EV Digest 6717
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: ADC 6.7 redline and how to measure it.
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: HARD TIME ON CURTIS WARRANTY CLAIM? (WAS Re: Newest Curtis
controllers OK to buy now for 120V EV? Or, go with Zilla controller?)
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Electric Aircraft
by David Bettencourt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Building your own CC Re: Comercial Contactor Controller
by "childreypa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Nationwide Insurance Co... Help!
by <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: ADC 6.7 redline - now rev limiter
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: corvette conversion
by Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: Electric Aircraft
by "Alan Gideon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Acceleration / Performance info using 9" ADC and Cutris 550 A
by Steve Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: HARD TIME ON CURTIS WARRANTY CLAIM? (WAS Re: Newest Curtis
controllers OK to buy now for 120V EV? Or, go with Zilla controller?)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: No "Juiced Up" at PODC
by "BadFishRacing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: corvette conversion
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: No "Juiced Up" at PODC
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) Re: Any experience(s) with this company can repair Curtis controllers?
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Electric Aircraft
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: corvette conversion
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: corvette conversion
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Curtis Controller - experiences
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Electric Aircraft
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) RE: HARD TIME ON CURTIS WARRANTY CLAIM? (WAS Re: Newest Curtis
controllers OK to buy now for 120V EV? Or, go with Zilla controller?)
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Electric Aircraft
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Cheap regen/DC-DC eliminator
by "Marty Hewes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Comercial Contactor Controller
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: cartoon
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) RE: ZILLA water-cooling photos URL?
by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Damon
Sorry I left ya hanging on this one D. As you stated
last post I'd stay at or below 6K on the 6.7's,
they've lost their tug anyway at that RPM so why go
above it. Better safe than sorry as it takes but a
nano-second for them to blow. I'm sure people have
gotten away with higher but you'd be in the danger
zone as far as I'm concerned.
Anyway just wanted to chime in here real fast.
Hope this helps
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
robert mat wrote:
> Reason for my questions? I'm an info-seeker, and I
> want a 4-wheeled EV that is as robust as my modded
> 2-wheelers.
Fair enough, though having a controller fail after 12yrs of service is
hardly indicative of it being unreliable. I realise you've only had the
truck a short while, so it seems like a sudden failure, but how much to
you really know about how that controller has been used and abused over
the other 11.5 years of its life, before you got it?
> The Curtis controller failed after I a few dead-starts
> in second and third gear. It was a sunny day, and
> Vancouver's Al Gore, Dr. Fred Bass, had just looked at
> it at the gallery rally, before I drove to another two
> errands; it failed after moving an inch in reverse,
> after a hour-long park, with no charging involved.
Bear in mind that something may have been weakened over time and just
happened to fail at this time.
> The day prior, though, was a 30 cm. rain-day, and I
> drove the S-15 a lot. So, highway spray could have
> seeped in, I suppose. But wouldn't Randy at CANEV
> already have built rain-spray into the chosen location
> for the controller?
Well, the controller appear to have lasted for 12yrs since Randy built
the truck, and it didn't just get rainy on the west coast since you've
had it, so I suspect the location was probably fairly well chosen ;^>
But, this also means it has been 12yrs since Randy built the truck, and
so who knows if the controller is even in the location he chose these
days.
> Our battery experiments and charging are well within
> industry standard procedures per battery, after the
> batteries were installed in the S-10.
>
> The KSI also worries me, even though the voltage was
> only 135V (tested) when the controller failed. One of
> our group thought the inbound voltage should be lower.
You had driven the truck for a couple of errands and had not been
charging, yet the nominal pack voltage on your 120V maximum rated
controller was 135V when it blew? Are you running a 132V nominal pack
or 144V? Either way, this voltage is higher than the controller is
designed for, and the peak voltage on charge is going to be higher than
that of a 120V pack even if you are within "industry standard procedures
per battery".
The 120V max rated Curtis lasted 11.5 yrs (approx.) with a 120V pack and
died fairly soon after being used with a 132v+ nominal pack...hmmm.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bill Dube wrote:
Focus on the batteries and put aside any drive system design efforts
at first.
