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Setting up a Direct Drive
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: links on evproduction.org wiki
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) CVT transmission for EV
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Re: Motor control for direct drive setup
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Motor control for direct drive setup
by "Pestka, Dennis J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: Motor control for direct drive setup
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) OT: Is this real
by Tim Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Setting up a Direct Drive
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) From Electricmotorcycles.net : 1911 Electric Motorcycle
by lyle sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: OT: Is this real
by Mark Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Motor control for direct drive setup
by =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jukka_J=E4rvinen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: OT: Is this real
by lyle sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: OT: Is this real
by Mark Farver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Are these chargers any different?
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) RE: Is this real
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23) An Electric Snowmobile? what a way to end the year!
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) RE: Are these chargers any different?
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: AC prop reductive charger; Isolation importance?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: links on evproduction.org wiki
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Apologies go to the list for a hurriedly-posted excerpt from my blog.
As you might have guessed, it was about repairing the shipping damage
to a used PFC 20. Thanks again to John for blowing something up so I
didn't have to! I'm learning more EVery day. ;-)
Jay
www.karmanneclectric.blogspot.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In this hybrid thought experiment, the ICE stays running.
That provides vacuum for the brakes, the power steering, heat and Air
conditioning and most the power. It is just that while pressing on the
gas pedal (and brake pedal) the electric helps out, my motor could
theoreticly(if I could behave) use less rpm's and shift earlier and the
milage would increase. If I wanted to replace the power steering rack
with electric assist and write a good skip-fire subroutine, I could do
even better.
In a sister grand am I put two such motor set-ups, one for each axle
and rip out the ICE, this gets the full sized battery pack, electric
heat and electric assisted brakes(my next invention) and electric Power
steering.
The key to this idea is that I could make a drop in hybrid kit for
people with GM n-body cars.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Siemens must have low/high
temperature specs for the cooling water you can use as a reference.
Siemens gives max temp 55 celcius, but no minimum temperature mentioned.
Osmo
14.12.2005 kello 19:46, Harris, Lawrence kirjoitti:
I would think that the controller might still overheat even at -30C if
there
were no water flow. You might want to consider a variable speed pump
so you
can slow the water flow if it's too cold and block the radiator in the
winter to keep the heat in or put a bypass valve in so you can remove
the
radiator during especially cold days. Siemens must have low/high
temperature specs for the cooling water you can use as a reference.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Osmo Sarin
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 4:48 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Cooling in cold climate
We can have -30 C (-22 F) in winter here in Finland at best/worst. (Not
so often anymore, "thanks" to the greenhouse effect...) If the water
pump of my soon to become Siemens AC conversion is ON all the time, it
keeps the motor (and inverter) very cold, which isn´t a good thing for
the bearings at least.
On the other hand, a low temperature brings the resistance of electric
components down, right? So which one is more important, pros or cons?
Should I use a thermostat to measure the water temperature and to cut
on/off the pump? It would be off most of the year I think, saving the
pump and amps also.
Has anyone done this?
Thanks again,
Osmo
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The good and bad of planetary gear sets
+ Strong balanced forces allow lighter weight gears for a given torque.
+ 2 ratios and a reverse can be obtained
+ under and overdrive avail with wide range
-- every gear mesh costs between 2% and 4% of energy and a 4 gear
planetary has 8 meshes. Some of this is offset by less torque per mesh.
2% is straight cut involute and are a little noisy. 4% and greater is
helical cut and must deal with increased side loads.
I have been playing with the idea of a 2 speed with reverse gearbox just
for EV's made from 3 cnc'ed pieces of aluminum and some of the stock
auto tranny parts connected with manual control. This is to give a
ratio around 2:1, an internal wet clutch, a 1:1, a reverse , and a
park(with a microswitch "park safety switch").
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Interesting...
