EV Digest 5440
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: WarP 9" motor efficiency and max voltage?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2) Firefly Energy Wins Frost & Sullivan Technology Innovation Award
for Carbon-Foam Lead-Acid Battery
by "Dr. Polsinelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: converting a gas mower to electric
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: EV Charging station
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Article 625
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) PHEV hybrid battery possible?
by Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: High Voltage Nationals
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: PHEV hybrid battery possible?
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Article 625
by Nick Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Article 625
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Wheels/Tires and rolling resistance
by Chet Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Team NEDRA dragster?
by Ken Trough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: PHEV hybrid battery possible?
by Chet Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: Deka Dominators - latest Jetta conversion brainstorm..
by "Matthew D. Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Article 625
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: Article 625
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Wheels/Tires and rolling resistance
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Article 625
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: PHEV hybrid battery possible?
by <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) FWD: Good news: a Prius PHEV hybrid-battery solution to the CCL conundrum
by Lightning Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Wheels/Tires and rolling resistance
by Ricky Suiter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Joule Injected Nissan at the EV Rally (part 1 - the damage)
by "Matthew D. Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I have put my VW pickup on a jet dyno.
11" KOstov, 240 volts(Hawkers), Z2K
At 2000 rpm 400 ft-lbs, 170 hp.
I have no current readings.
Will have to scan graphs.
Robert Salem
> Roland wrote:
>
> > HP - 39
> > Torque - 24 ft lbs
>
> It will be nice when we get some EV's on a chassis dyno and show what
> their real numbers are..
>
> http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5595/dynosheet4la.jpg
>
> http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/1023/tdyno12gw.jpg
>
> I plan on running mine on one.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Frost & Sullivan selected
<http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/press-release.pag?docid=68263239>
Caterpillar spin-off Firefly Energy <http://www.fireflyenergy.com/> as
the recipient of its 2006 Technology Innovation Award in the field of
advanced lead acid battery technologies for developing an innovative
graphite-foam lead-acid battery that could cause disruptive changes in
the market. (Earlier post
<http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/01/firefly_energy_.html>.)
The lead acid cell, a technology born in the 1850s, is reliable, safe
and inexpensive. It can also handle large surges in current, which makes
it attractive to the world's automobile manufacturers. However, the lead
acid cell realizes little of its theoretical power density and has a
relatively short battery life.
/While somewhat newer battery technologies like Lithium Ion and
Nickel Metal Hydride offer alternatives to traditional lead acid
cells, they have their own set of issues including higher costs.
Even though these advanced batteries have certain features that
improve upon the traditional lead acid cell, they cannot match all
its features and consequently, innovators such as Firefly Energy
believe they can improve the lead acid cell to match lithium ion and
the nickel metal hydrides./
---Sivam Sabesan, Frost & Sullivan Research Analyst
read more:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/05/firefly_energy_.html#more
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Michael S Briggs wrote:
> I'm not looking at converting a *car* to electric -- I want to
> convert a riding lawnmower.
That's a fairly straightforward thing to do.
GE made a large number of electric garden tractors in the 1970's under
the "ElecTrak" name. There were several sizes (E8, E10, E12...) and
several other companies marketed them under their name (Wheel Horse, New
Idea). They were very durable, and many are still around and in regular
use. You could buy one used; or look at one to get ideas for doing your
own conversion.
The garden tractor style of riding lawm mower is the best start. Cheap
riding mowers are too flimsily built, and can't carry enough batteries
to bother with.
A friend and I converted his old Wheel Horse garden tractor to electric.
It was a pretty simple process. We replaced the dead 8hp gas engine with
a 1.5hp 24v electric motor, and a separate 24v 3/4hp motor for the mower
deck. We initially used two 12v deep-cycle batteries, but mowing time
was too short (20 minutes). We replaced these to four 6v golf cart
batteries, and it could mow for up to an hour.
I also converted a corded mower to battery, and used it for a number of
years. I used sixty Gates 2v 2.5ah cells (each about the size of a "D"
cell). This pack was fairly light so the mower was still easy to push,
but run time was only 15-20 minutes. If I were to do it again, I would
make *two* battery packs, with a quick-change method so one could be on
charge while the other was in use.
--
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 ---
Dave Cover wrote:
> Maybe the price of oil will push us back towards another boom cycle.
We can hope; but it takes 10 years for that pendulum to swing. We're
probably somewhere near the lowest point in a cycle right now.
--
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 ---
> Is this the most daunting paragraph to overcome?
