EV Digest 6752
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Electric Mini Cooper Videos
by "Timothy Balcer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) GRM $2007 Challenge - Brainstorming
by Joel Silverman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: GRM $2007 Challenge - Brainstorming
by "Sean Korb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Doin' the math
by "Timothy Balcer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Doin' the math
by "Peri Hartman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) ExxonMobil's New Generation of Lithium-Ion Battery Separators
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Motor repair
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8) Re: ExxonMobil's New Generation of Lithium-Ion Battery Separators
by Tehben Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Doin' the math
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: GRM $2007 Challenge - Brainstorming
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: ExxonMobil's New Generation of Lithium-Ion Battery Separators
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Motor repair
by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: Motor equations
by Steve Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: GRM $2007 Challenge - Brainstorming
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: NI-Cad STM5-180 Auto watering hookup
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Doin' the math
by Ian Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) was ExxonMobil's Now If I want to get NiMH batteries
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
18) Re: Electric Mini Cooper Videos
by "Kaido Kert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: PFC-20
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: GRM $2007 Challenge - Brainstorming
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Why I got the batteries that I did
by Rob&Amy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: was ExxonMobil's Now If I want to get NiMH batteries
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23) AGNS bike garners 120volt record
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
24) Re: AGNS bike garners 120volt record
by Steven Ciciora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Wow. I had no idea they were doing LiFePO4. And these batteries look
extremely good.
On 5/9/07, Peter Gabrielsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was under the impression that their LFP line of cells are LiFePO4?
http://www.thunder-sky.com/products_en.asp?fid=66&fid2=70
On 5/9/07, Timothy Balcer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No.. I wasn't referring to Thundersky cells, which are not LiFePO4,
> they are standard chemistry.
>
> Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/226qwo
>
>
> On 5/9/07, Ian Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Valence Saphions are Lithium batteries including BMS designed for EV
> > use. Great idea, but overpriced: http://www.valence.com
> >
> > The 54c/Wh cells mentioned was probably referring to ThunderSky
> > (http://www.thunder-sky.com), but there's a real shortage of easy-to-
> > use BMSs available for EV-sized lithiums. Definitely a big hole in
> > the market there for some entrepreneurial soul to fill. Hmm... *gears
> > turning*..
> >
> >
>
>
--
www.electric-lemon.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
ok, I have been thinking about how cool it would be to
enter an EV in the Grassroots Motorsports $2007
Challenge. It is basically a contest to see who can
build the best car for $2,007 judged in autox, drag
and show. Best overall score wins.
I am interested in brainstorming ways to do this.
Would be fun to make it a list effort.
Check out the rules at:
http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/news/category/2007-challenge/
I do have a 1983 VW GTI that is waiting for a
conversion. I also have an 8" ADC motor.
Maybe a contact controller that can handle max amps?
A variac charger to blast the batteries.
I have a bunch of BB600 NiCads
Find some used racing springs/shocks
Throw in upper and lower braces
Seam weld the body
Rip out the entire interior
I am interested to hear some thoughts.
Joel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, even tho they have come down in price a bit, LiFePO4 prismatics
are still too expensive for most of us to consider buying in smaller
lots.
I've found that the $2/AH price quoted form the other manufacturer is
identical to the price being charged by a distributor for Thundersky
LiFePO4 cells in the US, so they are no bargain.
Also, Thundersky has increased their cycle life claims.. which I find
dubious unless someone tells me it is not just numbers on a piece of
paper. But, if we go with 1000 cycles @ 80% DOD, as they have claimed
previously, then here is how they stack up against good 'ol lead
floodies. I'll use some US Battery large formats as comparison.
for ~50kWh of lead in 12v/195AH batteries you pay, retail, $5184 or about $5200.
for ~50kWh of LiFePO4 3.2v/160AH you pay, list price, $32,000
That makes them a bit more than 6 times the cost of lead. We can
forgive some of that because of weight savings, so lets say we are
reducing our bias down to 5 times the cost.