A very small two-seat airplane needs about 65 HP. This is 746x65 ~ 50 kW.
Making this assumption, and the one hour (powered) flight time
assumption, dictate the results. They also ignore the potential for
developing an efficient aircraft. Early two seat aircraft in the 30's
flew on 38-45 HP; a foot launched Easy Riser can fly on about 5 HP if
that power is efficiently converted to thrust. Had the FAA actually
enforced Part 103's 254 lb weight limit on ultralights, we could have
seen the development of efficient aircraft. Aloha David Bettencourt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Jerry,
I like your ideas and would really like to put something together like
that. But Im having a hard time visualizing it. Are there any pictures,
diagrams, or websites you can point me to so I can see some first hand.
This will be my first try at an ev and want something tat works before
dropping a lot on the 1000amp controller I want eventually. Thanks so
much for the info.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jerryd
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 5:13 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Building your own CC Re: Comercial Contactor Controller
Hi Jack, Damon and All,
You all are making CC's much more complicated,
expensive than needed.
Cheaper ways are building a manual one just
buying some car starter motor contacts to truck ones for
higher power CC's. Using copper discs, bars, preferably
silver plated, to join them allows you to build a great CC
for under $100. These can be rotary like on a disc/golf cart
style or a drum style or a straight sliding arrangement too.
Even better is they can be repaired in under 10 minutes for
a couple $ instead of waiting for weeks to get a EC repaired
for much more money.
I built my last couple CC's with surplus SW80
Curtis contactors for $14 each or one can hit the forklift
shops to find lowcost used ones. These normally come with
replaceable contacts so even if bad, can be easily fixed.
Now let's drop the numbers, cost of contactors
by using just 2 batt banks S/P which with contactors takes
3, one contactor for shorting the startup resistor gives 3
speeds and your basic set up. If going over 96vdc, I'd go
with another batt S/P step.
If you have a lot of power, you can do more
steps like 1 or 2 field weakening steps where you partly
short out the field winding, I use 1' of 12gge solid copper
wire for it on a 100 amp motor, to get your motor to draw
more power in the higher rpm ranges. Another is S/P the
motors if you have 2 and another resistor if you want.
So the 3 speed takes just 4 contactors plus a
cutoff like a breaker or a main contactor though 2 S/P
contactors can be replaced by big honking diodes. Unless you
are a high powered EV, this is all you need unless you are
single speed where you can use field weakening.
So a S/P, resistor, a FW gives you a good all
round controller for with just 5-6 contactors which even at
list prices is much les than a EC of the same power. Most
who don't think CC's are good enough rarely acknowledge that
most CC's are in the 1000 amp range!! Just how much would a
1000amp EC cost? And can you fix it yourself?
You already have about 1/2 a CC for a EC to work
so easy to make an emergency CC if it goes bad just by
adding a couple more contactors so the cost difference is
even better.
For racing I always though of using several
battery packs, say a 36-72v starting pack of say 16amphr
batts S/P for starting, getting up to speed, then about 1/3
the way down the track, hit your high voltage pack and as
soon as it starts to lighten up, hit the motor with FW.
Tailor your packs so you get the correct burn out, traction,
finish speed.
CC's can be an excellent controller and has been
used reliably for 100+ yrs and a great way to make a cost
effective EV.
Jerry Dycus
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Comercial Contactor Controller
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:16:49 -0700
>My thought is to just tap the pack at 24, 48, 96 volts.
>Yes this will unevenly discharge the pack, so you must
>have a very good balancing charging system. It also
>reduces the range since its not taking advantage of all
>battery power. But it reduces the contactors to just 4,
>and is very simple.
>
>Has anyone else purchased the new Tyco LEV200 contactors?
>I've bought 4 of them, and 3 of them were defective!
>
>Jack
>
>damon henry wrote:
>> The main problem is that with the price of the contactors
>> you need to use, it turns out that that expensive PWM
>> controller is not so expensive after all. In fact a
>> contactor controller built with all new and properly
>rated parts could end up being more expensive. I bought
>> enough contactors and diodes surplus off of Ebay to make
>> a rectactor controller. All the parts at a deep
>> discount still cost me $200 and I still would have
>> needed to fabricate a bunch of stuff to put it all
>together. Ultimately I decided not to go that route. I
>> don't feel like I wasted the money, as beefy contactors
>> and huge diodes are always nice to have around and at
>> least some of them will undoubtedly end up in my new EV.