> (b) Noninterchangeability...
The problem is more serious than that. Article 625 does not just set an
unrealistically high standard for the connector. It sets unreasonable
standards for *every* part of the charging system!
For example, the wire must be special "EV" wire, and marked as such.
Ventilation requirements are extreme, for anything except sealed
batteries (and they define sealed as "hermetically sealed". There *is*
no such thing as a hermetically sealed battery!)
--
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 ---
Does anybody know if anybody has tried to convert a prius to PHEV with a
hybrid battery configuration? I looked on the PHEV sites and only found
attempts converting the gen3(2004-2005) prius' with BMS' and a SOC spoof
but only speculation that it might work with a hybrid battery config,
which seems an easier though not as efficient way that more people could
use.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob, All
We just picked up some new projects that are going to preclude us from
preparing the OJ-2 for race time.
...the OJ is hanging on the wall unfinished and untested.
Additionally, I stole the disconnect/ breaker box and "OH ____" lever
for the Monster Garage project. We have not had time to build and
install a new one. So OJ is out for Chicago
Say it isn't so! Getting to finally see your machine in person was to be
one of the highlights for me on this very long cross country trip. In
addition, for the first ever High Voltage Nationals, we really need to
put on an impressive show. Two rails are far better than one. Besides,
how can you not bring Orange Juice, when like my car, it's featured on
the flyer as one of the race cars spectators will be coming to see at
this EVent?
I've been laid out flat for nearly a week now with a terrible flu-cold
thing, and just this morning was the first time in 6 days my throat
hasn't felt like White Zombie was doing a burnout in there. I've lost
pretty much a week of precious race preparation time, but team Plasma
Boy is still coming! I delegated jobs to others while I've been trying
to get well.
Shawn, you're the same guy who helped build that Monster Garage machine
against all odds! And you say you can't make a knife switch and throw in
a couple of BIG fuses to replace the circuit breakers? Come on, if I can
lose a week and still get two EVs ready for the 4000 mile round trip in
time, surely you could get that awesome EV to the same show? If you need
a controller, I've got Godzilla #003 I can bring along...I'll even help
install it for you.
See Ya......John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
CalCar.org for one.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Does anybody know if anybody has tried to convert a prius to PHEV
with a
> hybrid battery configuration? I looked on the PHEV sites and only
found
> attempts converting the gen3(2004-2005) prius' with BMS' and a SOC
spoof
> but only speculation that it might work with a hybrid battery config,
> which seems an easier though not as efficient way that more people
could
> use.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:59:50AM -0500, Lee Hart wrote:
> > Is this the most daunting paragraph to overcome?
> > (b) Noninterchangeability...
>
> The problem is more serious than that. Article 625 does not just set an
> unrealistically high standard for the connector. It sets unreasonable
> standards for *every* part of the charging system!
I take it you're not a fan. :)
>
> For example, the wire must be special "EV" wire, and marked as such.
I wonder what makes EV wire different from normal wire? Why would they add
such strange requirements?
> Ventilation requirements are extreme, for anything except sealed
> batteries (and they define sealed as "hermetically sealed". There *is*
> no such thing as a hermetically sealed battery!)
Yea, all the charging equipment I've seen for Magnicharge says "No flooded",
and the AVcon head I have has 2 pages of instructions for connecting explosion
proof ventilation fans if charging in "a garage or other enclosed area".
Are the 625 requirements more extreme then this?
Are the AVcon units really up to spec?
Thanks!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Nick Austin wrote:
> I thought that even if you were setting up a public charging station
> that only provides standard AC, then Art 625 applies.
Article 625-4 says, "Unless other voltages are specified, the nominal AC
system voltages of 120, 120/240, 208Y/120, 240, 480Y/277, 480, 600Y/347,
and 600 volts shall be used to supply equipment covered by this
article." It does not appear to cover charging done with DC, or at other
voltages.
--
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 ---
Hello all,
I apologize in advance if this topic has been discussed but I don't seem to be
able to access the
Web Archive to do a search and the manual index EV and the get for each archive
seems to be like
some archaic form of punishment, so here goes ...
I will be needing to get new tires on my new EV, a 1993 Ford Escort converted
by Soleq. It has
currently 165/70 R13 tires, Goodyears in the front and Michelins in the back,
some bulging a bit
and others slow leaking.