The LiFePO4 batteries need a BMS.. but I dont want to use that since I
believe ALL EV packs should have one to maximize cycle life and keep
batteries balanced. There are more batteries, so you'd need more
boards, but you CAN get their highest sized battery and have the
equivalent Watthours to our example.
So.. still.. no good. Basically, even at only 4 times value we are way
over. For the value proposition to start to make sense, the LiFePO4
batteries would need to hold up to 2000 cycles at 80% DOD, or be half
the price.
Also, due to self discharge, I don't know that I'd -want- to own a
Lithium pack for more than 3 or 4 years. Unless they solve that
problem, which they haven't said they have solved so I'll assume it is
still an issue. So even if they DO go 3000 cycles, I don't think that
matters unless they guarantee a 8 year shelf life, which is how long
it takes to hit 3000 if you recharge every day.
I think someone in the US should make large format prismatic LiFePO4
cells and drive the costs as low as they can manage, grab the market,
and THEN start exploiting the margins!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think you're on to something with your comparison. But, aren't you under
estimating the effect of weight savings? I would guess (and I presume you
have actual numbers) that the TS are at most half the weight of lead.
Assuming your vehicle could even carry 50kwh of lead, knocking off half that
weight would probably give you a lot more than 6/5 more range.
Maybe you could roughly refigure this and reduce the number of TS cells
needed to get the same range as 50kwh of lead.
Second, I doubt 2000 vs 3000 recharges is an issue. On a daily basis, would
you really use 80% of 50kwh and need a full recharge?
Third, maybe a more realistic comparison would be with 15kwh packs. (Then,
unfortunately, I bet the lead pans out cheaper because the weight savings is
less significant compared to the gross weight.)
Peri Hartman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Timothy Balcer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: 09 May, 2007 6:34 PM
Subject: Doin' the math
Well, even tho they have come down in price a bit, LiFePO4 prismatics
are still too expensive for most of us to consider buying in smaller
lots.
I've found that the $2/AH price quoted form the other manufacturer is
identical to the price being charged by a distributor for Thundersky
LiFePO4 cells in the US, so they are no bargain.
Also, Thundersky has increased their cycle life claims.. which I find
dubious unless someone tells me it is not just numbers on a piece of
paper. But, if we go with 1000 cycles @ 80% DOD, as they have claimed
previously, then here is how they stack up against good 'ol lead
floodies. I'll use some US Battery large formats as comparison.
for ~50kWh of lead in 12v/195AH batteries you pay, retail, $5184 or about
$5200.
for ~50kWh of LiFePO4 3.2v/160AH you pay, list price, $32,000
That makes them a bit more than 6 times the cost of lead. We can
forgive some of that because of weight savings, so lets say we are
reducing our bias down to 5 times the cost.
The LiFePO4 batteries need a BMS.. but I dont want to use that since I
believe ALL EV packs should have one to maximize cycle life and keep
batteries balanced. There are more batteries, so you'd need more
boards, but you CAN get their highest sized battery and have the
equivalent Watthours to our example.
So.. still.. no good. Basically, even at only 4 times value we are way
over. For the value proposition to start to make sense, the LiFePO4
batteries would need to hold up to 2000 cycles at 80% DOD, or be half
the price.
Also, due to self discharge, I don't know that I'd -want- to own a
Lithium pack for more than 3 or 4 years. Unless they solve that
problem, which they haven't said they have solved so I'll assume it is
still an issue. So even if they DO go 3000 cycles, I don't think that
matters unless they guarantee a 8 year shelf life, which is how long
it takes to hit 3000 if you recharge every day.
I think someone in the US should make large format prismatic LiFePO4
cells and drive the costs as low as they can manage, grab the market,
and THEN start exploiting the margins!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I never would have guessed they had any involvement in batteries.
A petroleum link in the batteries?
