EV Digest 6954
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Make it
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2) Re: Custom Gears
by Eric Poulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Slightly OT: Painting your EV for less than $100
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4) Re: Cheap "balancer" for A123 pack
by Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Make it
by Bill Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Clutchless Shift [was EVgrin - RAVolt takes first EV trip]
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7) Re: Cheap "balancer" for A123 pack, Light-O-Rama (switcher)
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8) Re: Chances of working for an Auto Company
by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Slightly OT: Painting your EV for less than $100
by "Brian Pikkula" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Clutchless Shift [was EVgrin - RAVolt takes first EV trip]
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: regarding the Solectria Sunrise
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Ultimate magnetic motor design
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: regarding the Solectria Sunrise
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: regarding the Solectria Sunrise
by "John A. Evans - N0HJ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Make it
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Make it
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Make it
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: ???kWh EV battery pack
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: AGM vs Gel
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Cheap
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Make it
by Tony Hwang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Cheap "balancer" for A123 pack
by "Joseph T. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Cheap "balancer" for A123 pack
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Mark> Before Otmar gets to retire to the Caribbean he would have to
Mark> invest many more $ in volume production tooling to reduce the time
Mark> for assembling and testing the Zillas required just to meet the
Mark> production schedule. These dolars would also be spread over the
Mark> production run of 1M units and would have the overall effect of
Mark> reducing the overall unit cost as well due to the reduction in
Mark> labor cost. It takes money or time to make money.........me
With a firm order for 1M units in hand he could probably just sell Cafe
Electric to another company with high-volume electronics production
experience. He'd still get to retire on a sailboat in the Caribbean. ;-)
--
Skip Montanaro - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.webfast.com/~skip/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think I paid about $15 for a 14T, 1.25" hub adapter. The fit is
really tight, too. Quite a good deal.
Alan Brinkman wrote:
Eric,
I see the coupler in your link that I could have welded a sprocket to
and used in attaching to my 13 spline motor shaft. I was hoping that
machining a hub would not be so expensive, as I took that route. Your
resource is very good as many shaft sizes and spline counts are covered.
Alan Brinkman
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Eric Poulsen
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:19 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Custom Gears
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why not just spray it yourself? It'll cost about $150, but you can get a
decent paint job at home.
BTW, I'd be interested where you'd get enough paint for $100. House paint,
right?
On Thu, June 21, 2007 8:32 am, Brian Pikkula wrote:
> Since the majority of our EVs are > 10 years old, the paint on them
> isn't like it used to be. However, I have a hard time justifying spending
> $2k for something that will not propel my EV.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Unless you are talking about 100,000 cells, you don't have much hope
of getting a discount. These are very popular cells.
In nutshell, these cells are not going to be inexpensive in
the near term.
The BMS is the hard part. Someone must make one that will
work for the home EVer market. No one has.
Bill Dube'
I'm very excited about the potential for A123 batteries to change the
automotive industry, particularly with PHEVs initially. They appear to
be a very "switched on" company, backed up by a superb product.
The RC guys (oh, for a "cheap" hobby!) seem to have done a lot of
excellent real-world testing of the M1 cells at the micro level and
are very pleased with the results, particularly when compared with
other's like Kokam etc. and that's good enough for me.
There are two hurdles that I see obstructing my investment in them however.
1. Upfront Cost.
2. BMS.
I've had a quote from A123 Systems for 1500 of the M1 cells and their
price was competitive with other Li when life-cycle is considered
(10,000 cycles to 50% is awesome), however I'd hope that a "group
purchase" might bring this price down closer to what I can
realistically afford upfront. I'm not asking for you to comment on
this because I know it's not your area.
So, on the BMS issue;
In rough dimensions I'd probably have approximately 40 groups in
series, with 30 paralleled cells in each group, to replace my current
12 X 12V 100Ah(C20) lead pack.
My first question is; Do the 30 individual cells in a parallel
grouping need individual attention or can I treat them as one because
they are in parallel with each other? In other words, when charging
"all" that I need to do is make sure each group of 30 cells reaches
3.6V but no more?
Sorry if you've answered this question before but I haven't managed to
stumble across it in the archives.
Thanks for your time and thank-you to all the other outstanding
participants in the wonderful EVlist community.
Shaun Williams.
www.electric-echo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Roden,
Regarding Jim's comment below, do you have the ability to filter which
Emails make it to the list? If so, is it possible to block Emails
containing Oatmeal or Otmeal--or at least the ones from Chip
Crankenstein containing that? It seems pretty risk free, since oatmeal
isn't something that usually comes up a lot in the discussion of
electric vehicles. Or maybe it's not worth it--I just find them
annoying, as other probably do, too.