I was curious if there would be any rolling resistance advantage to going with
a larger wheel and
a lower profile tire and still retain the same braking performance and load
carrying. (The vehicle
with batteries is a little over 4000 lbs.) I am not concerned too much with
cornering or steering
response (other than basic safety) or cushy ride. Are there other ways to
improve the rolling
resistance? What replacement tires could be recommended?
My boys would like the 'look' of the larger wheels and I may as well if I can
find the right ones,
but in doing some research I have found that for the most part larger diameter
wheels/tires
usually implies wider as well which more than offsets the advantage of the
stiffer sidewall.
Total wheel/tire weight and distribution also came up in my research. Although
I am not going to
be drag racing.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One of the immediate plans I had for a "new" NEDRA" if I had been
successful in my election bid was to build a Team NEDRA dragster.
Great idea! Lots of possibilities.
You might want to post this over at the NEDRA forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nedra for more discussion. I'll respond in
detail over there so the thread can be more easily tracked and followed
by those not on the EVDL.
-Ken Trough
V is for Voltage
http://visforvoltage.com
AIM/YM - ktrough
FAX/voice message - 206-339-VOLT (8658)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, and Ron Gremban just posted a new alternative in the Seattle ev group and
the prius plus
groups. He is still spoofing the perceived SOC, but is doing so with the hybrid
OEM battery
switching in and out of parallel with the additional PHEV battery pack.
--- Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CalCar.org for one.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Does anybody know if anybody has tried to convert a prius to PHEV
> with a
> > hybrid battery configuration? I looked on the PHEV sites and only
> found
> > attempts converting the gen3(2004-2005) prius' with BMS' and a SOC
> spoof
> > but only speculation that it might work with a hybrid battery config,
> > which seems an easier though not as efficient way that more people
> could
> > use.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Brad and others,
I got a good chuckle after your last post, because it takes me back to times
where I re-thought a design aspect several times over. I recognize the same
frustration when you feel you're on to something, but the complexity of it,
and in this case, the concern over the Dominator's performance, brings you
back to a simpler approach. I'm glad to see that it's only frustration and
not *exasperation*, and that you're moving on with the project, now
convinced of which is the better approach.
For the rest of you on the list, Brad and I got to talk at Steve's EV Rally
in Fort Pierce over the weekend. We talked about his dual Orbital/Dominator
battery string idea and the Deka Dominator published specs. I think you're
much better off with just the Orbitals when considering cost, system
complexity and performance.
You do have a challenge in trying to cleanly fit 32 Orbitals in the Jetta,
though. Locating 25 in the 240SX was straightforward, but I wouldn't want to
try to jam in another seven of them. I imagine you'll have to beef up the
rear suspension and put the majority of the batteries in the back. You're
not kidding about that making for a stiff 192V pack, though!
You made a comment in your next post about the benefit of mounting through
the Orbitals. I agree it's convenient, and I used that method for all 25 of
my Orbitals, but don't feel that you must use this approach. Looking back on
the battery installation for the Nissan, I might have considered orienting
the batteries and regs differently so that a single hold-down beam could be
used instead. Of course there are pluses and minuses to both approaches. If
you intend to use regs, then the local (rather than remote) installation
method might be a deal-breaker for the single beam approach.
Keep us posted on the project!
Matt Graham
300V "Joule Injected" Nissan
http://www.jouleinjected.com
Hobe Sound, FL
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:04 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Deka Dominators - latest Jetta conversion brainstorm..
Aww screw this idea too... more searching leads to several posts about how
the gels sag too much after 200 to 300 amps. And screw my dual battery
string idea... too likely to blow up and/or not work well...
and the complexity makes my head hurt..
So I'm back to one of the earlier ideas- 32 Orbital 34DC36 batteries, buddy
paired for a very stiff 192 V. Should be good for 176 V at 1000 A. Which I
really like because it should give plenty of accelleration, even with 1300
lbs of batteries. Max range would probably be about 70 miles. Which means
low DOD for 20 miles. With a multicharger like I described and the low DOD,
might get up to 1000 cycles. Which would make the cost/mile reasonable. I've
never heard of anyone fitting 32 of these in a Jetta though.. hmmm..
Brad Baylor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> The whole point of art.625 is to prevent you from wiring your charger
> into the house and then using a standard AC receptacle as the output.
No; I don't think that's the point at all. I think the auto
manufacturers (GM in particular) did some fearmongering, and created a
bogeyman that says electric vehicle charging is somehow vastly more
dangerous than plugging in any other kind of electrical device.