> I decided to spend the money and buy an Alltrax 7245
>> instead. This cost me about $650 deliverd. Once I
>> factored in all my needs the Alltrax just made a lot
>> more sense.
>> If you have a very cheap source of suitable contactors
>> you can certainly make a contactor controller. If you
>> go to the File archive section of the Yahoo EVDL archive
>> you will find some scanned copies of contactor
>> controllers.
>> A 3 step contactor controller takes 9 contactors. A 3
>> step rectactor can be built with 3 contactors and 6
>> diodes. The one I was going to build took 5 contactor
>> but included one for field weakening and one for a
>> startup resistor.
>> damon
>>
>> Here is the original message from Lee Hart I was working
>> off of.
>> No; the rectactor is a better circuit. Here it is (view
>> with a fixed width font like Courier New or Fixedsys):
>>
>>
>_________________________________||__________||___ |
>> _|_ __|__+ | || | | || | |
>> D1 /_\ S4a ___ B1 | S1 | | S2 | _|_
>> |____||____| - | | |_ _| D5
>> /_\ +__|__ || _|_ |___|/___|
>\/\/\/ | | B2 ___ /_\ D2 +|\- | R1
>> |_ | - |__________| C1
>> _|_ _| MOTOR | S3 |
>> S5 ___ _| FIELD |______||_________|
>> | _| | ||
>> | | | ____|_____
>> | |____| _|_ __|__+
>> _|_ | D3 /_\ S4b
>> ___ B3 /_\ D6 _|_
>> |____||____| - | MOTOR /
>\ +__|__ || _|_ | ARMATURE |
>> | B4 ___ /_\ D4 |
>> \___/
>> |__________|___________|________________________________|
>> B1-B4 are your four 12v batteries. S1 is your main
>> contactor, and has capacitor C1 across it as a snubber.
>> R1 is your starting resistor, and S2 is the bypass
>> contactor for it.
>> S4 is your 12v/24v series/parallel contactor. When open,
>> B3 and B4 are in parallel via diodes D3 and D4; and B1
>> and B2 are in parallel via diodes D1 and D2. When you
>> close S4, it connects B1 and B2 in series, and B3 and B4
>> in series.
>> S3 is your 24v/48v series/parallel contactor. It works
>> with diodes D5 and D6 to select 24v or 48v.
>>
>> S5 is a field weaking contactor. It wires part of the
>> starting resistor across the field to get a speed halfway
>> between two voltage steps.
>> Notice that at full voltage (48v), there are no diodes in
>> the power path. At 24v, there is only one diode in the
>> power path (D5 and D6 are effectively in parallel, each
>> carrying 1/2 the motor current). At 12v, there is two
>> diode drops in the power path (D1, D2, D3, and D4 are
>effectively in parallel, each carrying 1/4th the motor
>> current).
>> Also note that no contactor ever needs to switch the full
>> 48v. In an emergency shutdown, opening all contactors
>> doesn't have more than 12v across any of them.
>> --
>> "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 ---
Bill,
You need to bring your insurance producer as much info as possible. You can
also tell them that all major insurers will underwrite an EV.
If all else fails complain to your department of insurance
-----Original Message-----
From: BC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 10:09 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Nationwide Insurance Co... Help!
...First go round my insurance company, Nationwide, says my conversion is an
experimental vehicle and they will not underwrite it. I haven't come armed
with all my info yet, but before I do is anyone out there insured with
Nationwide and would you be able to provide me with your agent's name and
number for handy assistance?
E-mail me off-list.
Thanks,
Bill in Delaware
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Phil Marino wrote:
> I'm using a setup similar to what Randy ( Canev) mentioned
> here some time ago.
CanEV uses/sells an ISSPRO 2-stage limiter.
