EV Digest 5795
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Apple recalls 1.8 million laptop batteries / A123 battery
fire
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Optical encoders for "throttle" (was RE: A note on potentiometers)
by Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Pot Box Cable Life
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Tesla Vs Lotus Elise
by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: The next evolution of hobbyist EVs - there is money to be made
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) WANTED: Adapter for 87 Chevy S10 w/ warp 9
by "Michael Mohlere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Potbox alternative
by "Paul Compton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Potbox alternative
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: NEDRA News: Late Night Nationals
by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: World's First Electric Junior Dragster
by "England Nathan-r25543" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Potbox alternative
by Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Real EVs on the road
by "England Nathan-r25543" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Potbox alternative
by "Stefan T. Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: range rockers
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Motor Current vs Battery Ratio
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Generator Trailer
by "steve clunn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Conversions in the Northwest
by "Joseph H. Strubhar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Freedom EV Crash Test?
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Apple recalls 1.8 million laptop batteries / A123 battery fire
by "Michael Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
For ordinary laptop cells, there is not a lot you can do, aside from
keeping things around the battery pack from catching fire.
Ordinary Li-Ion laptop cells, when heated beyond about 70
Celsius, will burn internally and flames will come out the end like a
road flare or a roman candle. You can pour water on the pack to help
keep adjacent cells from overheating, but in an EV-sized pack, this
will likely not do much good unless you put on a lot of water. The
burning cells will boil the water and the steam can overheat the
adjacent cells, touching them off.
Bill Dube'
At 02:41 PM 8/25/2006, you wrote:
Any idea how a lithium battery fire would be extinguished?
Will exposed lithium would burn violently when mixed with water
(like sodium), or does this not occur with the lithium compounds used?
There are several different classes of fire extinguisher, which one
is most appropriate? Are there types that would actually make the fire worse?
Danny
Charles Whalen wrote:
Thanks Roger and Ed for explaining how these fires in cylindrical li-ion
cells are usually the result of internal shorts caused by tiny metal
particle contamination across the separator as an occasional but inevitable
imperfection of the manufacturing process (which I assume must be difficult
to nearly impossible to completely eliminate through standard and even
enhanced quality control testing techniques -- if Sony can't do it, then
surely nobody can, as Ed suggested).
Combining this with Bill Dube's explanation of the mechanics of how such a
fire would burn in an A123 (LiFeP) 26650 cell in response to my previous
post asking about Craig Uyeda's A123 cell fire, I would guess that this type
of occasional but inevitable manufacturing imperfection that you guys
described is probably what caused the fire (due to just such an internal
short) in that single one of Uyeda's A123 cells (out of a pack of 100
cells), which burned up the "thimble-full of liquid electrolyte" in the
cell, but not having any oxides within the cell to further fuel the fire (as
is the case in the common LiCoO2 18650 industry-standard laptop cells), the
fire burned itself out fairly quickly such that it was contained to that
single cell and didn't spread in a chain reaction to the other 99 cells in
the pack, as almost always seems to be the case with assembled packs of
LiCoO2 18650 laptop cells.
Yeah, you're right that even the best, most sophisticated, most highly
engineered BMS in the world with triple and quadruple redundant fail-safe
backups is useless and can't do anything to prevent this sort of
conflagration of LiCoO2 18650 laptop cells (caused by such an internal short
within a single cell), but at least with A123 LiFeP 26650 cells, any such
fire is likely to be of short duration, contained to the single cell, and
won't erupt into a conflagration of the pack, as Bill Dube' explained.
This leads to another question or two. I've heard that A123 is working on
the development of large-format, EV-size cells in the 100-200Ah range.
First, I wonder what their timetable is on that, at least for having
prototype cells available. Second, I wonder if the much larger format cell
and its manufacturing process (as distinct from that of a small cell) is
inherently more amenable to solving/preventing this sort of manufacturing
imperfection in the small cells where this type of tiny metal particle
contamination occasionally occurs. Anyone have any insight into either of
those two questions?
Very interesting.
Charles Whalen
On Thursday, August 24, 2006 7:20 PM, Roger Stockton wrote:
Edward Ang wrote:
Dell confirmed that the problem is manufacturing
contamination. Metal particles remained in the
cell causing shorts across the separator.
The problem is inside the cell, so, no amount of
BMS could prevent the problem.
The cells are made by Sony. Makes you wonder if
Sony (the inventor of LiIon batteries) and one of the
best consumer product manufacturers could not nail
the manufacturing process, who else could, doesn't it?
I wonder what impact would these recalls have on Tesla
and AC Propulsion since they both actively advertise their
systems use laptop computer LiIon batteries.
This is one of the main reasons AIR Lab decided to focus
on the robust Nimh battery. The last thing we need is an
EV that burst into flame on the freeway. The local and
national news would love to cover and exaggerate this.
--
Edward Ang
President
AIR Lab Corp
I wrote about this precise problem with the LiIon cylindrical cells upon
my return from the 2006 Advancements in Battery Technology & Power
Management conference in April.
It appears *inevitable* that there will be failures of this sort
regardless of the manufacturer, although the frequency/likelihood is
dramatically higher with less well-controlled manufacturing processes
such as are often associated with lower-cost Chinese production.
The safer cell chemistries may contain the damage to the single
defective cell rather than proceeding into an uncontrolled combustion of
neighbouring cells as well, but the issue seems to remain that the
cyclindrical cells are prone to this sort of internal shorting, and
there is nothing an external BMS can do about it.