Therefore, extraordinary measures are required for public safety. GM was
promoting its inductively-coupled Magnecharger at the time, and sought
to ban all forms of conductively-coupled chargers. Other auto companies
(Ford in particular), would rather die than license a GM system; so they
promoted the Avcon conductive system.
There *were* no proponents for any other system at those meetings; so no
other systems were allowed.
> wouldn't do to have granma plug the vacuum cleaner into your high
> voltage DC output when she stops by to visit.
Standard NEMA connectors all have standard voltages and currents. NEMA
5-15 is the proper name for the familiar 120v 15amp connectors used in
everyone's homes and businesses. That connector is rated for 120v AC
*or* DC! 100 years ago, you would have been as likely to find DC as you
would AC at such a connector.
And, grandma's vacuum cleaner would have run equally well on DC. I
*have* a 40-year-old Hoover vacuum cleaner. For fun, I just read the
nameplate. It says:
100-115 volts DC to 45 Hz
105-120 volts AC 50-60 Hz
But I get your point. Lots of modern products are AC only, and would
fail (often spectacularly) if you plugged them into 120 volts DC.
> If the charger is a separate item that plugs into the AC power, then
> it's an appliance and not subject to NEC.
Correct. The NEC doesn't claim to have any authority over plug-connected
devices; only permanently-installed devices.
> The outlet it plugs into is a standard appliance outlet and as long
> as you use a standard outlet, it's already covered by NEC elsewhere.
That's where it gets fuzzy. Article 90-2b (Scope: Not Covered) says the
NEC doesn't cover automobiles; but then 625 says it does, for the
special case of anything used to charge an electric vehicle. Which
article has precedence?
> Now for the charger to vehicle interface... as long as the charger
> is a separate appliance, then NEC doesn't have jurisdiction and
> Art 625 doesn't matter.
No. As it is presently written, electric vehicles can only plug into
special connectors, not used for anything else. Article 625 defines all
the special restrictions on the interface between the AC mains and the
EV.
> If you are planning on setting up a public charging station that
> supplies something out than standard AC, then you definitely
> should follow Art 625, whether your local government has adopted
> it or not.
Art 625 is written to cover the charger's AC powerline interface, no
matter what voltage and current it uses.
--
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 ---
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> Jeff, are you planning on permanently wiring your charger
> into the house?
> If not, then don't worry about Art 625 because it doesn't apply.
I believe this is incorrect. Art 625 regulates the requirements of AC
outlets/power sources that are speficially for delivering charge energy
to an EV, and its onboard charger.
Remember, the Avcon and Magnacharge are the only Art 625 approved
charging stations, and *neither* is actually a charger: both are simply
specialised means of providing AC power to an EV's onboard charger.
> The whole point of art 625 is to prevent you from wiring your
> charger into the house and then using a standard AC receptacle
> as the output.
> If the charger is a separate item that plugs into the AC
> power, then it's an appliance and not subject to NEC.
No; as I read it, the whole point of 625 is to spell out the specific
requirements of an outlet that is provided for the specific purpose of
charging an on-road EV.
The requirements for the various branch circuits vary depending upon the
sort of load that they will be used for, and art 625 is the section of
the NEC that spells out the requirements that are specific to outlets
provided for EV charging.
> Now for the charger to vehicle interface...as long as the charger is a
> separate appliance, then NEC doesn't have jurisdiction and
> Art 625 doesn't matter.
I believe this is at least partly true. The charger appliance itself is
not subject to NEC or Art 625... Other than by the impact that Art 625
has upon the the charger by regulating the characteristics of the AC
outlet that may be used to supply power to the charger.
Again, note that while Avcon is an Art 625 approved conductive means of
AC energy to an EV's onboard charger, it strictly provides the connector
system between the AC grid and the vehicle; it is not a charger and one
can connect any charger they wish to the vehicle side of their Avcon
receptacle.
Art 625 regulates the connector system between the AC grid and the EV;
it does not appear to regulate the charging equipment that may be
powered from the vehicle's "charge inlet".
> The whole point of Art 625 is to prevent people from plugging
> appliances into voltages they aren't designed for.
Not at all; the whole point of Art 625 is to prevent people from
plugging their EV into any outlet that isn't provided specifically for
EV charging.
> NEC Art 625 is just trying to prevent folks from plugging
> something into the non-standard voltages/waveforms that an EV
> charger might put out.
No again; NEC Art 625 regulates the connection means between the AC grid
and an EV, it does not have anything to do with the output side of any
EV charger.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The trick I've found is finding REAL low rolling resistance tires.