The oem S-10 battery pack actually has a lot more in it than just batteries:
molded resin case (top, bottom, and divider shelf)
26 batteries (PbA or NiMH)
Battery Pack Control Module
Disconnect module
Kilovac contactors
shunt
main fuse
wiring harness (includes small fuses & resistors in each sense lead)
temperature sensors (6 or 7 - I'd have to check my notes)
The above is what I have found in my truck, which I believe to be
factory standard. Someday I'll post all my pictures, for now I stuck up
one (kinda large) at http://www.coate.org/jim/ev/archives/s10_pack_open.jpg
which shows the innards of my pack.
NiMH batteries are available on the used market; the electronics may be
available from GM (the BPCM at least was as of two months ago but I'm
less sure of the disconnect module); the fuses, shunt, temp sensors,
contactors etc are all likely standard stock items once you know what
value is needed; the wiring harness could be hand made given a little
patience. The battery box itself could be hard to replace as I am not
aware of any sources new or used. I suppose someone like Jerry would
just take a mold of an existing box and make his own :-) but I don't
have those talents. EV Bones will do a complete NiMH pack upgrade for
$7K, but that assumes that the other parts are present and working.
I don't know how many of these parts come with the truck now on eBay. I
know the seller is monitoring the EVDL and I am still hoping that he
will come forward with this information.
Cor van de Water wrote:
The batteries he has (under the tarp apparently) seem to be
regular UPS batteries, 75Ah with as replacement the UB12750
AGM battery which is the little brother of the UB121100 I am
installing in my S-10 former US Electricar (hacked with a
very special and very unique controller, so the different
battery set should only add to the fun)
http://www.power-sonic.com/ps-12750.pdf
Note that the Power-Sonic delivers nominal 47Ah in 1-hour
discharge so at 100A you will likely have little more than
20 min driving range, or about 20 miles...
That is why I chose the slightly larger UB121100 - spec'ed at
80A for 1h. Hope to get 50 miles range.
BTW - you could try a phone call to the fleet manager of the
City of Waltham, chances are he remembers the unique car and
has some background....
Regards,
Cor van de Water
--
Jim Coate
1970's Elec-Trak's
1998 Chevy S-10 NiMH BEV
1997 Chevy S-10 NGV Bi-Fuel
http://www.eeevee.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, December 14, 2005 1:53 pm, Jeff Shanab said:
> The good and bad of planetary gear sets
>
> + Strong balanced forces allow lighter weight gears for a given torque.
> + 2 ratios and a reverse can be obtained
> + under and overdrive avail with wide range
>
> -- every gear mesh costs between 2% and 4% of energy and a 4 gear
> planetary has 8 meshes. Some of this is offset by less torque per mesh.
Unless you want an exact 2:1 ratio, doesn't a planet have to be composed
of two gears instead of one? So for each planet, you have 3 meshes?
> 2% is straight cut involute and are a little noisy. 4% and greater is
> helical cut and must deal with increased side loads.
>
> I have been playing with the idea of a 2 speed with reverse gearbox just
> for EV's made from 3 cnc'ed pieces of aluminum and some of the stock
> auto tranny parts connected with manual control. This is to give a
> ratio around 2:1, an internal wet clutch, a 1:1, a reverse , and a
> park(with a microswitch "park safety switch").
>
I've thought it would be cool to have a planetary gearset that could
replace the cap on the drive end of the motor literally making it an
integrated gearmotor, whether a single fixed reduction or a 2-speed
transmission. Seems like less weight/complexity than using a separate
transmission.
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Use antifreeze. The bearings will not be too cold, don't worry about
it. Proper lube rating is important. Low temp is good for power
electronics, just watch out for control electronics parameters drift
at the extremes of the temp.
And, get good snow traction tires!
Victor
Osmo Sarin wrote:
We can have -30 C (-22 F) in winter here in Finland at best/worst. (Not
so often anymore, "thanks" to the greenhouse effect...) If the water
pump of my soon to become Siemens AC conversion is ON all the time, it
keeps the motor (and inverter) very cold, which isn´t a good thing for
the bearings at least.
On the other hand, a low temperature brings the resistance of electric
components down, right? So which one is more important, pros or cons?
Should I use a thermostat to measure the water temperature and to cut
on/off the pump? It would be off most of the year I think, saving the
pump and amps also.
Has anyone done this?