> It's a two-step limiter. The first step (at 5500 RPM)
> disconnects the throttle pot. This has a deadband of
> about 500 Hz, so the throttle comes back when the motor
> RPM drops to 5000 RPM.
Danger: your controller may not be particularly happy about the throttle
pot going open or short (depending on what you mean by "disconnect"). I
believe that a safer approach is to connect a fixed resistor in parallel
with the potbox when the first setpoint is exceeded. Choose the fixed
resistor value such that it will reduce the throttle command to a modest
value.
> The second step is at 5800 RPM. Here, the KSI terminal and
> main ( positive side) contactor drop out. This one has a
> bigger dead band, and won't reset the KSI and contactor
> until the RPM drops to about 4800 HZ. This should prevent
> contactor "buzzing". This is pretty much in case of
> controller failure ( or, stuck potbox, jammed throttle
> cable, etc)
Have you tested the rev limiter yet? I wonder if these setpoints might
be too close together since it will take some time for the rev limiter
to sense that 5500RPM has been exceeded and to respond, and if the RPM
rises sufficiently rapidly it might trip the second point before the
first setpoint has time to control it.
I think it might be preferable to have the second step latch off and
allow the motor to come back on until the driver resets the system (e.g.
ign off/on).
I figure that if the system is working properly, the second step would
only ever be exercised in the event that the first step failed to reduce
the RPM, which would suggest that the controller wasn't responding to
the potbox signal. I'm pretty sure one wouldn't want the vehicle to
surge between 4800 and 5800RPM at full power (possibly in excess of
whatever current limit the controller had) in the event of a full-power
controller failure, and it might take relatively few such cycles before
the main contactor is welded closed and the runaway becomes completely
uncontrolled. It might take many seconds for the motor speed to drop
from 5800 to 4800, so just as the driver breathes a sigh of relief, the
power comes back on and the vehicle takes off again ;^>
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
3000+ foot climb in 17 miles to commute (back from) "the big city".
> > I know some people will probably disagree, but I would modify that
> statement
> > to read, "Because 95% of my driving will be in the mountains, I
> >NEED< regen
> > capabilities."
> >
>
> What do you define as mountains?
>
> Where I live there is a 600 foot difference betweenn the lower parts
> and the
> higher parts of the city, although, as there is also a 30 mile
> distance
> it is not that apparent in normal driving.
---
Steve
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
As design points, the Alpin single-seat motor glider
http://www.auf.asn.au/students/thumb23.html uses a Rotax 447, which puts out
a max of 36 kW. The Straton D-9 single seater
http://www.ultralightnews.ca/airventure03/straton_d9.htm requires 28 hp.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Bettencourt
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:43 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Electric Aircraft
Bill Dube wrote:
> Focus on the batteries and put aside any drive system design efforts
> at first.
>
> A very small two-seat airplane needs about 65 HP. This is 746x65 ~ 50 kW.
>
Making this assumption, and the one hour (powered) flight time
assumption, dictate the results. They also ignore the potential for
developing an efficient aircraft. Early two seat aircraft in the 30's
flew on 38-45 HP; a foot launched Easy Riser can fly on about 5 HP if
that power is efficiently converted to thrust. Had the FAA actually
enforced Part 103's 254 lb weight limit on ultralights, we could have
seen the development of efficient aircraft. Aloha David Bettencourt
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You asked, so here is the best info I can give at this
time. I don't have an ammeter, so some is relative.
2200 lb car - as tested including batteries (approx).
Not very aerodynamic
9" ADC not modified (9700 EV miles on it right now)
Curtis 72 - 120 V / 550 A (squeeler version)
Batteries: 9 x 12 V = 108 V (7 old Deka AGM, 2 new
Johnson Controls flooded - individually charged)
Based on my experience with GE EV-1 controller at full
power, the batteries are definately not the limiting
factor.
Speed using Curtis 550 A at 108 V:
1st gear - ~25 MPH foot to the floor (I rarely use 1st
at all)
2nd gear - 42 MPH foot to the floor
3rd gear - 55 MPH foot to the floor (wish it was 60
MPH)
4th gear - ????
5th gear - ????