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/index.jsp?epi-content=NEWS_VIEW_POPUP_TYPE&newsId=20070508005343&ndmHsc=v2*A1176116400000*B1178787184000*DgroupByDate*J2*L1*N1000837*Zmobil&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view_popup
( if long link breaks(same as above) http://tinyurl.com/22wemk )
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well doesn't Texico own the patents or rights to NiMH so they can
keep them out of EV's.
Has anyone ever wondered why all the hybrids have NiMH batts? Is it a
deal with Texico to keep petroleum burners on the road... :P
On May 9, 2007, at 5:59 PM, Ryan Stotts wrote:
I never would have guessed they had any involvement in batteries.
A petroleum link in the batteries?
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/index.jsp?epi-
content=NEWS_VIEW_POPUP_TYPE&newsId=20070508005343&ndmHsc=v2*A11761164
00000*B1178787184000*DgroupByDate*J2*L1*N1000837*Zmobil&newsLang=en&be
anID=202776713&viewID=news_view_popup
( if long link breaks(same as above) http://tinyurl.com/22wemk )
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I think you're on to something with your comparison. But, aren't you
> under
> estimating the effect of weight savings? I would guess (and I presume you
> have actual numbers) that the TS are at most half the weight of lead.
> Assuming your vehicle could even carry 50kwh of lead, knocking off half
> that
> weight would probably give you a lot more than 6/5 more range.
I haven't done the math for a while, but as I recall, for a given range
NiMH are about 1/2 the weight of lead and LiIon/LiPol are about 1/4 (or
less).
--
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 ---
Sorry, but I don't see how you can do this, unless you already own all of
the parts needed for the conversion.
A new set of batteries alone will set you back close to $2000.
If you start with a beater and spend all your money on EVs parts, you end
up with an electric beater, what do you figure the odds are of that
winning anything?
> ok, I have been thinking about how cool it would be to
> enter an EV in the Grassroots Motorsports $2007
> Challenge. It is basically a contest to see who can
> build the best car for $2,007 judged in autox, drag
> and show. Best overall score wins.
>
> I am interested in brainstorming ways to do this.
> Would be fun to make it a list effort.
>
> Check out the rules at:
>
> http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/news/category/2007-challenge/
>
> I do have a 1983 VW GTI that is waiting for a
> conversion. I also have an 8" ADC motor.
>
> Maybe a contact controller that can handle max amps?
> A variac charger to blast the batteries.
> I have a bunch of BB600 NiCads
> Find some used racing springs/shocks
> Throw in upper and lower braces
> Seam weld the body
> Rip out the entire interior
>
> I am interested to hear some thoughts.
>
> Joel
>
> __________________________________________________
> 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 ---
Have you ever wondered why the Hybrids all use batteries of less than
10Ahr? That's because that is what the allowed limit is on battery size.
As I recall the licensing agreement specifically prohibits EV size
batteries, it actually specifies electric vehicles.
> Well doesn't Texico own the patents or rights to NiMH so they can
> keep them out of EV's.
> Has anyone ever wondered why all the hybrids have NiMH batts? Is it a
> deal with Texico to keep petroleum burners on the road... :P
>
>
> On May 9, 2007, at 5:59 PM, Ryan Stotts wrote:
>
>> I never would have guessed they had any involvement in batteries.
>>
>> A petroleum link in the batteries?
>>
>> http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/index.jsp?epi-
>> content=NEWS_VIEW_POPUP_TYPE&newsId=20070508005343&ndmHsc=v2*A11761164
>> 00000*B1178787184000*DgroupByDate*J2*L1*N1000837*Zmobil&newsLang=en&be
>> anID=202776713&viewID=news_view_popup
>>
>>
>> ( if long link breaks(same as above) http://tinyurl.com/22wemk )
>>
>
>
--
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 ---
Did you have him do the kevlar armature and comm wrap? Do you think I should
send him my WarP9's to rig for racing?