Thanks again,
Osmo
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dave wrote:
> Some older GM and Ford trannies had a pump at the rear that was coupled to
> the driveshaft. You could actually push start these cars. I think the last
> year for the powerglide was '66, and the old Ford Cruise-o-Matic was '58
In 1969, the Chevy Corvair powerglide automatic still had this extra pump.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Michaela Merz wrote:
>> I am amazed about the activity in regard to the creation of a EV webside.
>> On the other hand, it's more like throwing a rock into an ants nest.
>> (Almost) everybody is willing to do something, let's try this, found a
>> great software there...
But, no one is offering to create any new content. Everyone is just talking
about taking someone else's information and making it "open source".
The idea of having an "open source" EV is great. But, it requires a lot of
work, both to design and build the vehicle itself, and then to document it
well enough so someone else can duplicate it.
Stefan T. Peters wrote:
> People have this weird tendency to jump on a bandwagon *after* it already
> exists.
Exactly. This hints at the root of the problem. It's human nature to seek the
"easy way out". People want books, websites, email, and every other form of
free information to make their job *easier*. But when the tables are turned;
they do not want do any work or spend any money to make someone *else's* life
easier.
An open source situation works when *all* parties have something to gain by
cooperation. For instance, I share information about my own EVs because it a)
promotes EVs, a cause that I believe in; b) encourages others to share their
information with me; and c) is a form of "advertising" that gets me contract
engineering jobs. In return for these benefits, I have to spend time writing
emails like this. :-)
But I do *not* share information about work I do for clients. Nor do I provide
free engineering for people. Doing either of these would be self-defeating;
it would destroy my own means of livlihood!
An open source project like Linux can work because there is no real product.
It is all intellectual property. No one has to spend money to make things. No
one has to pay anything for parts, or tooling, or labor, or inventory, etc.
Making a copy of your program is a trivial effort, and does not degrade your
original.
Companies on the periphery that actually *do* produce physical products to
support Linux (books, CDs, training courses, etc.) must charge for these
products, just like any other real physical product.
I see the EV list itself as a form of intellectual property, much like Linux.
No one charges for the information; you are free to use it as you see fit.
But to get full use of it, you have to contribute to it yourself. Simply
reading the EV list will leave you with a lot of unanswered questions and
misconceptions.
The EV parts suppliers are more like Red Hat Linux or O'Reilly Books; they
sell tangible products that support linux. But you have to buy their work.
This income supports them, and encourages them to continue.
I think your best chance at making an EV website is simply to have it serve as
a portal to all the websites that already exist. No one is likely to create
any new content to support it. What passes for "content" will probably just
be blog-type chatty discussions, pictures and descriptions of someone else's
work; etc. -- not original material.
To get original material with any significant intellectual content, I think
you'd have to pay for the material; like a magazine does. And then, you'd
have to get people to pay to read it -- again, like a magazine does.
The best examples I know of are the ham radio operator's ARRL (American Radio
Relay League) and the "other" EAA (the Experimental Aircraft Association).
Both are groups of active hobbyists, that build real things, and provide
detailed technical information on *how* they built it to other members. They
have created organizations that support their members, train and recruit new
members, get quantity buys of parts, provide a forum for members to
buy/sell/trade between them, hold conventions, lobby for supportive
legislation, etc. Until the EV world gets something similar going, we are
just a bunch of powerless individuals who can be easily ignored as oddballs
and nuts.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'll pose this question again.
Has ANYONE used the CVT transmission out of the Mini or any other for that
matter? This looks ideal for my smart car and would make the little woman
more likely to use the car. So if anyone knows anything good or bad about
this trans please reply on list.
Pedroman
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I respectfully disagree, OEM EV's use massively DC !
Forklift/industrials ones AND road ones.
Most produced/drived road EV all arround the world are French EV cars and
they use DC separately exited motors.
i hope Evan and other UK friends will forgive me that i don't talk about UK
milk delivery vans, they use DC too :^)
cordialement,
Philippe
Et si le pot d'échappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
Forum de discussion sur les véhicules électriques
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
----- Original Message -----
From: "Victor Tikhonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: Motor control for direct drive setup
> Steve Arlint wrote:
> >
> > Notice that I haven't mentioned AC motors. I am still awhile from that
world. I am interested though.