Below is a link to some independant testing. From their list you can
find some tires that are LRR. The next step is finding LRR tires that
are still available.
Mine are the Goodyear Viva2's sold only at Walmart.
The best one is the Bridgestone B381. They are a little tough to find.
One of our guys found a set thru an little independant dealer.
After you have located what's available then choose the diameter wheel
to match.
Mike
http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_tire_rollingresistance.pdf
-- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chet Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I apologize in advance if this topic has been discussed but I don't
seem to be able to access the
> Web Archive to do a search and the manual index EV and the get for
each archive seems to be like
> some archaic form of punishment, so here goes ...
>
> I will be needing to get new tires on my new EV, a 1993 Ford Escort
converted by Soleq. It has
> currently 165/70 R13 tires, Goodyears in the front and Michelins in
the back, some bulging a bit
> and others slow leaking.
>
> I was curious if there would be any rolling resistance advantage to
going with a larger wheel and
> a lower profile tire and still retain the same braking performance
and load carrying. (The vehicle
> with batteries is a little over 4000 lbs.) I am not concerned too
much with cornering or steering
> response (other than basic safety) or cushy ride. Are there other
ways to improve the rolling
> resistance? What replacement tires could be recommended?
>
> My boys would like the 'look' of the larger wheels and I may as well
if I can find the right ones,
> but in doing some research I have found that for the most part
larger diameter wheels/tires
> usually implies wider as well which more than offsets the advantage
of the stiffer sidewall.
>
> Total wheel/tire weight and distribution also came up in my
research. Although I am not going to
> be drag racing.
>
> Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Nick Austin wrote:
> If you are designing a very safe, durable, well build, and
> medium power connector why not use it for a lot more then
> EV charging?
The problem is that the connector itself is just one part of the EV
charging connection system specified/regulated by Art 625.
Let's assume for a moment that you could devise an EV charging station
that satisfied all the tenants of Art 625 while using an ordinary NEMA
14-50 outlet as the connection to the EV. The problem, in NEC's view,
is that this is compeletely unacceptable since the use of a common
outlet means that I could plug my EV into *any* 14-50 outlet, including
those without all the other safeties, etc. that are provided by the Art
625 compliant EV charging station. And, plugging AC into an EV charger
is *so* much more dangerous than plugging in any other sort of device,
as *everyone* "knows"... ;^>
> Ahh, this is for an off board charger? Why doesn't this meet
> NEC 625 reqs? The Non interchangeability bit? I doubt
> anybody would be plugging an RV or power tool into that strange
> plug :)
Well, the scheme I described wasn't/isn't subject to Art 625 because it
was used between the charger and the EV (battery); Art 625 applies to
the connection between the AC grid and the EV's onboard charger.
However, my point was exactly that such a scheme might just be a way to
satisfy Art 625 without expensive tooling for custom connectors. Just
devise a specific contact configuration out of off the shelf Anderson
PowerPole building blocks so that the resulting connector is different
from those used elsewhere. You'd still have to provide all the other
safeties, such as GFCI and backfeed protection, but this would at least
cover off the connector issue.
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, I will be testing this soon (on a 2005 Prius). The method is to use a
lower voltage higher A-hr battery pack, preferably lithium ion, with a boost
converter power supply, which keeps the existing NiMH pack, and has minimal
invasive changes. An advantage of this method is that the voltage and current
can be set to maintain an optimum, programmed value, almost independent of the
added battery pack's state of charge.
I placed orders last fall for the Valence batteries and the boost
converter/regulator prototype to be developed and produced. I expect to have
both by June. I will keep the list informed of progress after that and plan to
make key components and a reference design available, once finalised and tested.
Best Regards,
Doug
>
> From: Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2006/05/03 Wed PM 12:06:03 EST
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: PHEV hybrid battery possible?
>
> Does anybody know if anybody has tried to convert a prius to PHEV with a
> hybrid battery configuration? I looked on the PHEV sites and only found
> attempts converting the gen3(2004-2005) prius' with BMS' and a SOC spoof
> but only speculation that it might work with a hybrid battery config,
> which seems an easier though not as efficient way that more people could
> use.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
As also seen on the eaa-phev, priusplus, and gridable maillists.
Very exciting news! I'm going to have to get started on something
I've been putting off for some time... That's speculating on the
various lengths of strings that might be used for a simple contactor
based dump-charge Hybrid-Battery Configuration in various hybrids.