Estimated top speed - 85 MPH
Acceleration:
Using 1st gear, you will slip the clutch if you put
your foor to the floor. With full power using EV-1
controller it did slip, even in 2nd gear.
Using 2nd gear, as good or better then my 97 Corrola
with 1.5 L. No problem at all keeping up with /
beating traffic unless you are on a steep hill.
Hill climbing -
Steep hill (I guess 5-6 degree grade, but I really
don't know. All I can say is very steep). 15-18 MPH
in 1st gear foot to the floor and slowing down all
along the way. There are other hills in my area that
the car just can't get up. I have to avoid those
streets all together.
Moderate grades - it can handle OK.
That's about all I can say about it without further
instrumentation and tests.
Steve
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Roger Stockton
> I'm with Steve on this: I'd suspect that the controllers saw too
> high of a peak voltage while the truck was charging... For a 144V
> max controller this suggests the KSI input will survive over 200V,
> but I strongly doubt that Curtis used bus caps with more than a
> 200V rating for the power stage.
The Curtis 1221C-7401 (rated 72-120v) controller has 160v rated electrolytics.
The Curtis 1231C-8601 (rated 96-144v) has 200v electrolytics. A decent charger
should never reach these voltages; however, crude ones can go this high.
The real problem is that as electrolytics age, their specs get worse. Their
voltage rating goes down, and their ESR (Equivalent Series Resistance goes up.
A high ESR allows higher voltage spikes during controller operation. I suspect
that weak or failing capacitors have killed many controllers.
> The other possibility is humidity; the Tofino area can be quite
> wet, and if the case seals on the Curtis were a bit leaky its life
> would be shortened.
The Curtis case only *looks* like it is sealed. In no time at all, they develop
cracks between the case and potting compound in the ends. Another common reason
I see for controller failures is from water inside the case.
--
"Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the one who is
doing it." -- Chinese proverb
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For those that don't follow electricmotorcycles.net, guess you should....
I've posted about my recent trials with 96V in the Piranha. Torque is
currently uncontrollable. Yes, I'm still running the albright controller
which some question. After the installation of wheeliebars, she should be a
contender. Guess it will definately be an old school/new school battle.
Lead Acid Hawkers - Series/Parallel with contactors
vs.
Milwaukee Li-Ions - 2K Zilla
Darin
BadFishRacing
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:31 AM
Subject: No "Juiced Up" at PODC
BAD NEWS
It's looks as though our new "Juiced Up" dragster will not be ready for
the PODC this year. At least not in the form I would be satisfied
bringing it to an official NEDRA event. Four nine inch motors, four 2K
Zillas, and 3000+ battery cells with full regulation presents some
challenges. The Zillas our here on the shelf, the motors should be here by
the end of May, and I am not ready to share final details of the battery
pack at the time being, but rest assured "Juiced Up" will be completed,
tested, tuned and at a NEDRA asap. I had considered bringing it with me to
PODC in an incomplete state but don't see the purpose in that.
GOOD NEWS
So what to do with four new 2K Zillas while they wait for their new home.
I installed one in AGNS last week. She ran a 14.7 @ 85 on Saturday at 84
volts. Darin and Piranha have moved up to 96 volts so it will be a class
shootout in Maryland on June 3! A guy from Texas took the 96 volt record
held by the Electropolitan last fall so I found a temporary home for
Zilla#2. Not sure what 2000 amps will do to that tiny little rear axle in
but I have a spare one just in case. We will have her at PODC as well. OJ
is going to have to carry the water one more time for us in the dragster
category and will be there withe not only a 2K, but, (are you listening
Rudman?) an nice green box that doesn't shock the %&*# out of you while
charging. We're still looking for that elusive 240 volt 10.55 number......
Shawn Lawless
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database:
269.6.2/781 - Release Date: 4/30/2007 9:14 AM
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If I understand this correctly, you go Down hill when the pack is full and
climb up hill when it's low?
If that's the case, then Regen is just about useless. Your pack will be
full when going downhill, so you won't be able to use regen, except maybe
a tiny bit.
Regen doesn't do anything for you going up hill.