Cheers,
Roger.
On Wednesday, August 23, 2006 5:58 PM, Bill Dube wrote:
The electrolyte is an organic solvent. There is a thimble
full in each cell. If you short a cell, it can overheat and vent the
solvent. If there is an ignition source present (like the red-hot
shorted interconnect) you can get a flame. Once the solvent is gone,
or you starve the fire for oxygen, the flame goes out. You won't get
much flame in a closed battery box, for example, because you will
quickly use up the oxygen.
This is distinctly different to what other types of Li-Ion
cells do. In those type cells fire is internal. These traditional
style of Li-Ion cell behave just like a road flare or a roman candle.
You can't put them out. They require no air to continue burning. The
whole pack is going to burn and there is nothing you can do but watch
(perhaps roast a marshmallow.)
Quite a big difference.
Bill Dube'
At 02:07 PM 8/23/2006, Charles Whalen wrote:
That guy Craig Uyeda claims that one of his 100 A123 li-ion cells caught
on fire. Does anyone know the circumstances of that and how it happened?
I didn't think it was possible for A123 li-ions to catch fire because of
their lithium-iron-phosphate chemistry being very distinct and much safer
than the common lithium-cobalt-oxide chemistry used in the
industry-standard 18650 laptop cells, in particular with no "oxide" to be
liberated in the case of LiFeP. Valence and A123, both of which use
lithium-iron-phosphate chemistries, claim that something like that (a
fire) is not supposed to be able to happen with their batteries.
Very curious and wondering how that happened with the A123 cell.
Charles Whalen
On Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:00 AM, Mark Fisher wrote:
This thread
http://www.visforvoltage.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=31&t=4325&s=71612a004543b13cb5673077c0e2711a
has some discussion of the effects of lithium fires. Craig Ucheda is a
particularly extreme EV scooter enthusiast. Apparently the Fire Marshall
isn't so thrilled by his hobby...
Of course, gasoline burns pretty well too...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdCsbZf1_Ng&NR
Mark
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
I haven't tried it, but it looked like it should work. One problem is
that you don't have access to the internal supply voltage.
This is true. VSD is derived from an LM317L -- I checked the
schematics, and the datasheet, and I came up with 87V, which is almost
certainly wrong. I think the schematics are wrong (the schematic says
this itself!) -- they list the regulator programming resistors as 69K
and 1K, respectively. However, you could use a DVM to measure VSD by
measuring the voltage from ground to the pot "HI" input, since this
input is connected directly to VSD via a single resistor, as long as the
potbox isn't hooked up, you should get an accurate reading of VSD.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How many miles does the average 5K Curtis Pot Box last before the
cable breaks inside the box, your foot goes to the floor and you go
nowhere but to your spare parts box ????
My first box only lasted 2500 miles of stop and go traffic 47 mile
round trip commuting.
Any substitutes for the 5K Curtis Pot Box ?
Any better cable than what Curtis uses inside their box ?
Menlo Park III,
Bill
________________________________________________________________________
Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month!
Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage.
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Great story Ken!
I test drove an Elise earlier this year and had a blast. I had the
car up to 120 mph and 80 mph on the ramps. The Elise stuck like glue
in the turns. I was so addicted to it I put a down payment on one
that day but my wife wasn't crazy about the idea so no Elise . . . .
for now.
It would be cool to test a Tesla. That car is going to leave alot of
exotic car owners in the dust. The fact that it has Lotus blood in it
makes it event better.
We'll have to see what happens when the first cars ship in 2007. That
must be a painful wait for those lucky folks who ordered the first 100.
I imagine one of the car mags will do a head to head test with them
if they can wrangle one away from Tesla.
The car should do well at SCCA events and we'd love to have them at
some NEDRA races.
Chip Gribben
NEDRA Webmaster - thinking about how things are going at the LNN
http://www.nedra.com
On Aug 25, 2006, at 5:05 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: August 25, 2006 2:11:15 PM EDT
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Tesla Vs Lotus Elise
About two weeks ago, I spotted a Lotus Elise in a Walgreens parking
lot. I whipped in to look it over. By the time the owner came out
of the store, a sizeable crowd has formed. I got to chat with him
a while, before he started giving rides to the crowd, and asked if
he knew of the Tesla - which is built on the Elise line. He did
not and asked me about it. Among other things, I told him that the
Tesla was total electric and could go 250 miles per charge and did
0 - 60 MPH in 4 seconds. He was astonished and said his car was
neither that fast nor would it go that far on a tank of gas.
Interesting....
Ken
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Granted these are not easy products, but I would like to point out a few
things that do put this within the grasp of the entrepreneurial hobbyist:
1) Otmar is doing well with his DC Controllers - is an AC controller that
much more complicated? (remember, I am naive about the internals of
controllers)
2) For sure, there are no hobbyists building AC motors (or even DC ones),
but I am sure Jim's chomping at the bit to give it a try. Can a quantity
(say 30 per year) be made for $2000-$3000 each? Maybe the idea would be to
adapt, modify and or rewind existing motors for EV purpose.
3) The idea behind the lithium battery module is to take advantage of the
18650 lithium cell and leverage existing BMS for a more convenient, ready to
use large EV purpose cell (maybe an 80Ah 12V battery). Is it that complex
that money cannot be made from enthusiasts market similar to what Otmar and
Rich are doing?