The trick will be finding the sweet spot voltage within the normal
range of the vehicles HV battery at which SOC Drift begins to occur.
http://www.eaa-phev.org/wiki/Battery_Pack_Configurations#Hybrid
This is going to make Dave Cloud, Rich Rudman, and John Wayland
very pleased. These are some Washington and Oregon EV Drag race
guys that have used dump-charge procedures in one way or another
for quite some time. John has many entertaining stories about
various forms of this trick both on and off the track. Dave has
been building contactor controller systems for race EV and been
suggesting this idea for use in the Classic Prius for a few months.
Rich would like to take Daves simple contactor based setup a step
further with his PFC chargers which are capable of dumping, in a
more controlled manner, power from a source pack of at least 140v
into any sized target pack as well as functioning as a high power
charger, it's even capable of charging from the Prius ICE as a
genset which could be pretty handy, quiet, and clean at NEDRA EVents.
L8r
Ryan
Ron Gremban wrote:
> In thinking about Mike Sassnet's suggestion to dump the excess regen
> current into a resistive heating element, I came up with what I believe
> is a solution to the "Charge Current Limit" problem. I have
> successfully tested it yesterday and today. Although my testbed is a
> hack and needs some further refinement, it works well and with it the
> vehicle has exceptional driveability. It also has some further major
> advantages.
>
> What I've done is combine the idea of using a higher voltage for
> spoofing the Battery ECU, controlling the spoofing via perceived SOC
> feedback, and intermittantly paralleling the new PHEV battery with the
> existing OEM battery. The vehicle is run on the OEM battery and the
> Battery ECU. No battery tap emulation is required (meaning that the HV
> Board is no longer necessary). When perceived SOC (read from the CAN
> bus) is below 69%, the PHEV battery pack is placed in parallel with the
> OEM pack (currently by a contactor, but in the near future by an IGBT).
> Once the perceived SOC reaches 71%, the PHEV battery is removed from the
> circuit. I am planning on, but have not yet added, a diode to send
> regenerative braking current to the PHEV battery as well as the OEM
> battery once the voltage exceeds the current voltage of the PHEV pack,
> even when the batteries are otherwise disconnected from each other.
>
> This paralleling charges the OEM battery by holding its voltage higher
> than normal, which also raises the ECU's perceived SOC. When the
> perceived SOC reaches 71% and the batteries are once again disconnected,
> the ECU's perceived SOC will, as it is designed to do, settle on the
> true SOC of the OEM battery. Note that for the OEM battery, this
> process mimics regenerative braking, nor does it happen when the OEM
> battery's SOC is too high.
>
> As the PHEV battery is discharged through this process, less and less
> voltage is added when the batteries are paralleled. Eventually, the
> PHEV battery is unable to keep the perceived SOC above 69% and remains
> in parallel from then on. Its real SOC will equalize at a point where
> its open circuit voltage matches that of the OEM battery at the
> approximately 60% SOC that the ECU tries to maintain -- and once again,
> the perceived SOC will match the OEM battery's real SOC. I therefore
> believe that, though lots of voltage shifts and SOC spoofing is going
> on, this process will treat the OEM battery well by keeping it within
> its normal operating range -- a major requirement of any hybrid battery
> scheme.
>
> It will also treat the PHEV battery well by requiring much smaller
> current peaks from it and by settling on a minimum SOC predetermined by
> the difference in voltages of the two battery packs. And a really low
> PHEV battery internal resistance (IR) is not required for proper
> operation; increased IR will merely result in reduced EV-only range. I
> believe that with this scheme, the lifetime of the PHEV battery should
> be at least doubled from that of CalCars' first PbA pack. It's also
> likely that battery heating for the PbA pack will no longer be strictly
> necessary, though it could still be helpful in preserving PHEV range at
> low ambient temperatures.
>
> Yet another potential advantage of this hybrid-battery configuration is
> that the overall battery system's IR will at worst match the Prius' OEM
> IR, and when the batteries are paralleled -- as will be the case for all
> driving beyond the PHEV range -- the combined IR will be around half of
> that. This should improve city hybrid-mode mileage, probably fully
> making up for the added weight of the PHEV battery pack. It also has so
> far eliminated all DTCs due to excessive voltage swings as well as exits
> from EV-only mode due to undervoltage (<180V).