> >
> > VR,
> > STEVEN ARLINT
> > University of Portland
> > Elecrtical Engineering Student
> >
> AC solution is the only one which is trivial to set up - you only need
> to pick right components. Wide RPM range (10k or more) provides
> zero to freeway speeds, no problem. You still need a single gear
> reduction somewhere though.
>
> Note, I'm not saying it is not doable for DC motors. It is just
> far more difficult and stressful for them - too much current
> on a tall gear, too much RPM on a low one. Narrow(er) band of
> everything.
>
> How many OEM EVs (US and European) use AC motors and how many use DC
> one? What do you think Why?
>
> Victor
>
> --
> '91 ACRX - something different
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have some of the same questions?
According to my calculations, my 65 Datsun Truck with 4.875 rear gears and
26" dia tires will do 63 MPH @ 4000 RPM.
Can anyone tell me if my calculations are correct?
If they are correct, what other problems will I run into with a direct
coupled motor to the drive shaft?
Seems to me like the way to go.
Frees up a lot of weight and space!
Thanks;
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Robison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 8:39 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Motor control for direct drive setup
On Tue, December 13, 2005 7:33 pm, Steve Arlint said:
> Hi There,
>
> This direct drive discusion has really caught my interest.
> Transmissions are expensive and need increasing maintenance with age.
> Eliminating this device in an EV would be outstanding. In the real
> world, with voltage and current limits on a series DC motor, direct
> drive does not seem to be vastly superior VS. a transmission. If you
> gear for low current consumption, you're motor will reach it's RPM
> limit before you reach a decent speed. If you gear the other way
> around, too much current is used for the speed that you want.
I'll be struggling with this myself, having a motor with a fairly low
redline. My eventual solution of using two different rear end gearsets for
street and strip isn't terribly practical, but it's lighter than a
transmission.
> One solution to this is the series/parallel switching. In essence a
> 2-speed transmission.
>
> To overcome this direct drive issue for just one motor, would it be
> possible to control a series DC motor in a differnt way? One thing
> comes
The Warp13 does this with a split field. One motor, six terminals, two
speeds. Time will tell how effective this turns out to be.
> to mind. A controller could be made to independantly control the
> armature and field coils. Not just field weakening, but completely
> controlling both to always be optimized for range. I am not sure on this
though.
>
> My other question is would another DC type motor be better suited for
> direct drive? For instance, A Cumulative Compound DC motor. Good
> starting torque from the series winding, and lower current draws and
> smoother regenerative breaking when up to speed. These types of
> motors are more expensive though.
>
> Notice that I haven't mentioned AC motors. I am still awhile from
> that world. I am interested though.
I think the ultimate motor for using without a transmission is one with a
completely flat torque curve all the way out to an enormously high RPM limit
-- which does tend to point to AC.
For DC EV motors though, I think more attention should be paid to raising
the redline -- moveable brushes actuated by a high-speed stepper or
voicecoil via a standard digital interface with the controller, interpoles,
kevlar banding, steel commutators. All of this would be worth the extra
cost to get more power from less iron and copper, the latter of which has
climbed in price so much in recent years that "copper theft" is becoming a
common problem.
With engines, the Japanese have shown us that there are benefits to having a
tiny engine that revs to insane speeds. There *is* a replacement for
displacement; torque is only half the picture. I think the same could be
true of motors. If you could rev a Warp9 to 15,000 rpm and could apply
whatever necessary wizardry to prevent arcing the comm to death, you might
get as much power out of it as a monster motor like mine, and your entire
motor would still weigh about as much as my armature.
Of course if your car is RWD, having a driveshaft spinning at 15,000 rpm
sounds a little scary; you'd probably want some reduction on the motor side
as well as in the diff. :o)
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, December 14, 2005 3:38 pm, Pestka, Dennis J said:
> I have some of the same questions?