4) I know of several hobbyists who have designed and built BMSs that work
well for lead acid, one of those is the "Lee Hart Battery Balancer". I know
a lot of work went into this and I am not trying to minimize the effort.
Victor and John are working on something like this. Cannot one be designed
and built for a larger scale system required by lithium?
One advantage the hobbyist has is that generally they build something
without keeping track of their time invested. There is also an expectation
that they would never be paid for all their R&D work, most likely only
manufacturing costs and profit from there. I am sure if Otmar or Rich added
up all the time they put into their products, they would probably average
out to 25 cents an hour. Maybe if they new this at the beginning, they
would have never started.
Don
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: August 24, 2006 9:33 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: The next evolution of hobbyist EVs - there is money to be made
Don Cameron wrote:
> there are a few places where an electrical/mechanical hobbyist can
> make some money:
>
> 1) High performance AC controller and motor.
> 2) Lithium battery modules.
> 3) An inexpensive BMS for lithium cells.
These sound to me like very complex products to design, that will be very
expensive to make, and only sell to very small market. Not exactly the
formula to make money!
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!"
-- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My first conversion, which I am labeling "experimental" - 1987 Chevy S10 w/
2.5 liter 4 cyl engine and 4 spd transmission. Looking for adapter between
clutch/tranny and Warp 9. Used would be great. Only spent $225 on the
truck, so a used adapter would be perfect.....if none available, where is
the best place to get a new one at a reasonable price. Also waiting on my
Zilla controller, but then again, who isn't???.....
Mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You know, there's a reason I don't read this list on a regular basis and it
has to do with the tendancy of some list members to ignore proven off the
shelf solutions to simple problems. I've posted many times over the years on
alternatives to the convenient, but expensive and not very reliable Curtis
potbox, but almost always been ignored.
I'll try again, just in case anybody is listening.
If you've got a controller with a 0-5K, or 5-0K, or a potentiometer input,
then take a look at;
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=4246718
and
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=7006457
Automotive rated conductive plastic pots with 'D' shaft activation and built
in return springs.
5 million full cycles.
10 million 'dither' cycles.
Paul Compton
www.sciroccoev.co.uk
www.bvs.org.uk
www.morini-mania.co.uk
www.compton.vispa.com/the_named
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 11:21 PM 25/08/06 +0100, Paul Compton wrote:
You know, there's a reason I don't read this list on a regular basis and
it has to do with the tendancy of some list members to ignore proven off
the shelf solutions to simple problems. I've posted many times over the
years on alternatives to the convenient, but expensive and not very
reliable Curtis potbox, but almost always been ignored.
I'll try again, just in case anybody is listening.
If you've got a controller with a 0-5K, or 5-0K, or a potentiometer input,
then take a look at<snip>
G'day Paul, and all
A useful device, thank you. And I understand your 'proven' comment. I find
lots of frustration over people who want to spend hours setting up a
(potentially unreliable) optical tach pickup then refuse to listen to how
easy it is and reliable it is to use an inductive proximity switch, for not
much more money and probably less if you value your time at more than
pennies per hour.
When there is one, use the most appropriate part.
How frustrated? Well, this is something that I have seen in the 'real
world' here, and up close at the last company I worked for. So frustrated
that I set up my own company and use an expression in tandem with the use
of the business name: "Appropriate Technology for Industry".
Regards
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Otmar! It's cool to help out.
You all are probably on your way out there now.
I'm glad to hear you'll be racing California Poppy. And great going
on the EHVs! Can't wait to hear how everything goes.
Have a good time this weekend!!
Chip
On Aug 25, 2006, at 3:38 AM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: Otmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: August 25, 2006 2:14:30 AM EDT
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: NEDRA News: Late Night Nationals
Echoing Jim Husted, John Wayland's and Roy LeMeur's enthusiasm for
the Late Night Nationals, I hope everyone can make it out. Jim
will have at least 3 of his new motors in vehicles racing and
others on hand for people to see up close.
Hey Chip,
Great job on the graphics! Very nice.
I've just finished bench testing a couple Z2K-EHV's so I'll be
bringing one of them (in the 914 of course) to the races Friday and
Saturday for the Late Night Nationals. This way some lucky customer
will get a truly "race tested" controller. ;)
I'm sure looking forward to it, it promises to be a fantastic weekend!
See you all there.
--
-Otmar-
914 EV, California Poppy,
http://evcl.com/914/
http://www.CafeElectric.com/
The Zilla factory has moved to Corvallis Oregon.
Now accepting resumes. Please see:
http://www.cafeelectric.com/jobs.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is there an electric class for Jr. Dragsters or not? I keep hearing
conflicting information but don't know anyone with an electric Jr.
Dragster and have not found them on the web.
Thanks,
Nate
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I like it. Are these available affordably in the US? Ordered from them it would
be about 4 to 5
times the price of a good quality 5k pot.
Dave Cover
--- Paul Compton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You know, there's a reason I don't read this list on a regular basis and it
> has to do with the tendancy of some list members to ignore proven off the
> shelf solutions to simple problems. I've posted many times over the years on
> alternatives to the convenient, but expensive and not very reliable Curtis
> potbox, but almost always been ignored.
>
> I'll try again, just in case anybody is listening.
>
> If you've got a controller with a 0-5K, or 5-0K, or a potentiometer input,
> then take a look at;
>
> http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=4246718
> and
> http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=7006457
>
> Automotive rated conductive plastic pots with 'D' shaft activation and built
> in return springs.