Bill Dennis
Jim Husted wrote:
Hey Dan
You know, you really are a cowboy! Come in to town,
guns blazing, calling all the good town folk names
like "otmeal" or "your heiness" and then you wonder
"why" no one wants to talk to you!
Furthermore, there are two kinds of "smart", book
smart, and good old fashion common sense, of which IMO
you possess none!
The funniest thing to me (the thing that started your
whole rant) is your fear Otmar is getting filthy rich
off his controllers. One day a big corp will produce
your cheap controller, create lots of crappy factory
jobs with "don't meet ends wages" while the CEO's
enjoy huge profits and bonuses. God what a perfect
world you invision! At least at that point you will
have something to bitch about! But hey you'll have
that super "cheap" controller you wanted.
FWIW take the silver spoon out of your mouth, take the
I'm the worlds greatest man sign off your back, learn
some basic "people" skills, and maybe, just maybe,
you'll find less friction towards your posts.
Well that, and maybe try to actually become a doer!
EVery one of the people you are soooooo eager to slam
has become respected through their works not idle
words.
Just something to chew on, if you decide to remove the
silver spoon first 8^)
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Joseph.
How long does it take you to "clutchlessly shift" compared to when
you shifted with the clutch?
I'm just starting out and taking it slow. It was about 2 seconds, but
could have pushed it harder. It really just dropped into gear - no
worries about reving the motor and no lurching. The shift was
smoother than my ICE shifting.
Rob
RAVolt.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Way back when, in the dark ages (~ 1991) I was in the US Navy, on an old
ship. It was decomissioned approx 6 months after I left (~ 1993).
It had 2-dozen refrigerator sized "mechanical" computers to calculate the
direction that sonar would be transmitted from the dome (the old
John-Wayne-movie pingers. They don't use those these days, btw). (oh yeah,
at the time, every single one of those same "mechanical" computers could
have been replaced with a 80286, 80386 units were just becoming cheap
enough for your average sailor to almost buy).
To get somewhat to the point, is that we had a 311+ pole mechanical
switch, which was later replaced by a digital things with lots of little
cards in it (approximately the size of 4 credit-cards stacked tightly
together). This old mechanical, then new digital switch, handled the
power that went to the dome (and we're talking about lots of power). I
think it actually made the 'decision' - and elsewhere were relays - I
think, that turned on specific sonar "speakers" (we called them something
else).
To get really close to the point, we have something similar here: lots of
things (batteries) that need the same thing (charging, balancing,
monitoring).
Who knows what the Navy's unit costs...
Here's an impressive switching device...
Would it be possible to use a unit like this - to switch between battery
sets, for.... whatever?
http://www.snopes.com/photos/arts/xmaslights.asp
The unit is made by Light-O-Rama
http://www.lightorama.com/
Samples of its capabilities....
http://www.lightorama.com/Videos.html
Thoughts anyone?
Do you think that Light-O-Rama might be interested in creating a DC
switcher? (this thing switches AC)
Ed Cooley
Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
06/27/2007 00:19
Please respond to
ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To
ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
cc
Subject
Re: Cheap "balancer" for A123 pack
Unless you are talking about 100,000 cells, you don't have much hope
of getting a discount. These are very popular cells.
In nutshell, these cells are not going to be inexpensive in
the near term.
The BMS is the hard part. Someone must make one that will
work for the home EVer market. No one has.
Bill Dube'
>I'm very excited about the potential for A123 batteries to change the
>automotive industry, particularly with PHEVs initially. They appear to
>be a very "switched on" company, backed up by a superb product.
>
>The RC guys (oh, for a "cheap" hobby!) seem to have done a lot of
>excellent real-world testing of the M1 cells at the micro level and
>are very pleased with the results, particularly when compared with
>other's like Kokam etc. and that's good enough for me.
>
>There are two hurdles that I see obstructing my investment in them
however.
> 1. Upfront Cost.
> 2. BMS.
>
>I've had a quote from A123 Systems for 1500 of the M1 cells and their
>price was competitive with other Li when life-cycle is considered
>(10,000 cycles to 50% is awesome), however I'd hope that a "group
>purchase" might bring this price down closer to what I can
>realistically afford upfront. I'm not asking for you to comment on
>this because I know it's not your area.
>
>So, on the BMS issue;
>In rough dimensions I'd probably have approximately 40 groups in
>series, with 30 paralleled cells in each group, to replace my current
>12 X 12V 100Ah(C20) lead pack.