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 6:32 PM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: Motor repair
>
>
> I just had Jim Husted of Hi Torque electric rebuild my advanced 4001 dc
> motor.If anyone needs a motor rebuilt I highly recomend Hi torque electric.
> The motor looks better than a new one, he even painted it a beautiful blue.
> Larry Cronk 72 Datsun
> ELEC TK
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 10:27 -0700, Roger Stockton wrote:
> That's odd; do you mean an FB4001 that has had the internal fan removed,
> or a stock 9" with the original internal fan?
Roger,
Here's the path I've taken:
I got the curves from the EVParts site:
http://www.evparts.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=536&product_id=1128
All I know is one graph says "Ventilated - Not Fan Cooled"
and the other says "Fan Cooled". The EVParts site doesn't say which
version they sell, so as a newbie, I was at a loss to really be sure
which version Uwe's calculator referred to.
But it gets better: I was alerted to this whole issue because I noticed
a couple of local EVers had directed the output of some small external
fans into their ADC motors--so I figured they were creating the "fan
cooled" version. I didn't think to ask the owners about it at the time,
however.
Having noticed that the curves were much better for the fan-cooled
version (as you'd expect), I figured I'd sim it and see what it would do
for me....that's when I took a hard look at Uwe's numbers.
>
> The first entry on Uve's motor page is for the standard FB4001 (with
> internal fan):
>
> <http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/8679/motor.html>
That may be, but if you use Uwe's (n,k) values (1.55, .0085) for the
FB4001 and calc the points for the torque vs. amps line, you'll find
they match (within 6-7% worst case) the ADC chart for "Ventilated--not
fan cooled" and fit less well the chart for "Fan Cooled". That (plus the
EVers with their fans) lead me to believe the calculator was really
modelling the "not fan cooled" motor.
>
> At the top of this page are the equations that his calculator uses to
> model the motor behaviour. The problem I have with them is that they
> are not based on the actual physics of a series motor but rather are an
> approximate fit to the motor curve over some range. The problem here is
> that since they are not based on the underlying physics they generally
> don't model the motor very well as the calculator extrapolates beyond
> the range over which the parameters were calculated to result in a
> decent fit to the actual motor behaviour.
I agree. I did a bunch of calcs, noticed the same thing, and was
bothered for the same reason--the formula didn't represent any physics
that I could find a description for. That's when I decided to yell for
help :-)
>
> Jeff Major has stepped up and offered the theoretical equations for a
> series motor, and has noted that these strictly model the electrical
> behaviour of the motor, they do not account for such practicalities as
> the losses associated with the internal fan (a function of the second or
> third power of the RPM), or bearing and brush friction, nor brush
> losses, or armature reaction, or field saturation, etc. For instance,
> notice that theory predicts that torque will vary with the square of the
> current, yet the actual motor curves tend to show that it actually
> varies by the current raised to about 1.2 or so.
>
> If you are looking to model a stock FB4001, you can probably use Uve's
> calculator and its model provided you don't trust any predictions it
> makes for high RPM/low torque or low RPM/high torque extremes.
I'd do that, but the whole reason I started looking into this is that I
*do* need some confidence in the numbers at the low RPM/high torque
extreme because I actually need more RPM at the higher torque levels if
I'm going to climb some 8% grades at 50 mph or so. The curves for the
"Fan cooled" version appear to help a bit in that regard.
>
> If you wanted to, you could plug Uve's model equations and parameters
> into a spreadsheet and plot the resulting curves against the factory
> curves for the motor and see where the error is, and if it is small
> enough to ignore.
I've done spot-checks and the discrepancies bothered me enough to make
me wonder if I was doing something wrong or the parameters weren't right
or the equation was just faulty. Knowing which chart (fan vs. no fan) to
compare to would help, too.