>
> 5 million full cycles.
>
> 10 million 'dither' cycles.
>
> Paul Compton
> www.sciroccoev.co.uk
> www.bvs.org.uk
> www.morini-mania.co.uk
> www.compton.vispa.com/the_named
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the link to evalbum.com, it shows basic set ups. Only a few
owners explain how they came up with their results but a good place to
start.
Roland's answer was excellent, not only do I know what his set up is but
have a feel for the characteristics of his EV in real world situations.
This gives me a very good idea as to how practical this package is for
everyday use and some idea of what to expect if I built an EV close to
these specs.
Thanks everybody,
Nate
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dave Cover wrote:
I like it. Are these available affordably in the US? Ordered from them it would
be about 4 to 5
times the price of a good quality 5k pot.
Dave Cover
--- Paul Compton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You know, there's a reason I don't read this list on a regular basis and it
has to do with the tendancy of some list members to ignore proven off the
shelf solutions to simple problems. I've posted many times over the years on
alternatives to the convenient, but expensive and not very reliable Curtis
potbox, but almost always been ignored.
I'll try again, just in case anybody is listening.
If you've got a controller with a 0-5K, or 5-0K, or a potentiometer input,
then take a look at;
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=4246718
and
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp?SKU=7006457
Automotive rated conductive plastic pots with 'D' shaft activation and built
in return springs.
5 million full cycles.
10 million 'dither' cycles.
Paul Compton
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those what are typically
used as a TPS in most domestic cars?
Seen nearby in the "Optical encoders for throttle (was RE: A note on
potentiometers)" thread:
Danny Miller wrote:
There are reliable pots out there though.
If this is still about throttles, the vehicle's original Throttle
Position Sensor is designed for continuous back-and-forth duty. If
you kept the original throttle body and throttle cable, it'd be pretty
simple to use that. Otherwise some jerryrigging is going to be
necessary.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tom,
The album could tell you at which speed the data was obtained as that is
filled in with the consumption,
but it currrently does not display it.
My US Electricar conversion of a 94 Chevy S10 does 320 Wh/mi or on par with
Bob Gruenwald's van
at a steady 55 mph on flat road.
To show this info, I have now copied it to the "Description" as well.
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/694
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Tom Shay
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:23 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: range rockers
This is an interesting listing, but I have serious doubts about its
usefulness. It's not known
how the data was measured, calculated, estimated or guessed. And human
natrure being what it is, some of the data is probably fraudulent. Also the
data would
vary depending on terrain, speed and driving habits.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 8:02 PM
Subject: range rockers
> some folks were asking for a list of the
> more efficient cars at austinev, so
> here you have all cars with over 7 km/kWh:
>
> Rick and Bryan Woodbury's Tango
> 223.4 Wh/mile
> 7.2 km/kWh
> 14.5 KWh battery capacity
> 104.0 km range
> 1181.8 kg
> batteries: 22 Optima Yellow Tops
> motor: Two Advanced DC FB-4001 9"
> controller: DCP T-Rex
> top speed: Est. 122 mph within 1/4 mile at 8000 rpm
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\211.html
>
> Doug Canfield's Consolair
> 221.1 Wh/mile
> 7.2 km/kWh
> 9.4 KWh battery capacity
> 68.0 km range
> 1818.2 kg
> batteries: twenty-nine Hawkers 12 Volt 27Ah (dead)
> motor: 50kW AC vector controlled;
> controller: Hughes Dolphin;
> top speed: 72 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\698.html
>
> Thundersky Leitian EV-3
> 220.8 Wh/mile
> 7.2 km/kWh
> 33.1 KWh battery capacity
> 240.0 km range
> 1180.0 kg
> batteries: 46xTS-LCP9393A
> motor: 15kW cont 30kW max
> controller:
> top speed: 110km/h
> site:www.thundersky.com
>
> Union County Career Center's Future Shock
> 220.0 Wh/mile
> 7.3 km/kWh
> 8.6 KWh battery capacity
> 62.4 km range
> 1113.6 kg
> batteries: thirteen Optima model thirty-four yellow top
> motor: 9 inch DC
> controller: 1200 amp Raptor
> top speed: About 100 mph or more
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\263.html
>
> Steve Clunn's '80 Porsche 924 Turbo
> 220.0 Wh/mile
> 7.3 km/kWh
> 13.2 KWh battery capacity
> 96.0 km range
> 1727.3 kg
> batteries: twenty 12 Volt group 31 flooded deep cycle lead-acid