>
>My first question is; Do the 30 individual cells in a parallel
>grouping need individual attention or can I treat them as one because
>they are in parallel with each other? In other words, when charging
>"all" that I need to do is make sure each group of 30 cells reaches
>3.6V but no more?
>
>Sorry if you've answered this question before but I haven't managed to
>stumble across it in the archives.
>
>Thanks for your time and thank-you to all the other outstanding
>participants in the wonderful EVlist community.
>
>Shaun Williams.
>
>www.electric-echo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually Joseph it depends on what you want to do.
You said designing cars. I can take a stab at that. Any school that
teaches "Industrial Design" would be the place to start. "Industrial
Design" with a focus on "Automotive Design" is where I would look to
first if you actually want to design cars.
There is a group of accredited Design schools around the nation. Art
Center College of Design in Pasadena is probably the school that puts
out the most in terms of automotive designers. Alot of the car
companies also have design centers in Pasadena, including Toyota and GM.
There is also Detroit's College for Creative Studies. Both Detroit
and Pasadena are top design schools. I'm not exactly sure what the
entry requirements are now. I had to have a portfolio review to get
into design school. At the time SATs were just a formality (thank
goodness). But it was the portfolio review that was important. So if
you want to get into a design school start drawing now.
That's if you want to design cars. There is also the Engineering
track. Find a school with a solid Mechanical and/or Automotive
Engineering design program that also is a partner with the Society of
Automotive Engineers. Also find a college that has a racing program.
That looks good on a resume and provides real-world experience.
Either of those tracks will point you in the right direction. We also
can't forget Marketing and Electrical Engineering as well.
Chip Gribben
NEDRA
On Jun 26, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Electric Vehicle Discussion List wrote:
From: "Joseph T. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: June 26, 2007 3:01:27 PM EDT
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Chances of working for an Auto Company
What do you guys think are the chances of working for an Auto Company?
(you know, designing cars and stuff)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Too messy to paint with spray.
Just about $20 (~ 2L, ~0.5 gal) of Rustoleum or $80 of Interlux
Brightside for a bit better gloss. Check out
http://www.electric-lemon.com/?q=node/174
Brian
On 6/26/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why not just spray it yourself? It'll cost about $150, but you can get a
decent paint job at home.
BTW, I'd be interested where you'd get enough paint for $100. House paint,
right?
On Thu, June 21, 2007 8:32 am, Brian Pikkula wrote:
> Since the majority of our EVs are > 10 years old, the paint on them
> isn't like it used to be. However, I have a hard time justifying spending
> $2k for something that will not propel my EV.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Of course, being able to slip the clutch seems like it would have help a lot
in reverse.
damon
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Clutchless Shift [was EVgrin - RAVolt takes first EV trip]
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:59:31 -0400
Joseph.
How long does it take you to "clutchlessly shift" compared to when you
shifted with the clutch?
I'm just starting out and taking it slow. It was about 2 seconds, but
could have pushed it harder. It really just dropped into gear - no
worries about reving the motor and no lurching. The shift was smoother
than my ICE shifting.
Rob
RAVolt.com
_________________________________________________________________
Get a preview of Live Earth, the hottest event this summer - only on MSN
http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthhm
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
Eventually, in a year or two, I hope we can offer a fairly complete
kit; you provide the donor car, buy the motor, batteries, and
controller of your choice, and bolt it all together!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The donor car will provide what? Brakes, suspension, steering? Frame? I
guess I missed something.
The donor car has subframes for the entire front and rear suspension.
You unbolt them from the donor. The front subframe, with wheels, brakes,
steering, suspension, etc. is all used as-is. The only change is to
replace the stock coil spring and antisway bar with softer ones because
the Sunrise is so much lighter. We'll also add an air bag for adjustment
(since the weight depends so heavily on the battery pack each builder
chooses).
The rear subframe likewise provides the wheels, brakes, independent
suspension, and differential. We are replacing the subframe itself with
a custom built one, because we are narrowing the rear track by 10",
flipping the differential upside down, and adding the motor mounting
plate and coupler. Again, we'll use lighter springs and antisway bar,
with air bags to allow adjustment.
The donor car also provides a number of other miscellaneous parts. For
example, we are using the entire door mechanism to avoid "kit car door"
syndrome (kit cars usually have doors that rattle, leak, and in general
work poorly).