>
> The voltage of the PHEV pack necessary for proper spoofing probably
> depends on the PHEV battery IR as well as its chemistry. My test
> results are as follows:
> 20 EVP20-12 batteries, 240V nominal: 5 miles EV range until kicked
> out of EV-only by perceived SOC hitting 45%
> 21 EVP20-12 batteries, 252V nominal: 10 miles and 9.7Ah until 45%,
> 7-8 miles and 7-8Ah until 60% SOC (nominal end-point)
> 22 EVP20-12 batteries, 264V nominal: may be perfect, but ran out of
> time to try until later this week
>
> Note that freeway-speed testing is yet to come, too. There may still be
> some further quirks to work out.
>
> I will next continue this testing process and look at the changes
> required to both Ryan's Maker Faire and the Electro Energy conversions
> to use this configuration in its current unrefined form. There are
> specific control, battery voltage, and charger voltage issues for each
> conversion. Then I will refine it and come up with a more permanent
> solution, using, for example, solid-state instead of wear-prone
> contactor switching.
>
> In the meantime I have worked on neither Maker Faire nor Electro Energy
> schematics and parts lists, as I knew that they would of necessity be
> changing, possibly significantly, to accomodate a necessary solution
> (now found) to the CCL conundrum.
>
> /ron
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Ron Gremban, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization:
> http://www.CalCars.org
> Moderator & Technical Lead
> http://www.priusplus.org
> PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
> Newsletter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
> Do-it-yourself PHEVs: http://www.eaa-phev.org
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There is deffinitely room for efficiency improvements with LRR tires. The
problem is there are no real numbers available for all tires (I know about the
green seal list). If they can handle the load ok I'd recommend going with some
Bridgestone Potenza RE92 165/65/14, which is the Honda Insight OEM tire, which
is LRR. Insight owners who have gone to standard 175/65/14 tires have reported
anywhere from a 5 - 10+ mpg loss depending on what exactly they put on the car.
Also, if you can afford it look for some fairly light weight wheels if you want
an extra gain there it will take less energy to rotate less mass.
The Potenza RE92 175/65/14 is also LRR, this is the original Prius tire. I
have Goodyear Integrity tires on my Saturn and compared to the old no name
tires that were on it they made a good 10 amp difference at cruising speed. I
have no numbers on these, but they do specifically spell out that they are
"fuel efficient" so at the least they are quasi lrr.
Here's another listing of some tires to consider:
http://www.bridgestone-firestone.com/news/index_enviro_news.asp?id=2003/030326a
Chet Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello all,
I apologize in advance if this topic has been discussed but I don't seem to be
able to access the
Web Archive to do a search and the manual index EV and the get for each archive
seems to be like
some archaic form of punishment, so here goes ...
I will be needing to get new tires on my new EV, a 1993 Ford Escort converted
by Soleq. It has
currently 165/70 R13 tires, Goodyears in the front and Michelins in the back,
some bulging a bit
and others slow leaking.
I was curious if there would be any rolling resistance advantage to going with
a larger wheel and
a lower profile tire and still retain the same braking performance and load
carrying. (The vehicle
with batteries is a little over 4000 lbs.) I am not concerned too much with
cornering or steering
response (other than basic safety) or cushy ride. Are there other ways to
improve the rolling
resistance? What replacement tires could be recommended?
My boys would like the 'look' of the larger wheels and I may as well if I can
find the right ones,
but in doing some research I have found that for the most part larger diameter
wheels/tires
usually implies wider as well which more than offsets the advantage of the
stiffer sidewall.
Total wheel/tire weight and distribution also came up in my research. Although
I am not going to
be drag racing.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------
Get amazing travel prices for air and hotel in one click on Yahoo! FareChase
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey everyone,
As promised, here's a description of some of the recent events with the
240SX. Warning: read it when you've got some real time to kill!
The end of last week was crazy-hectic. Trying to balance work and sleep with
a frantic effort to complete some improvements on the car and modifications
for the generator/trailer in time for the Ft. Pierce EV Rally. Well, I
wasn't able to get the hitch and wiring installed, but thought that I still
might be able to make the EV trek up there--about 35 miles. Saturday morning
I was still installing my new switch panel and cleaning up the interior, and
afterwards, I wanted to take the car out for a brief run and recharge to get
the batteries in tip-top condition.
Originally intending to just ease the car around the neighborhood, I came
across a friend that was owed a ride in the car. I picked him up and we got
outside of the residential area so I could at least accelerate up to 45-50
mph. Well, when the acceleration was requested, I got little satisfaction in
return. I was pretty sure the differential finally gave up and said "Uncle!"