> motor: 11" Kostov
> controller:DCP T-Rex 336 Volt 600 Amp
> top speed: 75 + mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\388.html
>
> Steve and Susan Evans' '76 CitiCar
> 216.0 Wh/mile
> 7.4 km/kWh
> 10.8 KWh battery capacity
> 80.0 km range
> 590.9 kg
> batteries: 8 Trojan T-105 Flooded Lead-Acid 6 volt batteries,
> motor: 6 hp General Electric DC Series Wound;
> controller: series/parallel contactors with resistor
> top speed: 38 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\158.html
>
> Marc Geller's 2000 Ford Th!nk City
> 215.1 Wh/mile
> 7.4 km/kWh
> 11.4 KWh battery capacity
> 84.8 km range
> 960.0 kg
> batteries: NiCad pack (550 lb/250kg, liquid-colled, 100ah,
> motor: Liquid-cooled 3-phase AC induction, 27kW max
> controller: AC inverter
> top speed: 56 mph (90 km/h) governed max (faster downhill in neutral)
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\469.html
>
> Bill Dube's '85 VW Wabbit
> 213.3 Wh/mile
> 7.5 km/kWh
> 9.6 KWh battery capacity
> 72.0 km range
> 1295.5 kg
> batteries: 16 Optima Yellow Tops (8 front, 6 under rear
> motor: Advanced DC; XP-1227
> controller: Auburn PWC1200-192
> top speed: 100 + mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\014.html
>
> Jay Lopes' 83 Ford Escorrt GT
> 211.2 Wh/mile
> 7.6 km/kWh
> 10.6 KWh battery capacity
> 80.0 km range
> 1272.7 kg
> batteries: sixteen Optima Yellow Tops in 2 parallel banks
> motor: Advanced DC FB-4001
> controller: Curtis 1221B
> top speed: I have not taken it over 55 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\099.html
>
> John Benson's Porsche 914
> 200.0 Wh/mile
> 8.0 km/kWh
> 12.0 KWh battery capacity
> 96.0 km range
> 1227.3 kg
> batteries: Twenty Saft STM-100 Ni-Cad
> motor: Advanced DC FB-4001
> controller: Curtis 1221C
> top speed: 85 + mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\042.html
>
> Matt Peterson's '99 Lectra
> 195.0 Wh/mile
> 8.2 km/kWh
> 3.1 KWh battery capacity
> 25.6 km range
> 145.5 kg
> batteries: 4 Optima D750S "Yellow Top" 12 volt batteries
> motor: EMB VR24
> controller: EMB Proprietary
> top speed: 51 theoretical, 48 is my top speed so far
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\116.html
>
> Blaine Wills' 1993 Kewet EL-JET3
> 185.60 Wh/mile
> 8.62 km/kWh
> 13.9 KWh battery capacity
> 120 km range
> 727.3 kg
> batteries: twelve Trojan T-875s; 8 Volt Deep Cycle
> motor: Advanced DC; 203-4002
> controller: Curtis 1221 500 Amp
> top speed: 70+ mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\483.html
>
> Victor Tikhonov's '91 CRX
> 184.80 Wh/mile
> 8.66 km/kWh
> 18.5 KWh battery capacity
> 160 km range
> 1536.4 kg
> batteries: 28 D950U Optimas for now, Zebra Z5C in future
> motor: AC induction, Siemens 1PV4133WS20, liquid cooled
> controller: Siemens Simovert 6SV 100kW inverter, liquid cooled
> top speed: Speedometer pegs, my guess 135 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\194.html
>
> John Bryan's '71 Volkswagen Karmann Ghia
> 176.00 Wh/mile
> 9.09 km/kWh
> 10.6 KWh battery capac
> ity
> 96 km range 1136.4 kg
> batteries: 16 Optima Yellow Top AGM batteries
> motor: Advanced DC XP-1227A
> controller: Auburn PWC600-192 "Grizzly";
> top speed: not legally determinable
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\034.html
>
> Citroen Berlingo Electrique (OEM Electric)
> 170.67 Wh/mile
> 9.38 km/kWh
> 32.0 KWh battery capacity
> 300 km range
> 1200.0 kg
> batteries: FEVT EnergyPack 32 (32 kWh Li-Ion system with BMS);
> motor: Leroy-Somer Sep-Excited, 11-20kW / 12.7m.daN,72kg;
> controller: SAGEM 140V 200A IGBT 400A/600V based;
> top speed: 100 km/h limited by OEM but will be cracked :);
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\641.html
>
> Kim Bottle's '95 Solectria Force
> 169.87 Wh/mile
> 9.42 km/kWh
> 7.6 KWh battery capacity
> 72 km range
> 1272.7 kg
> batteries: thirteen Deka 8G27 12 Volt sealed gell-cell batteries
> motor: Solectria ACgu20 (3 phase AC motor)
> controller: Solectria AC325
> top speed: about 75 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\456.html
>
> James Corder's '96 Solectria Force
> 169.87 Wh/mile
> 9.42 km/kWh
> 7.6 KWh battery capacity
> 72 km range
> 1272.7 kg
> batteries: thirteen 8G27 sealed gell cell batteries
> motor: Solectria DAC System
> controller: Solectria DAC System
> top speed: 70 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\540.html
>
> ProEV Inc's '95 Subaru Impreza 166.32 Wh/mile
> 9.62 km/kWh
> 16.6 KWh battery capacity
> 160 km range
> 1272.7 kg
> batteries: eighty-eight 70 amp/hr Kokam Lithium Polymer
> motor: two Siemans 5134WS20
> controller: two Siemans 6SV1 AC Controllers
> top speed: Tested over 120 MPH;
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\464.html
>
> Wolf Sator's Sator Elf-Cab
> 160.00 Wh/mile
> 10.00 km/kWh
> 9.6 KWh battery capacity
> 96 km range