--
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 ---
Dale Ulan wrote:
one thing has me puzzled... your comments on PWM being faster to
generate a sine wave, if you are using the commutating power stages
to also do current control.
In a typical 3-phase AC controller, the 6 power switches are all being
switched at high frequency to synthesize the 3-phase sinewaves. It's
like having six DC motor PWM controllers.
You're correct that at any given time, only 3 of these 6 PWMs are in
operation. For example, if at one point in the low-frequency AC cycle
you want current to flow in phase A and out phases B and C, then the
upper transistor and lower diode of phase A, and the lower transistors
and upper diodes of phases B and C are carrying the current. These
transistors are cycled on/off at the high switching frequency to create
the desired current in each AC motor phase wire.
Roughly half the heat in your transistors is produced by switching
losses. So, by running your switches at a high switching frequency, you
double losses in the controller.
Older inverters, or modern high-power inverters tend to use much lower
switching frequencies. Instead of sinewaves, they synthesize square
waves, or more commonly, the 2-step waveform (0v, +v, +2v +v, 0v, -v,
-2v, -v, 0v...) This lets them increase inverter efficiency and get
about twice the power out of the same number of transistors. The
tradeoff is that it lowers motor efficiency, unless you redesign the
motor to work with this waveform.
Now look at how a brushed DC motor does it. Let's assume a 2-pole motor
with a dozen commutator bars and armature coils. The commutator forms a
2-pole 12-position switch. Doing this with transistors requires 24
transistors. 12 connect each "bar" to the positive supply, and 12
connect each "bar" to the negative supply. It looks just like a 12-phase
AC motor and inverter!
In operation, only two of these switches are on at any given time (one
to +, one to -). Each switch only operates once per revolution, so its
switching frequency is very low (60 Hz if the motor is rotating at 3600
rpm. So, switching losses are very low.
Also note that as the motor turns, the induced voltage in each of those
12 coils changes in a sinusoidal fashion. At the instant you want to
turn off the last switch and turn on the next one, it just so happens
that the voltage across the coil between them is zero. Thus, your
switches automatically turn on and off at full current, but with *zero
volts across them! This is the trick that lets that crude old mechanical
switch commutator last so long. It also works here to allow cheap slow
solid state switches to be used.
The drawback is, of course, that you need 24 transistors able to carry
the full motor current. If your switches are cheap enough, it works. But
when you have to pay a fortune per switch, this approach costs more.
If my understanding is correct, then, if you are running a 36-slot,
18-phase, 2-pole, square wave commutation, then you have six phase
coil pairs energized at any time and just rotate those around, right?
That is one approach. The DC motor approach powers *all* coils all the
time, but arranges these coils physically so their magnetic fields add
up vectorially to make sinewaves.
But the real key to all this is that there are *many* solutions to the
problem of how many coils to have, when to power them, and what
waveforms to produce in them. Since both extremes are in use (pure
sinewaves vs pure square waves, only one coil at peak vs all coils
always powered), and both produce workable motors of about the same
performance, it stands to reason that there are lots of other workable
strategies in between these two extremes. This is the area where some of
the oddball motor designers are playing.
Also, would the harmonics of square-wave commutation cancel enough
in an ACIM rotor or would that become a power-loss issue?
That's another issue! Some harmonics produce positive torque; some
produce negative torque, and some just waste energy or cause acoustic noise.
In general, you shape your magnetics and arrange your coils so they just
happen to generate a waveform (if the motor is used as a generator) that
matches the waveform that your inverter produces. Then when you drive it
as a motor with that inverter, you have minimized the power lost to
useless harmonics.
--
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 can also use the VIN of the donor car to avoid DMV hassles.
damon
From: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: regarding the Solectria Sunrise
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:27:56 -0500
Lee Hart wrote:
Eventually, in a year or two, I hope we can offer a fairly complete
kit; you provide the donor car, buy the motor, batteries, and
controller of your choice, and bolt it all together!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The donor car will provide what? Brakes, suspension, steering? Frame? I
guess I missed something.
The donor car has subframes for the entire front and rear suspension. You
unbolt them from the donor. The front subframe, with wheels, brakes,
steering, suspension, etc. is all used as-is. The only change is to replace
the stock coil spring and antisway bar with softer ones because the Sunrise
is so much lighter. We'll also add an air bag for adjustment (since the
weight depends so heavily on the battery pack each builder chooses).
The rear subframe likewise provides the wheels, brakes, independent
suspension, and differential. We are replacing the subframe itself with a
custom built one, because we are narrowing the rear track by 10", flipping
the differential upside down, and adding the motor mounting plate and
coupler. Again, we'll use lighter springs and antisway bar, with air bags
to allow adjustment.