>
> If you have removed the internal fan, then you can't rely on the factory
> curves anymore if you want good accuracy. The internal fan represents a
> loss that increases (rapidly!) with RPM, so if you did use the stock
> motor data you should be confident that your real life results should be
> a bit better than the predictions.
Haven't touched the motor. Don't even have one to touch :-(
>
> If you want to take up the challenge of modelling the FB4001 accurately,
> I would start by plugging the manufacturer's data into a spreadsheet,
> then plug in the theoretical equations for a series motor, and then add
> to them equations to model the losses (drag) associated with the
> internal fan/windage and bearings. Play with the parameters until the
> curves are a resonably good match to the manufacturer's data. Now you
> have a model that predicts the motor behaviour and isolates the
> contribution of the internal fan so that you can remove the portion of
> the equation associated with the internal fan losses and have a
> resonable confidence that the predictions will yield a fair prediction
> of the FB4001 behaviour with the internal fan removed.
>
> This is the sort of thing I generally enjoy fooling around with, but I
> just haven't got the spare time right now to do it...
Understand. Hopefully, once we get the fan vs. no fan thing sorted out
things will be a bit clearer.
>
> Hope this helps,
Tremendously. Very much appreciated.
--Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
But it doesn't need new batteries, or batteries that last beyond the
competition testing. I'd use old car starting batteries.
I like these kind of challenges, but going to Florida would be quite
costly. I'd be happy to build the car if someone else wants to tow it
from Sacramento to Florida and back and can do the driving.
Jack
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
Sorry, but I don't see how you can do this, unless you already own all of
the parts needed for the conversion.
A new set of batteries alone will set you back close to $2000.
If you start with a beater and spend all your money on EVs parts, you end
up with an electric beater, what do you figure the odds are of that
winning anything?
ok, I have been thinking about how cool it would be to
enter an EV in the Grassroots Motorsports $2007
Challenge. It is basically a contest to see who can
build the best car for $2,007 judged in autox, drag
and show. Best overall score wins.
I am interested in brainstorming ways to do this.
Would be fun to make it a list effort.
Check out the rules at:
http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/news/category/2007-challenge/
I do have a 1983 VW GTI that is waiting for a
conversion. I also have an 8" ADC motor.
Maybe a contact controller that can handle max amps?
A variac charger to blast the batteries.
I have a bunch of BB600 NiCads
Find some used racing springs/shocks
Throw in upper and lower braces
Seam weld the body
Rip out the entire interior
I am interested to hear some thoughts.
Joel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The STM5-180 caps are threaded and sealed with an o-ring. The only avenue
of escape for the hydrogen is through the watering system. In order for it
to function properly to control the height of the electrolyte it needs this
seal.
The TEVan uses a bubbler system on the watering circuits, (five of them for
the 30 batteries). This also recovers any overflow and saves it in a small
rewervoir tank that is in-line with the supply line.
HTH,
Jim
'93 Dodge TEVan (w/ old bubbly boiler orange-cap STMs)
'88 Fiero ESE
>Subject: Re: NI-Cad STM5-180 Auto watering hookup
>To add to Evan's comments, I've seen flame arrestors used on the watering
>system overflow outlets - but not in every case, so I don't know when
they're
>required. I get the impression that the watering system is the only route
for
>hydrogen to escape. That's certainly the case on the MR range, where
there
>are no removeable cell caps.
>Certainly
>the old bubbly boiler orange-cap STMs lived long and prospered. I'm not
>100% sure of that though.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com - Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider -
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 10/05/2007, at 9:34 AM, Timothy Balcer wrote:
So.. still.. no good. Basically, even at only 4 times value we are way
over. For the value proposition to start to make sense, the LiFePO4
batteries would need to hold up to 2000 cycles at 80% DOD, or be half
the price.
One other point which is hard to put a value on is the need for early
adopters to show demand for an immature technology to help bring the
prices down. It's a bit like the chicken and the egg problem - if
nobody buys the large prismatic lithiums, there won't seem to be a
large market and so won't be much economic incentive to improve them.