> 522.7 kg
> batteries: 48V-200Ah EV lead acid gel (Exide);
> motor: AC asynchron motor, 80 Nm torque, 7kW nom. 13kW
> controller: programmable microprocessor, with regen
> top speed: 45 mph (70 km/hr)
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\341.html
>
> Paul V.'s Porsche 911
> 156.00 Wh/mile
> 10.26 km/kWh
> 7.8 KWh battery capacity
> 80 km range
> 1068.2 kg
> batteries: 13 Exide Select orbital AGM
> motor: Kostov 11"
> controller: DCP Raptor 1000 amp
> top speed: 90 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\444.html
>
>
> top trucks
>
> Bob Gruenwald's '87 Plymouth Voyager Minivan
> 320.00 Wh/mile
> 5.00 km/kWh
> 14.4 KWh battery capacity
> 72 km range
> 1818.2 kg
> batteries: 24 Red Top Optima's
> motor: Modified Reliance RPM AC
> controller: 120 Kw Flux Vector AC Traction Controller
> top speed: 90 mph, so far
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\377.html
>
> Eric Lambert's '94Chevrolet S-10 White Angel
> 307.20 Wh/mile
> 5.21 km/kWh
> 20.0 KWh battery capacity
> 104 km range
> 2136.4 kg
> batteries: 52 Hawker Genesis 32 Ah (2 banks in parallel)
> motor: GM Hughes AC induction 3-phase
> controller: GM Hughes AC power inverter
> top speed: 70 mph (governed)
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\230.html
>
>
> Tom Stockebrand's '82 Isuzu Pickup
> 294.55 Wh/mile
> 5.43 km/kWh
> 32.4 KWh battery capacity
> 176 km range
> 2227.3 kg
> batteries: Twenty Four Trojan T-145 Flooded Lead-Acid
> motor: Advanced DC FB-4001
> controller: Curtis 1231C
> top speed: 75 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\072.html
>
> Steve Richardson's '90 Mitsubishi Mighty Max pickup
> 288.00 Wh/mile
> 5.56 km/kWh
> 28.8 KWh battery capacity
> 160 km range
> 1181.8 kg
> batteries: 48 Optima Yellow Tops
> motor: Kostov Series Wound DC
> controller: DC Power Systems DCP-1200
> top speed: unknown at this time
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\026.html
>
> Philippe's '00 Renault Express
> 230.40 Wh/mile
> 6.94 km/kWh
> 15.1 KWh battery capacity
> 105 km range
> 1100.0 kg
> batteries: 18 Saft Ni-cad STM140, 6V-140A
> motor: DC sep. exc.
> controller: IGBT400A 108V with regen
> top speed: 90km/h , 0-50km/h in 10s
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\331.html
>
>
>
>
> other cars that have unusually high km/kWh for their weight:
>
> William Korthof'S Honda EVplus
> 235.64 Wh/mile
> 6.79 km/kWh
> 25.9 KWh battery capacity
> 176 km range
> 1636.4 kg
> batteries: Nickel Metal Hydride pack
> motor: Brushless DC, 3 phase
> controller: Honda "PCM"
> top speed: 86 mph (governed)
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\086.html
>
> Steve Clunn's '80 Porsche 924 Turbo
> 220.00 Wh/mile
> 7.27 km/kWh
> 13.2 KWh battery capacity
> 96 km range
> 1727.3 kg
> batteries: twenty 12 Volt group 31 flooded deep cycle lead-acid
> motor: 11" Kostov
> controller: DCP T-Rex 336 Volt 600 Amp
> top speed: 75 + mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\388.html
>
> Doug Canfield's Consolair
> 221.08 Wh/mile
> 7.24 km/kWh
> 9.4 KWh battery capacity
> 68 km range
> 1818.2 kg
> batteries: twenty-nine Hawkers 12 Volt 27Ah
> motor: 50kW AC vector controlled;
> controller: Hughes Dolphin;
> top speed: 72 mph
> site: www.austinev.org\evalbum\698.html
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 10:13 AM 25/08/06 -0700, Mark wrote:
I was curious about the field voltage and current ratio to battery
current. I ran my motor (7" Schaef 36V Hyster pump) with the Cushman
rear wheels lifted & at braking at 300 amps I saw 4.5V across the field
with a 72V source. With the lights out I could see occasional flashing
or sparking on the comm at 300A. (Maybe advancing the timing might help
that, not sure).
At 200A the field was 3V and at 100A 1.5V. So when I make a SepEx
control I'll have to match the same field power level.
G'day Mark, and all
"So when I make a SepEx control" (!) What are your plans for your Sepex?
Low voltage high current, or rewind the fields and go high voltage low current?
I've thought a few times about what it would take to change a series motor
to SepEx, and what to control it with. The choices seem to be either a)
rewind the field for high voltage/low current to achieve the same
ampere-turns for the characteristics desired, or b) use the technology used
in inverter welders (perhaps even the 'guts' of an inverter welder) to
drive the field.
Sepex to me would seem to be the ideal way for EV drag racers - With a
Zilla on the armature to keep things under control, maximum field off the
line, then once the Zilla signals that it is out of current limit, start to
back off the field - Zilla goes back into current limit & interrupt the
backing off. Maximizing torque all the way. Then maybe run a fixed field
setting for on road.
So, Mark, spill the beans, what are you planning?