So if this is the case, then I wouldn't waste any money on regen unless
you get it in a motor/controller that you are buying for some other reason
anyway. I.e. get it if it's free, but don't spend money buying something
you can't use.
> Hi,
>
> 3000+ foot climb in 17 miles to commute (back from) "the big city".
>
>> > I know some people will probably disagree, but I would modify that
>> statement
>> > to read, "Because 95% of my driving will be in the mountains, I
>> >NEED< regen
>> > capabilities."
>> >
>>
>> What do you define as mountains?
>>
>> Where I live there is a 600 foot difference betweenn the lower parts
>> and the
>> higher parts of the city, although, as there is also a 30 mile
>> distance
>> it is not that apparent in normal driving.
>
> ---
> Steve
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is this the Jack that has the 96 volt SC record. If so then congrats.
It will be tough to win back. There aren't alot of gearing options for
a 1957 Metropolitan floating around and the thing is just geared too
darn low. I have only hit 50-52 at 96 volts flat out. It's really
quick off the line then falls on it's face about 40 mph.
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Sent: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: No "Juiced Up" at PODC
Good luck on your racing Shawn!
Jack.
----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:31 AM
Subject: No "Juiced Up" at PODC
BAD NEWS
> It's looks as though our new "Juiced Up" dragster will not be ready
for > the PODC this year. At least not in the form I would be satisfied
> bringing it to an official NEDRA event. Four nine inch motors, four
2K > Zillas, and 3000+ battery cells with full regulation presents some
> challenges. The Zillas our here on the shelf, the motors should be
here > by the end of May, and I am not ready to share final details of
the > battery pack at the time being, but rest assured "Juiced Up" will
be > completed, tested, tuned and at a NEDRA asap. I had considered
bringing > it with me to PODC in an incomplete state but don't see the
purpose in > that.
> GOOD NEWS
> So what to do with four new 2K Zillas while they wait for their new
> home. I installed one in AGNS last week. She ran a 14.7 @ 85 on >
Saturday at 84 volts. Darin and Piranha have moved up to 96 volts so it
> will be a class shootout in Maryland on June 3! A guy from Texas took
> the 96 volt record held by the Electropolitan last fall so I found a
> temporary home for Zilla#2. Not sure what 2000 amps will do to that >
tiny little rear axle in but I have a spare one just in case. We will >
have her at PODC as well. OJ is going to have to carry the water one >
more time for us in the dragster category and will be there withe not >
only a 2K, but, (are you listening Rudman?) an nice green box that >
doesn't shock the %&*# out of you while charging. We're still looking >
for that elusive 240 volt 10.55 number......
> Shawn Lawless
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's
free > from AOL at AOL.com.
>
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com.
=0
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lawrence Rhodes used this company to rebuild and mod his Curtis for
higher amps with success:
http://www.logisystemscontrollers.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hmm, I thought UltraLights by law could only be single seater planes?
Comparing the requirements of a single seater untralight to a two-seat
light plane seems almost like an apples to oranges comparison to me.
> Bill Dube wrote:
>> Focus on the batteries and put aside any drive system design efforts
>> at first.
>>
>> A very small two-seat airplane needs about 65 HP. This is 746x65 ~ 50
>> kW.
>>
> Making this assumption, and the one hour (powered) flight time
> assumption, dictate the results. They also ignore the potential for
> developing an efficient aircraft. Early two seat aircraft in the 30's
> flew on 38-45 HP; a foot launched Easy Riser can fly on about 5 HP if
> that power is efficiently converted to thrust. Had the FAA actually
> enforced Part 103's 254 lb weight limit on ultralights, we could have
> seen the development of efficient aircraft. Aloha David Bettencourt
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
17 miles on the brakes is too much.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think you definintely need regen in this situation.
You also need to reduce your weight as much as possible as well, or
hauling UP a big battery pack is going to be very stressful.
17 miles and up 3,000 feet is going to take a lot of energy.
If lithium is out of the budget, I think you really need to consider
using NiMH, or maybe the BB600 NiCad at least, with the BB600's you can
overcharge them on regen without much consequence, but someone tell me
where you can actually buy BB600 cells?