I heard a clicking/popping noise and smelled something like burning clutch,
and basically the car went nowhere. However, after letting back off the
accelerator, then gradually applying pressure, the car eased forward again.
Driving nice and easily after that, everything seemed to be fine.
I really wanted to make it up to the rally, and so after getting the car
back on charge at the house, I gave Steve a call. He told me that I could
charge up at a lawn customer's house, about 20 miles away from me on the way
to the rally. So, after topping off the batteries, off I went! Worse case,
I'd need a tow back to the house, so what did I have to lose but the
afternoon?
The trip was uneventful, but still thrilling for me. Even tuned down, the
car is so much fun to drive. Nice and quiet, with both windows down, it was
cool enough for a comfortable drive up to Port Saint Lucie. I got to Dot's
house around noon, and we chatted for about an hour and a half while the
batteries were topped off again. As we talked, I thought about how, although
not "convenient" to wait for a recharge, it afforded me this great
opportunity to meet someone new and have a relaxed conversation. Not racing
around from one point to another, isolated in our shiny metal boxes. In some
ways, it's sort of a benefit of driving an EV.
Anyway, I was back on the road around 1:30PM and finished the last leg of
the trip without any problems. The car seemed to forget all about it's
earlier difficulties. I pulled into the Advance Auto parking lot and backed
right into a choice parking spot near the other EVs. I'll let Steve or
someone else describe the rest of the event, since I got there so late. I
felt a lot of eyes on me as I got out and popped the hood and rear hatch. I
think 10-15 people swarmed the car and I began a two-hour long Q&A about the
conversion process, components and the car's performance. There were so many
interested people there with great questions. It was a great event!
At the end of the Rally one of the guys there jokingly asked for a ride. I
shut the hood and said, "get in!" We eased out of the parking spot as
everyone around was grinning at the silent departure. I pulled around behind
the store to the deserted strip mall with a huge, empty parking lot. I
didn't want to push my luck, so I just gave the accelerator a quick push to
around half-throttle. Apparently, that was a bit too much! As the car stood
still and the motors whined up in RPM, I knew the key in the driveshaft
coupling must have let go. To add insult to injury, after taking the key out
of the ignition at first, I put it back in to unlock the steering column and
push the car back into a parking spot, then proceeded to lock both doors
afterwards! For future reference, it takes approximately 30 seconds to break
into a 1990 240SX. ;-)
I had just planned on leaving the car there and catching a ride back with
Charles Whalen on his return to Delray Beach, but after a talk with Steve
and a loan of some rope, we opted for a tow back to Steve's shop. It must
have been some sight to see the RAV4 EV towing my car a few miles, and I was
hoping that everyone would interpret it as an EV towing an everyday
gas-powered 240SX! Steve had to run off and play in his band, so after
confirming that he had some 1/4" keystock at the shop, Charles and I hooked
up the tow rope between our cars.
Man, I have even greater respect for that little RAV4 EV now! Granted, we
were taking the trip nice and slowly, but it powered right on and brought me
and my car right to Steve's shop. Charles got the RAV4 on charge and we
proceeded to get the rear of the Nissan up on some jack stands. Soon after
this, though, it was clear that the jack stands needed to be at the other
end of the car. Sure enough, turning the driveshaft also nicely turned the
rear motor, but left the front motor stationary. Rats! It's the coupling
area that's the problem, and the good money's on the little 3/16" key on the
smaller diameter tailshaft. That means a complete removal of the entire
motor assembly!
To make an even longer story less long, it was in fact the smaller key that
sheared right off in the keyway of the tailshaft. Charles gave me a ride
back to the house that night, sort of on the way back to Delray Beach--about
a 90 mile trip. No problem for him since he won the long distance
competition held earlier that day! I'll let him fill in the details of that
event, as well as the Miami Beach Earth Day show he helped organize and we
attended only a few short hours later!
Part 2 - Repairs will be concluded later tonight or tomorrow, depending on
my progress. So far I can tell you it is (much) uglier than it sounds, so a
working EV tomorrow may be a long shot. It's funny--even though the car is
not functional and I have a long night of repairs ahead of me, I am grinning
right now. There's something very satisfying about the force required to
shear key stock in half! ;-)
Matt Graham
300V "Joule Injected" Nissan
http://www.jouleinjected.com <http://www.jouleinjected.com>
Hobe Sound, FL
--- End Message ---