Regards
[Technik] James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Brian , I'm sure many are thinking , "just drive your gas car..." and if
you didn't already have a EV I might say the same . There are more reasons
for doing what you are talking about then just saving a little money , and
getting to use your EV . Every time somebody dose something with a EV that
people though couldn't be done , we brake down another wall holding EV's
back. Find a way and you'll have busted another wall . Here in Florida we
are getting a net work of charging spots mostly at Ev owners homes or
shops. Having somebody doing a long distance EV drive come by your place to
charge is just plane nice as you can feel the wall keeping EV;s out start to
fall. If there where 2 EV drivers along the way you could set up some kind
of fast charging station , at each place . A old pack of batteries and use
as a dump pack , or a monster bad boy , I don't know what kind of batteries
you have , I've written before about my lawn mower and fast charging and the
same could be done with a car with the same orbitals just need to be able to
deliver 200 amp ( remember we're not doing this to save money , we're
busting down walls that are holding EV's back ) . You'd also have to charge
at your destination . OK lots of stuff to tickle , another idea might be the
Li-ion battery trailer that you can't afford , If a group of Ev'er would all
put money toward it , and each time its used the person using it paid all
the others for the use . Example , 35 people put up $1000 and buy a Li-ion
pack/ and trailer . The pack should be good for 2000 charges , now anybody
using the trailer would pay $35 for each charge ( details could be changed )
and each of the 35 people would get dollar back each time its rented .
Kind of like stock. in time some would even make money . Any EV'er in your
area could then do long distance EVing . We would get to know these
batteries to. Ahhhh if there where only that many EV'ers. I know your saying
it will take years to pay for its self , but what's the price of gas going
to be in years? What would you pay to rent the trailer now per day to do
your trip? If your thinking well I use about 7 gallons so 21 dollars, ,then
no walls are going to come down today :-( , . I can see that little trail
with the Li-ion batteries on the back of a EV at the drag races , now that
would be a first , I'll bet they don't have a rule against pulling a
trailer yet . Joe 6 pack and his mussel car gets beat by some EV pulling a
trailer , now that would be sweet and worth the $35.
Steve Clunn
----- Original Message -----
From: "brian baumel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 1:53 PM
Subject: Re: Generator Trailer
my goal is to travel 90 miles one way. but since a
recharge is not guaranteed at my destination, I'll
need a 180 mile range. twice a week. right now I'm
getting about 38 miles/charge. the pusher trailer
would work, but at that point I may as well just drive
my ICE (no fun).
so if the generator trailer is not practical, why is
AC propulsion and a few other people doing it? I doubt
I could afford a Li-ion battery trailer. are there any
other options that anyone can think of other than a
bio diesel gen, the pusher trailer or the batt
trailer?
thanks again
Brian
81' Bradley GTII
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am - check out www.gremcoinc.com
I am currently trying to find the money for a shop building.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 9:03 AM
Subject: Conversions in the Northwest
> Who is doing conversions in the Northwest? I'm just doing EV work locally
> here in the San Francisco Bay area but there are people in the Oregon/
> Washington area that want cars done. Roderick do you have
> recommendations????
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.6/428 - Release Date: 8/25/2006
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually....
As a car manufacturer, you are required to build a car that meets the
specifications. The crash testing is basically voluntary. What it
boils down to is you must be able to show a responsible and sufficient
effort to that end in order to get liability insurance, avoid court
mandated recalls and law suits. The use of an engineering service
instead of physical crash testing is to save money when going thru the
iterations of re-design to get it right. For physical crash testing you
generally need to supply 3 rolling vehicles and some interior mockups
for impact testing.
K-car told me that the air-bag testing is one of the most difficult to
get correct, speed, angle etc for the various people sizes, seating
positions and steering column positions. The number of tests that are
chosen are totally at the discretion of the manufacturer.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
http://www.allelectronics.com/battery_safety.html says to only charge
Lithium batts in a fireproof container. Never leave unattended. It's very
dangerous to breathe the fumes and all that is required is for lithium to be
exposed to air. That might explain a singe ruptured cell taking out the
entire cargo. In an accident, it recommends removing yourself quickly and
staying away for at least half an hour.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0UBT/is_29_18/ai_n6280927 says
for small fires, Lith-x or Halon will work. For lager fires they say to
remove yourself and apply *lots* of water from a long range. (Remember, the
fumes are hazardous.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: Apple recalls 1.8 million laptop batteries / A123 battery fire
> Any idea how a lithium battery fire would be extinguished?
>
> Will exposed lithium would burn violently when mixed with water (like
> sodium), or does this not occur with the lithium compounds used?
>
> There are several different classes of fire extinguisher, which one is
> most appropriate? Are there types that would actually make the fire
worse?
>
> Danny
>
> Charles Whalen wrote:
>
> > Thanks Roger and Ed for explaining how these fires in cylindrical li-ion
> > cells are usually the result of internal shorts caused by tiny metal
> > particle contamination across the separator as an occasional but
> > inevitable
> > imperfection of the manufacturing process (which I assume must be
> > difficult
> > to nearly impossible to completely eliminate through standard and even
> > enhanced quality control testing techniques -- if Sony can't do it, then
> > surely nobody can, as Ed suggested).
> >
> > Combining this with Bill Dube's explanation of the mechanics of how
> > such a
> > fire would burn in an A123 (LiFeP) 26650 cell in response to my previous
> > post asking about Craig Uyeda's A123 cell fire, I would guess that
> > this type
> > of occasional but inevitable manufacturing imperfection that you guys
> > described is probably what caused the fire (due to just such an internal
> > short) in that single one of Uyeda's A123 cells (out of a pack of 100
> > cells), which burned up the "thimble-full of liquid electrolyte" in the
> > cell, but not having any oxides within the cell to further fuel the
> > fire (as
> > is the case in the common LiCoO2 18650 industry-standard laptop
> > cells), the
> > fire burned itself out fairly quickly such that it was contained to that
> > single cell and didn't spread in a chain reaction to the other 99
> > cells in
> > the pack, as almost always seems to be the case with assembled packs of
> > LiCoO2 18650 laptop cells.