(Of course it'll happen eventually as improvements trickle down from
consumer Lithiums, but not as fast as we might like.)
I think someone in the US should make large format prismatic LiFePO4
cells and drive the costs as low as they can manage, grab the market,
and THEN start exploiting the margins!
Interestingly I've heard Martin Eberhard (CEO of Tesla) talk about
this on several occasions. He's actually hinted that he'd be willing
to "step up to the plate" and have a go setting up a US based Lithium
battery plant. He makes an interesting point about national security,
where dependency on oil from the middle east would just be converted
into dependency on lithium cells from asia.
-Ian
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 5/10/07, Timothy Balcer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wow. I had no idea they were doing LiFePO4. And these batteries look
extremely good.
FYI, i just got an offer for small batch of 10Ah LiFePO4's with 50A
max discharge capability, for $1000/kWh from Taiwan
tad expensive, still.
-kert
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A short piece of hose cut to fit between the pot and the panel should do it.
The screwdriver goes in through the hose and can't touch anything but the
inside of the hose. If it were glued to the front panel, it would go on and
off with the panel.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Shanab" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: PFC-20
> Maybe a plastic shroud fitted over the pot and up against the case would
> be a good long term fix. It is all that freedom that gets us in trouble?
>
> ie
> xxx | | yyyy
> |__|
> -----------||------------ board, x and y hazards
>
>
> ========== =========== case
>
>
>
>
> Added shroud
>
> xxx | | yyyy
> |__|
> ----------||||----------- board, x and y hazards
> | |
> _| |_
> ========== =========== case
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> But it doesn't need new batteries, or batteries that last beyond the
> competition testing. I'd use old car starting batteries.
??? do you really expect to be competitive in a drag race and an autocross
using old starting batteries???
I just went and read the rules, you can't use parts you have lying around
unless you deduct their fair market value from the $2007.
Even using used starting batteries, I don't think you can build an
electric car that will be safe and competitive for $2007.
Note: transportation costs and sales tax has to included in the total price.
But if someone can prove me wrong, heck I might even show up and cheer
them on.
>
> I like these kind of challenges, but going to Florida would be quite
> costly. I'd be happy to build the car if someone else wants to tow it
> from Sacramento to Florida and back and can do the driving.
>
> Jack
>
> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>> Sorry, but I don't see how you can do this, unless you already own all
>> of
>> the parts needed for the conversion.
>> A new set of batteries alone will set you back close to $2000.
>>
>> If you start with a beater and spend all your money on EVs parts, you
>> end
>> up with an electric beater, what do you figure the odds are of that
>> winning anything?
>>
>>
>>>ok, I have been thinking about how cool it would be to
>>>enter an EV in the Grassroots Motorsports $2007
>>>Challenge. It is basically a contest to see who can
>>>build the best car for $2,007 judged in autox, drag
>>>and show. Best overall score wins.
>>>
>>>I am interested in brainstorming ways to do this.
>>>Would be fun to make it a list effort.
>>>
>>>Check out the rules at:
>>>
>>>http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/news/category/2007-challenge/
>>>
>>>I do have a 1983 VW GTI that is waiting for a
>>>conversion. I also have an 8" ADC motor.
>>>
>>>Maybe a contact controller that can handle max amps?
>>>A variac charger to blast the batteries.
>>>I have a bunch of BB600 NiCads
>>>Find some used racing springs/shocks
>>>Throw in upper and lower braces
>>>Seam weld the body
>>>Rip out the entire interior
>>>
>>>I am interested to hear some thoughts.