>
> According to my calculations, my 65 Datsun Truck with 4.875 rear gears and
> 26" dia tires will do 63 MPH @ 4000 RPM.
> Can anyone tell me if my calculations are correct?
I found a calculator online. Of course, transmission ratio = 1.0:
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/procrastination/rear.html
The page says you're right -- 63.466 mph.
> If they are correct, what other problems will I run into with a direct
> coupled motor to the drive shaft?
The main issue is safety in the event that your controller fails full-on
and your contactors weld. Since you don't have a clutch to disengage, an
emergency disconnect handle in the cab is a necessity (many would argue
it's a good idea anyway). The actual disconnection itself should be
outside the cabin envelope, so you aren't burned by the potentially large
arc when you pull it under power. If you don't have a way to disconnect
power, as others have said it's possible that your brakes will fail to
match the motor's torque and you may run into something/someone before
your fuse blows.
Second, make sure you've got enough torque to replace torque
multiplication in the transmission. The larger size of the motor necessary
may reduce the benefit of losing the transmission, and the lower
efficiency that larger motors seem to have (at least, that's the trend
with Netgain's motors) may offset the reduced efficiency loss from getting
rid of the gear meshes.
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry about the OT.
But I figured if anybody knew, somebody here would.
Is the video at the following link real or computer generated??
http://www.members.cox.net/transam57/lights.wmv
As a note to dial-up users... this is a 3 minute long Windows Media Video of a
home's CHRISTmas lights display. It may take a looong time to come in over
dial-up. It's 4.83MB
Thanks
Stay Charged!
Hump
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Dec 13, 2005, at 7:52 PM, Dave wrote:
Some older GM and Ford trannies had a pump at the rear that was
coupled to the driveshaft. You could actually push start these cars. I
think the last year for the powerglide was '66, and the old Ford
Cruise-o-Matic was '58
Another option is the 1965 and older Mopar 904 3 speed auto. These had
front and rear (engine and output shaft) oil pumps. I don't know how
strong they are but driven by a /6 they are dead reliable; mine was in
perfect working order at 205k miles (I sold the car.)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Popular Mechanics 1911 (month?) page 560
Motorcyclists who object to the trouble of
starting the gasoline-driven cycle, or to its
gatling-gun-like exhaust, will welcome a new type of
electric motorcycle which is being introduced, and
which, it is claimed, will run from 75 to 100 miles on
a single battery charge, start instantly on the turn
of the switch, and run absolutely without noise.
The motor, which is located under the seat,
drives the rear wheel by means of a chain and sprocket
wheels, and is connected to the three speed controller
which provides for speeds of 4, 15, and 35 miles an
hour. The 6-cell, 12-volt battery is suspended in the
lower part of the frame, and any of the standard types
may be used. The motorcycle has a 51-in. wheelbase,
and weighs complete about 200 lb.
Caption reads: "Simplicity, Ease of starting and
Noiselessness in Operation are the Features of This
Electric Motorcycle"
On the EM server- beware large files:
http://electricmotorcycles.net/modules/xcgal/albums/userpics/10039/1911EMcyclelarge.JPG
http://electricmotorcycles.net/modules/xcgal/albums/userpics/10039/1911EMcycleArticle.jpg
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
FWIW: I watched that on the news recently. They actually had an interview with
the person who did it and showed pictures of all of it during the day so I
don't think it is fake. The configuration of his bushes and everything looks
like it is the same one. Although on the news they just shows a few seconds of
it.
It took months to setup and was all computer controlled but it caused alot of
traffic issues so he shut it down.
Tim Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry about the OT.
But I figured if anybody knew, somebody here would.
Is the video at the following link real or computer generated??
http://www.members.cox.net/transam57/lights.wmv
As a note to dial-up users... this is a 3 minute long Windows Media Video of a
home's CHRISTmas lights display. It may take a looong time to come in over
dial-up. It's 4.83MB
Thanks
Stay Charged!
Hump
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
French EVs are made (PSA and Renault) with direct drive. Motor is set
for 7000 RPM max. By then speed is about 90km/h (56mph).