> >
> > Yeah, you're right that even the best, most sophisticated, most highly
> > engineered BMS in the world with triple and quadruple redundant
fail-safe
> > backups is useless and can't do anything to prevent this sort of
> > conflagration of LiCoO2 18650 laptop cells (caused by such an internal
> > short
> > within a single cell), but at least with A123 LiFeP 26650 cells, any
such
> > fire is likely to be of short duration, contained to the single cell,
and
> > won't erupt into a conflagration of the pack, as Bill Dube' explained.
> >
> > This leads to another question or two. I've heard that A123 is
> > working on
> > the development of large-format, EV-size cells in the 100-200Ah range.
> > First, I wonder what their timetable is on that, at least for having
> > prototype cells available. Second, I wonder if the much larger format
> > cell
> > and its manufacturing process (as distinct from that of a small cell) is
> > inherently more amenable to solving/preventing this sort of
manufacturing
> > imperfection in the small cells where this type of tiny metal particle
> > contamination occasionally occurs. Anyone have any insight into
> > either of
> > those two questions?
> >
> > Very interesting.
> >
> > Charles Whalen
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, August 24, 2006 7:20 PM, Roger Stockton wrote:
> >
> >> Edward Ang wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dell confirmed that the problem is manufacturing
> >>> contamination. Metal particles remained in the
> >>> cell causing shorts across the separator.
> >>> The problem is inside the cell, so, no amount of
> >>> BMS could prevent the problem.
> >>>
> >>> The cells are made by Sony. Makes you wonder if
> >>> Sony (the inventor of LiIon batteries) and one of the
> >>> best consumer product manufacturers could not nail
> >>> the manufacturing process, who else could, doesn't it?
> >>>
> >>> I wonder what impact would these recalls have on Tesla
> >>> and AC Propulsion since they both actively advertise their
> >>> systems use laptop computer LiIon batteries.
> >>>
> >>> This is one of the main reasons AIR Lab decided to focus
> >>> on the robust Nimh battery. The last thing we need is an
> >>> EV that burst into flame on the freeway. The local and
> >>> national news would love to cover and exaggerate this.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Edward Ang
> >>> President
> >>> AIR Lab Corp
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I wrote about this precise problem with the LiIon cylindrical cells
upon
> >> my return from the 2006 Advancements in Battery Technology & Power
> >> Management conference in April.
> >>
> >> It appears *inevitable* that there will be failures of this sort
> >> regardless of the manufacturer, although the frequency/likelihood is
> >> dramatically higher with less well-controlled manufacturing processes
> >> such as are often associated with lower-cost Chinese production.
> >>
> >> The safer cell chemistries may contain the damage to the single
> >> defective cell rather than proceeding into an uncontrolled combustion
of
> >> neighbouring cells as well, but the issue seems to remain that the
> >> cyclindrical cells are prone to this sort of internal shorting, and
> >> there is nothing an external BMS can do about it.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Roger.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, August 23, 2006 5:58 PM, Bill Dube wrote:
> >
> >> The electrolyte is an organic solvent. There is a thimble
> >> full in each cell. If you short a cell, it can overheat and vent the
> >> solvent. If there is an ignition source present (like the red-hot
> >> shorted interconnect) you can get a flame. Once the solvent is gone,
> >> or you starve the fire for oxygen, the flame goes out. You won't get
> >> much flame in a closed battery box, for example, because you will
> >> quickly use up the oxygen.
> >>
> >> This is distinctly different to what other types of Li-Ion
> >> cells do. In those type cells fire is internal. These traditional
> >> style of Li-Ion cell behave just like a road flare or a roman candle.
> >> You can't put them out. They require no air to continue burning. The
> >> whole pack is going to burn and there is nothing you can do but watch
> >> (perhaps roast a marshmallow.)
> >>
> >> Quite a big difference.
> >>
> >> Bill Dube'
> >>
> >> At 02:07 PM 8/23/2006, Charles Whalen wrote:
> >>
> >>> That guy Craig Uyeda claims that one of his 100 A123 li-ion cells
> >>> caught
> >>> on fire. Does anyone know the circumstances of that and how it
> >>> happened?
> >>>
> >>> I didn't think it was possible for A123 li-ions to catch fire
> >>> because of
> >>> their lithium-iron-phosphate chemistry being very distinct and much
> >>> safer
> >>> than the common lithium-cobalt-oxide chemistry used in the
> >>> industry-standard 18650 laptop cells, in particular with no "oxide"
> >>> to be
> >>> liberated in the case of LiFeP. Valence and A123, both of which use
> >>> lithium-iron-phosphate chemistries, claim that something like that (a
> >>> fire) is not supposed to be able to happen with their batteries.
> >>>
> >>> Very curious and wondering how that happened with the A123 cell.
> >>>
> >>> Charles Whalen
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:00 AM, Mark Fisher wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> This thread
> >>>>
> >>>>
http://www.visforvoltage.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=31&t=4325&s=71612a004543b13cb5673077c0e2711a
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> has some discussion of the effects of lithium fires. Craig Ucheda is
a
> >>>> particularly extreme EV scooter enthusiast. Apparently the Fire
> >>>> Marshall
> >>>> isn't so thrilled by his hobby...
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course, gasoline burns pretty well too...
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdCsbZf1_Ng&NR
> >>>>
> >>>> Mark
> >>>
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