>>>
>>>Joel
>>>
>>>__________________________________________________
>>>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 ---
Don't underestimate the impact of Peukert Effect and Internal
Resistance/Voltage Sag. Here are some example calcs from my design
spreadsheet:
Example 1:
Trojan 24TMX 12V FLA, pack of 2x12 (1128 lbs)
C/20 85AH, at 200A = 30.1Ah
65mph -> 208A @ 139V -> 22.2mi range
Example 2:
Deka Intimidator 9A34 VRLA AGM, pack of 2x12 (984 lbs)
C20 55Ah, at 200A = 45.7Ah
65mph -> 200.5A @ 142.2V -> 29.45mi range
So In this case the AGMs give 32% more range, weigh less, and cost
about $109 each at online pricing.
Even if you don't need the range you have to take into account the
effect your reduced range will have on the life of your batteries.
The more of your capacity you burn everyday, the sooner you'll be
having to replace the pack.
Take the following example chart from Concorde AGMs:
http://www.uuhome.de/william.darden/conlife.gif borrowed from http://
www.uuhome.de/william.darden/carfaq11.htm
Using this chart and assuming a 10 mile round trip daily commute
would give the following:
Design Range Est %DOD Cycles Lifetime
12.5mi 80% 500
2yr
20mi 50% 1000 4yr
40mi 25% 2000 8yr
Rob
On May 8, 2007, at 4:13 AM, Steve Powers wrote:
So, I did but 12 V / 80 AH (at 20 hr rate) flooded
batteries. You say ... marine batteries ... I say
... well I guess they are (but the highest grade
Starting / Deep Cycle Marine batteries you can buy).
So why?
I see it like this Optimas are $170 / ea and they are
only 50 Ah. Sure they can put out 800 - 1000 CCA, but
my controller is only 550 A. My new batteries have
650 CCA. So acceleration performance is no different.
Cycle life - they have a 1 year free replacement and 2
year pro rated warranty. So, I'm not worried there.
Capacity. Rated 80 AH. Maybe I'll get 40 AH usable.
Still not much worse than Optimas.
Weight. My car just can't take the weight. The
second best option is flooded golf 8 V golf cart
batteries. That was about 30% more expensive and I
only estimates a 18 - 20 mile range, less performance,
more weight, and nearly breaking the suspension on the
car. It had 13 in there originally, running 104 V.
Is that really better than my 10 x 12 V Marine
batteries? Time will tell. I can say for sure that
the performance is much better now, and I only needed
an 8 mile range.
So, did I make a mistake? Not sure. Time will tell.
Thoughts?
Steve
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>
> Here is the link you can get it direct from the Cobasys what they have to
> say about this.
> ..
> _http://www.cobasys.com/pdf/faq/faq.html_
> (http://www.cobasys.com/pdf/faq/faq.html)
***********************************************
I think GM should be informed of this site and the last two paragraphs"
8). How many years will a NiMH battery last in automotive applications?
Advanced battery technologies are typically evaluated in terms of complete
discharge cycles. A standard electric vehicle battery can be charged and
discharged 1,000 times to 80% depth-of-discharge (DOD) equivalent to over
100,000 miles. Hybrid vehicle applications use batteries very differently.
Typically, the emphasis is not on energy storage, but on power density. The
battery is, generally, never fully charged or discharged in hybrid applications.
NiMH batteries used in hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) applications can be cycled
in shallow discharges hundreds of thousands of times and last over 200,000+
miles under a partial charge/discharge regime.
9). How do you dispose the batteries when they have reached end of life?
NiMH batteries are 100% recyclable and use no toxic materials (lead, cadmium, or
lithium), making them the only rechargeable battery that can be legally disposed
of in a landfill. We can refer several battery disposal facilities to you.
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Endymion MailMan.
http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Springtime fianllay came to Thompson Raceway on Wednesday night with
temps in the mid 70's and light wind.
The Lawless crew and AGNS were there for grudge night with hopes of a
120 volt record run and 100 mph. Having let work get in the way of our
racing we didn't get to the track until after 6 pm. We had just enough
time for 2 runs during T-N-T. First run 13.85 @ 92.47. A quick recharge
later and a 13. 78 @ 94.723. They are within 1% so the second time
should stick as the new 120 volt record.