Going downhill, you essentially don't need ANY battery power really,
it'll coast all the way down. So you really only need to focus on being
able to make the return trip UP. And that means reducing weight as much
as possible and having a motor and controller that won't overheat.
Jack
Steve wrote:
Hi,
3000+ foot climb in 17 miles to commute (back from) "the big city".
I know some people will probably disagree, but I would modify that
statement
to read, "Because 95% of my driving will be in the mountains, I
NEED< regen
capabilities."
What do you define as mountains?
Where I live there is a 600 foot difference betweenn the lower parts
and the
higher parts of the city, although, as there is also a 30 mile
distance
it is not that apparent in normal driving.
---
Steve
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Phil Marino
> Steve- are you using 6V golf cart batteries? ... Is it possible
> that the car's inability to climb steep hills in second (or
> higher) gear is caused by battery voltage sag at high current?
That would seem unlikely. The controller steps the voltage down and so the
current up. Current is what makes the torque, and torque is what lets you climb
hills. Even if the batteries had tremendous amounts of sag, the controller
should still be able to deliver its full current limit; just at a lower
voltage. You'd climb the steepest hill, but slowly.
Steve Powers wrote:
>> I have the Curtis 120 V / 550 A model running at 108 V in my
>> '93 Festiva with 9" ADC... even with my 2200 lb car including
>> batteries, it can't get up steep hills in any gear higher than
>> 1st (15 -20 MPH).
Something sounds wrong. Unless the Curtis is hot, or its current limit pot is
turned way down, it should be delivering 500 amps or so to the motor. 500 amps
to an ADC 9" motor makes 110 ft.lbs of torque. That's probably more than the
Festiva's ICE. You should be able to climb hills at least as well.
>> In between, I used the GE EV-1B running at 96 V / 320 A. The
>> performance was more jerkey on startup, top speed in each gear
>> was higher than the Curtis, but it gave less range (maybe 10-20%
>> less range) and it is known to be a "battery eater."
This implies that your Curtis isn't delivering even 320 amps. Is it getting
hot? (The Curtis cuts back current if it gets hot.) Is the current limit pot
turned down? (there's a pot behind the screws in the side of the case).
--
"Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the one who is
doing it." -- Chinese proverb
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Peter VanDerWal
> I thought UltraLights by law could only be single seater planes?
No, there's a category for a 2-place ultralight, intended to be used as a
trainer aircraft.
> Comparing the requirements of a single seater untralight to a
> two-seat light plane seems almost like an apples to oranges
> comparison to me.
There is almost a continuous spectrum of aircraft weights, ranging from hang
gliders at well under 100 lbs to modern equivalents of the old Piper J3 Cubs
which are almost ultralights.
--
"Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the one who is
doing it." -- Chinese proverb
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
> The Curtis 1221C-7401 (rated 72-120v) controller has 160v
> rated electrolytics. The Curtis 1231C-8601 (rated 96-144v)
> has 200v electrolytics. A decent charger should never reach
> these voltages; however, crude ones can go this high.
160V is 2.67V/cell on a 120V pack. For Trojan floodeds this is the
normal charge voltage at -20C, and is a level than can be reached during
the constant current finish/equalise portion of a charge cycle even at
normal temperatures (though 2.5-2.6V/cell is probably more typical).
Bob appears to have been pushing the limits of his 1221B by using a 132V
nominal pack, and the 160V rating of the caps would have been reached at
a completely normal 2.43V/cell level... except that the caps were
already almost 12years old and so probably even 160V may have been
pushing it for them.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have an ultralight, a powered parachute.
UL are ruled under FAR Part 103.
103 does not allow two seaters.
Many years ago the UL crowd argued it was dangerous since there was no
way at all to train new pilots other than sending them up solo. Thus
the 6088 Exemption came about, which basically says that the items in
103 regarding # of seats, weight, and fuel capacity are modified if
certain conditions are met (operated by a flight instructor for
instructional use). It was fairly simple to get an instructor's
license. Many got it just to fly with their spouse, friends, whatever
and call it instruction. "ultralight" is not an official defined term
by the FAA. Craft using the 6088 Exemption are still governed by the
rest of 103 and generally still called "ultralights".