It is ok for most driving but in summer time freeway is normally driven
130 km/h (81mph). To get there I should push the motor up to 10000 rpm.
Now with current current the car accelerates well enough. Not a rocket
but it is ok.
I will now try the same renault motor with 1k Zilla set to 2x amps
recommended and see how much it improves. I will push the motor over the
edge and replace it then. I will do this since I really want to know if
the exsisting car base (10000 made EVs and still running) can be used
for high ways too.
Many users would like to have this update. When updating batteries it
could be done while waiting.
-Jukka
Chris Robison wrote:
On Wed, December 14, 2005 3:38 pm, Pestka, Dennis J said:
I have some of the same questions?
According to my calculations, my 65 Datsun Truck with 4.875 rear gears and
26" dia tires will do 63 MPH @ 4000 RPM.
Can anyone tell me if my calculations are correct?
I found a calculator online. Of course, transmission ratio = 1.0:
http://www.angelfire.com/fl/procrastination/rear.html
The page says you're right -- 63.466 mph.
If they are correct, what other problems will I run into with a direct
coupled motor to the drive shaft?
The main issue is safety in the event that your controller fails full-on
and your contactors weld. Since you don't have a clutch to disengage, an
emergency disconnect handle in the cab is a necessity (many would argue
it's a good idea anyway). The actual disconnection itself should be
outside the cabin envelope, so you aren't burned by the potentially large
arc when you pull it under power. If you don't have a way to disconnect
power, as others have said it's possible that your brakes will fail to
match the motor's torque and you may run into something/someone before
your fuse blows.
Second, make sure you've got enough torque to replace torque
multiplication in the transmission. The larger size of the motor necessary
may reduce the benefit of losing the transmission, and the lower
efficiency that larger motors seem to have (at least, that's the trend
with Netgain's motors) may offset the reduced efficiency loss from getting
rid of the gear meshes.
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
http://www.snopes.com/photos/arts/xmaslights.asp
instructions here
http://www.wonderlandchristmas.com/wizardsofwinter.php
--- Mark Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW: I watched that on the news recently. They
> actually had an interview with the person who did it
> and showed pictures of all of it during the day so I
> don't think it is fake. The configuration of his
> bushes and everything looks like it is the same one.
> Although on the news they just shows a few seconds
> of it.
> It took months to setup and was all computer
> controlled but it caused alot of traffic issues so
> he shut it down.
>
> Tim Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry about the OT.
>
> But I figured if anybody knew, somebody here would.
>
> Is the video at the following link real or computer
> generated??
>
> http://www.members.cox.net/transam57/lights.wmv
>
>
> As a note to dial-up users... this is a 3 minute
> long Windows Media Video of a home's CHRISTmas
> lights display. It may take a looong time to come in
> over dial-up. It's 4.83MB
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Stay Charged!
> Hump
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tim Humphrey wrote:
Sorry about the OT.
But I figured if anybody knew, somebody here would.
Is the video at the following link real or computer generated??
This has been circulating the internet for a month or so now. As always
the best place to find out if a bit of email fluff is true or not is
http://www.snopes.com
http://www.snopes.com/photos/arts/xmaslights.asp
Mark
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is there anything different about these chargers compared to others?
http://www.ctek.com/us/home.asp
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Certainly an potential EV'er there. Looks like my corporate show lighting
guys off the wagon!
Great clip.
Pedroman
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Humphrey
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 5:38 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: OT: Is this real
Sorry about the OT.
But I figured if anybody knew, somebody here would.
Is the video at the following link real or computer generated??
http://www.members.cox.net/transam57/lights.wmv
As a note to dial-up users... this is a 3 minute long Windows Media Video of
a home's CHRISTmas lights display. It may take a looong time to come in over
dial-up. It's 4.83MB
Thanks
Stay Charged!
Hump
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey all
Sorry I haven't been posting like I'd like to, but it's my busy time and Matt
and I are running around like freaks keeping the distribution centers up and
running for the holiday crunch. Not a week's goes by though that I don't have
some sort of EV experience of one sort or another. In as much as they all have
some appeal to me (as a motor guy) this call took the cake. I got a call from
a young man named Matt from Utah State and they've built themselves an electric
snowmobile. Their running it 120 volts with an ADC8, and they have a range of
3 miles at 35 MPH. Only 2 other colleges have an all electric and those two
are getting only a mile he said.