We were headed in the right direction but since we were the last TNT
run we didn't have time to recharge before eliminations began a few
minutes later. I talked to the starter and he agreed to allow us a
timed run whenever we were ready. What cool folks! Well you know what
happens when you have too much time to think. Should we make another
120volt run? Experience with this bike tells me that it probably would
have been a 13.6? at 95-96 mph. Not bad considering we were running a
single starnd of 10 Hawkers and 60% less battery than we had at 96
volts. Should we bump up to 144 volts or go all the way and see what
192 volts will do? We stuffed 6 more Hawkers in there and were floating
around 215 volts by the time we were in staging. We positioned
ourselves at the 600 ft mark and waited. Denis came down the track like
he was sent from a silent cannon but he must have wanted to show off
because when he got right in front of us at 600 ft. the motors put on a
nice light show. Safe to say I now know how high I can't set the motor
voltage. All kinds of nasty noises accompanied the sparks and AGNS
snapped, crackled, and popped down the rest of the track all the way to
a 13.39 @ 93.83. We headed down track to a find pair of smoldering
Perm motors, a heartbroken Denis that he had done this to his AGNS and
an otherwise ready to run bike. We'll open up the motors today. Should
find all kinds of parts to hang on the wall. What a week of racing! 3
new NEDRA recors, One flame job, and one group of addicted EV racers.
When will AGNS get 100 mph? Next week at 144 volts I hope.
Shawn Lawless
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Pictures! We want to see pictures of this new Bike!!
Congrats on the new records, and thanks for showing
everyone how much fun racing can be.
- Steven Ciciora
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Springtime fianllay came to Thompson Raceway on
> Wednesday night with
> temps in the mid 70's and light wind.
> The Lawless crew and AGNS were there for grudge
> night with hopes of a
> 120 volt record run and 100 mph. Having let work get
> in the way of our
> racing we didn't get to the track until after 6 pm.
> We had just enough
> time for 2 runs during T-N-T. First run 13.85 @
> 92.47. A quick recharge
> later and a 13. 78 @ 94.723. They are within 1% so
> the second time
> should stick as the new 120 volt record.
> We were headed in the right direction but since we
> were the last TNT
> run we didn't have time to recharge before
> eliminations began a few
> minutes later. I talked to the starter and he agreed
> to allow us a
> timed run whenever we were ready. What cool folks!
> Well you know what
> happens when you have too much time to think. Should
> we make another
> 120volt run? Experience with this bike tells me that
> it probably would
> have been a 13.6? at 95-96 mph. Not bad considering
> we were running a
> single starnd of 10 Hawkers and 60% less battery
> than we had at 96
> volts. Should we bump up to 144 volts or go all the
> way and see what
> 192 volts will do? We stuffed 6 more Hawkers in
> there and were floating
> around 215 volts by the time we were in staging. We
> positioned
> ourselves at the 600 ft mark and waited. Denis came
> down the track like
> he was sent from a silent cannon but he must have
> wanted to show off
> because when he got right in front of us at 600 ft.
> the motors put on a
> nice light show. Safe to say I now know how high I
> can't set the motor
> voltage. All kinds of nasty noises accompanied the
> sparks and AGNS
> snapped, crackled, and popped down the rest of the
> track all the way to
> a 13.39 @ 93.83. We headed down track to a find
> pair of smoldering
> Perm motors, a heartbroken Denis that he had done
> this to his AGNS and
> an otherwise ready to run bike. We'll open up the
> motors today. Should
> find all kinds of parts to hang on the wall. What a
> week of racing! 3
> new NEDRA recors, One flame job, and one group of
> addicted EV racers.
> When will AGNS get 100 mph? Next week at 144 volts I
> hope.
>
> Shawn Lawless
>
________________________________________________________________________
> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out
> more about what's free
> from AOL at AOL.com.
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
--- End Message ---