A couple of years ago the FAA got into this "Sport Pilot" initiative,
which creates a new category of sport aircraft and pilot license. It is
supposed to be easier to get than a pilot's license. It allows much
heavier and faster craft than 103 allowed. Many of them available now
have a continuous fuselage and you'd much sooner associate them with
"aircraft" as opposed to these exposed tube and nylon/dacron wing
ultralights. However, the FAA gave the 6088 Exemption a death sentence
and requires all 2-seaters and pilots to register and operate under SP.
It's pretty painful for the average flying Joe, hardly appropriate to
get into details here, but damn the process is tough and expensive and I
see nothing useful it does for anyone but kick masses of people out of
the sport.
Danny
Lee Hart wrote:
From: Peter VanDerWal
I thought UltraLights by law could only be single seater planes?
No, there's a category for a 2-place ultralight, intended to be used as a
trainer aircraft.
Comparing the requirements of a single seater untralight to a
two-seat light plane seems almost like an apples to oranges
comparison to me.
There is almost a continuous spectrum of aircraft weights, ranging from hang
gliders at well under 100 lbs to modern equivalents of the old Piper J3 Cubs
which are almost ultralights.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Makes sense, thanks!
Now, since regulaters went internal, is there a way to do that without
opening the output with a high current relay, and any idea what happens to
an alternator if you open the output? Maybe an older alternator with an
external regulator, would be a better bet.
Marty
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:00 AM
Subject: Re: Cheap regen/DC-DC eliminator
Marty Hewes wrote:
Anybody tried using an air conditioner compressor clutch on the front
shaft to engage a belt to an alternator to charge a 12V accessory battery
during deceleration? Free power for pumps, lights, heater etc?
Alternators spin so freely that you really don't need the clutch. Just
remove the load from the alternator if you want it to freewheel.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I wonder,if you are handy, money could be saved by "rolling our own"
The sliding contact :
carbon brushes across brass bars, The bars are connected to the
pack in various configurations and the brushes connect to the motor.
The lever could be in place of the tranny shifter, spring loaded into
the center,neutral position and can be pulled for reverse and pushed
forward for acceleration.
or if you like to keep both hands on the wheel a clutch like peddle for
the go peddle.
or how about
Make your own mega contactor that is connected to the clutch peddle
actuated by the clutch cable to disconnect the main power.
Then use a remote shifter like from a fiero and use the cables onto the
remaining hand made contactors. Since the shifted contactors won't be
switched under load, only the clutch operated one needs to be fast.
Maybe this can be a sandwich of plates with a hole in the center that
drops into 4 positions
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Milliron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:40 AM
Subject: cartoon
>
> Just thought you might chuckle at this.
>
> http://comics.com/wash/bonanas/archive/bonanas-20070428.html
> Good one! Kinda reminds me of one I saw YEARS ago of a cop having pulled
over the same type car." And WHAT Amusment Park do you work for?"In the
backround are a few trolley cars, for the overhead to power the car off the
property.
My two tokens worth
Bob
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Robert,
You can see how I have my Zilla mounted at http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/756
The hairball is mounted up on 1" insulators just like the other components.
I have a rectangular Tupperware bowl upside down over the Hairball.
Its not for water though. I do not get water intrusion into the motor area
with a (still temporary) belly pan cover between the front frame rails.
The tupperware has to keep the soft fluffy drifty snow out. The real lite
soft stuff swirls its way all over everything in the motor compartment.
Tupperware keeps all the dust (snow) off and the insulators put it up 1"
into its cover. Not water proof, but definitely snow resistant.
Mike,
Anchorage, Ak.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of robert mat
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:26 AM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: ZILLA water-cooling photos URL?
>
>
> Are there photos of how the Zilla 1K should be
> installed? What about the alleged need for a
> "water-proof box" for the Hairball? How was this done
> on an S-10 pickup?
>
> Photo link: Using the world's first licensed
> Revived Battery electric pickup truck
> for everyday errandshttp://my-ev-diary.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
--- End Message ---