Talk about rolling resistance, LMAO.
He got my name from someone here at the list who's also on a snowmobile list
(how the hell can anyone maintain 2 list?? OMG) Anyways what do you do, they
have a vehicle with the coasting ability of a brick in leg irons. Looking for
anything that will extend their range I ran the list of mod's I've done to
other motors (most of which have yet to be tested). He went back to the build
team and they've decided to ship it up for a lightening and a field series /
parallel option and any other madass idea I have from now till then ; )
Now Wayland and I differ a bit as to the effects this will produce. Now I
know it won't be even close to a dual motor series shift, but in this case I
can't see how being able to plumb your motor down to series for hills and
starting out, not helping to save some battery life and extend some range.
Anyway this kid and crew are pumped, I made no gauranties, but felt it might
net 5 to 10 % more range. From the sound of it I believe 5 % would make these
boys wet their panties, Lmao. Of couse they have no budget, but this project
just screamed at me to become involved. Being I hate the cold I figuered this
would be a good way for me to fight the ICE monsters I face ; P
Anyway this will be the third "single" motor with a series / parallel field
setup. They will represent 3 different motor types running different voltages
in 3 different mediums being a car, a motorcycle and now a snowmobile. So one
way or another 2006 should get some decisive data on the single motor dual
speed motors.
Although this has been my first year here at the EVDL it has seemed (at least
to my green eyes) that this has been an incredible year for both individuals
and as a community as a whole.
As 2005 closes I wish the best of times. Hey maybe next year we get Santa to
go electric?
Anyways just thought I'd share this unusual build request with you all.
Heres to an EVen better year in 06
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I would like to know "how" a bettery charger can detect that a battery is
AGM versus Gel. These two type of batteries have very different charging
profiles, and if treated the same, one or the other will suffer.
After too many rotten 12V battery chargers, I did a lot of research and
purchased a Interacter charger (http://www.interacter.com/). When I got it
home I hooked it up to the meter logger and plotted the charge curves for
AGM and GEL, and it did a nice job of charging with the different profiles.
Victoria, BC, Canada
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ryan Stotts
Sent: December 14, 2005 4:09 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Are these chargers any different?
Is there anything different about these chargers compared to others?
http://www.ctek.com/us/home.asp
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Arthur W. Matteson wrote:
> Out of curiosity I studied the buck-boost topology last night...
There are basically four topologies; buck, boost, buck-boost, and Cuk'. All
four convert one DC voltage to another DC voltage, are not isolated, and use
one transistor, one diode, one inductor, and one capacitor.
The buck-boost topology is not the one I referred to for PFC control with an
output voltage that is lower than the input. I was describing a boost-buck
setup with *two* converters; an input boost converter which feeds a separate
buck converter. The boost converter does the PFC, and the buck converter
steps the voltage down.
The Cuk' topology is capable of doing both PFC and voltage step-down in a
single stage, but it is harder to design and puts a lot of stress on the
parts. If you're interested, the circuit is (view with a fixed-width font):
InputDC+_____________||_______________OutputDC-
| || |
|_| capacitor _|_
||_ _\_/_
| | transistor diode |
|______________________|
|_
_|
inductor _|
_|
InputDC-_____________|________________OutputDC+
The output voltage of a Cuk' converter can be higher or lower than the input.
It has the interesting feature that the input and output current ripple can
be zero! However, the output voltage polarity is *inverted* with respect to
the input, and the transistor, diode, and capacitor have to withstand the
*total* voltage difference between input and output. The capacitor ripple
current is also equal to the full load current.
> But I am somewhat confused on the importance of isolation... My Renault's
> 48/96V battery pack will be isolated from the body of the car... When the
> motor is on, however, currents are induced and the car body acts as the
> "neutral" of the motor allowing electrocution (this is hard to avoid).
Precisely. Cocconi had trouble with this as well (as did GM and all the other
AC EV makers). You can isolate the batteries, motor, and inverter from ground
for DC. but there will be significant AC coupling capacitance to ground. The
high-voltage high-frequency square waves from the inverter cause significant
AC current to ground even with relatively small capacitances.
His solution was to surround the batteries, motor, and inverter with a virtual
ground (a shield), which is not connected to the vehicle chassis. He made the
capacitive currents into this virtual ground add up to zero. Thus, it
neutralized the net AC current to the vehicle chassis. It works, but is
tricky to build.
> I would think that since the pack is isolated from the car body,
> charging with an unisolated charger would be fine since the motor is off
> (and there are no induced currents there).
But there will be if you use a switching converter! And, if you use the
motor's winding as your converter's inductor, then its capacitance to ground
just adds to the problem.
Think of it this way. Suppose the total capacitance to ground is 0.01uf. At
60hz, it has an impedance Z = 1 / (2 pi f C) = 265k ohms. On 120vac 60hz,
this only produces a ground current of I = 120v / 265k = 0.45 milliamps.
But now suppose you are switching at 15 KHz. The frequency is 250 times
higher, so the AC ground current 250 times larger or 112 milliamps!
> what is a summary of the isolation requirements of government agencies,
> U.S. or otherwise?
0.5ma is the generally accepted threshold for when people begin to feel the
shock, and 5ma is considered the maximum safe current, above which serious
injury or death can occur.
The US standard is 0.5ma for medical equipment, and devices that are used
around infants, invalids, or others that can't get away from the source of a
shock.
The US standard is 5ma for GFCIs and other general purpose devices; you can
get a serious shock at 5ma, but a normal healthy person will still retain
enough muscle control to get themselves away from the shock source.
The auto companies used a 20ma limit, mostly because it was cheaper and easier
to meet in EVs with high-voltage high-frequency AC controllers (see above).
20ma is well into the region where shocks can be fatal.
> considering the charger would be inside the car, not outside, so maybe
> UL would not apply?)
Neither UL nor NEC standards apply to vehicles. The auto companies fought long
and hard over the past 100 years to insure that automotive electrical
standards are self-regulated.
> When should one isolate a high voltage - is it
> only for fibrillating AC? What priorities are different for innocent
> bystanders vs. battery attendants? What is the difference between
> isolation and insulation, and what is "double-insulation" in EV terms?
That's a complex subject, determined as much by lawyers and paranoia as it is
by science and engineering!
UL defines "isolated" to mean the insulation must withstand double the
worst-case operating voltage plus 1000 volts. For example, a 115vac appliance
might see 125vac at high line; (2x125)+1000 = 1250vac. So the insulation in a
115vac appliance will be tested at 1250vac, and a 230vac device at 1500vac.
To UL, "double insulation" means that a product has at least *two* completely
independent insulation systems, so that even if one completely fails, the
other will be able to provide all the isolation needed. For example a "double
insulated" 115vac electric drill will withstand 3000vac.
Testing at these HIgh POTential voltages for isolation is referred to as
"hipot" testing.
UL treats any insulation that cannot pass these hipot requirements as if it is
not there. For example, magnet wire insulation is very thin, and not good for
much over 100 volts. The slightest scratch, nick, pinhole, or corrosion would
puncture it. So for hipot testing, UL pretends that the motor or whatever is
wound with bare wire! So the manufacturer has to include extra insulation to
pass the hipot testing even if there is a flaw in the magnet wire insulation.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Interesting. So why EV oddballs and nuts still did not form a league
just as ham [nuts] did ARRL or aircraft nuts did EAA? People themselves
I'm sure are no different. Is it just not enough critical mass yet, or
unlike other two nuts groups, EVers step on the toes of OEM industry?
Victor
Lee Hart wrote:
The best examples I know of are the ham radio operator's ARRL (American Radio
Relay League) and the "other" EAA (the Experimental Aircraft Association).
...
Until the EV world gets something similar going, we are
just a bunch of powerless individuals who can be easily ignored as oddballs
and nuts.
--- End Message ---