The donor car also provides a number of other miscellaneous parts. For
example, we are using the entire door mechanism to avoid "kit car door"
syndrome (kit cars usually have doors that rattle, leak, and in general
work poorly).
--
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
_________________________________________________________________
Get a preview of Live Earth, the hottest event this summer - only on MSN
http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthhm
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Speaking of my experience with Colorado and a kit trailer I assembled
(Harbor Freight), when I went to register it and get tags, they didn't
want the VIN supplied by the chinese manufacturer since it was a KIT -
so they issued me sticker with a state issued VIN and requested/required
that I remove the original VIN from the trailer. Sounds really silly in
my opinion, but that is the way it happened here.
So for Colorado, I would say that a kit vehicle would get a different
VIN rather than the underlying vehicle VIN.
john
damon henry wrote:
I wonder if you can also use the VIN of the donor car to avoid DMV
hassles.
damon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dan Frederiksen wrote:
is either of those super expensive in your opinion and if so which and
how much?
I don't consider the design a cost since that's a one off so don't
mention that
It has to be considered because it is *major* expense which has to be
spread and amortized over units to be sold. NOt millions as you might
think, at best thousands because this is the life of the product unless
it goes mainstream GM way (every person has to have an EV with that unit)
A company I work with has developed power inverter we will offer for
sale to individuals. The components cost may be half of what the
customer's price is. Few [outside motion control pro company] engineers
worked on the software for months and it cost may be half a mil Euro to
pay them. You cannot ignore that cost as one-time expense as if it does
not exist just because it's one time one. If I find a half-mil Euro
laying on a freeway, I'd pick it up and hired the same motion control
company to develop inverter for me - that's the only way to get it to
you as a customer. But normally money are not laying around like that,
and [normally] company
either use personal/invertors resources or borrows from banks; in any
case they have to pay back. After they're done paying, sure the cost of
the product is only ongoing components cost and labor to put them
together, but chances are by then this product is obsolete. There are
ways to predict how aggressively you have to amortize to pay back
development expenses (with interest!) before no one will buy
the product anymore.
To let you know, major cost of Siemens inverters I have is their
software development share, and software, once developed for one unit,
cost nothing to replicate for many. Still, like I said that "one time"
expense is a major portion of the price customer will pay for years to
come, keeping company (Siemens in this case) income allowing them to
develop next version. Pay back can be much more than
spent amount if the product is very successful, good for them if that
happens.
I just finished developing EVision. I'm a hardware engineer and my
time to design and construct it is "free", but I paid about $30k (so
far) to the software developer. Do you think I should just forget about
this one time expense out of my own pocket and charge only for the
parts/assembly labor cost? May be this business model will work for you,
it doesn't for me, so you *will* pay software development share cost
(and my time share) if you want my product. Else - forget it, it's like
asking to develop something for free.
So life is not fair and if you want a product, you pay what manufacturer
thinks it worth, not what you think it should worth; else you don't
get it. Simple as that. One time expense should be tucked in it or not,
is not for a customer to decide.
When you will manufacture something, then welcome to charge as much
as you think it worth so another Dan may start complaining it cost too
much. Until then - it's wasting bandwidth.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dan Frederiksen wrote:
Cory Cross wrote:
Want to pay my design costs then?
I was counting on a few good people offering a bit of their time to help
save the world. I will be one. you might not be
I, too, was counting on a few good people at my mortgage company to
allow me to skip couple of monthly payments while I'm contributing to
saving the world. So far no luck, they say good intentions don't
pay bills.
If you hear of any charity mortgage companies, I'd like to learn more.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dan Frederiksen wrote:
is either of those super expensive in your opinion and if so which and
how much?
I don't consider the design a cost since that's a one off so don't
mention that
It has to be considered because it is *major* expense which has to be
spread and amortized over units to be sold. Not millions as you might
think, at best thousands because this is the life of the product unless
it goes mainstream GM way (every person has to have an EV with that
unit) is relatively short.
My European partner company I work with has developed power inverter we
will offer for sale to individuals. The components cost may be half of
what the customer's price is. Few [outside motion control pro company]
engineers worked on the software for months and it cost may be half a
mil Euro to pay them, I'm not sure. You cannot ignore that cost as
one-time expense as if it does not exist just because it's one time one.
If I find a half-mil Euro
laying on a freeway, I'd pick it up and hired the same motion control
company to develop inverter for me - that's the only way to get it to
you as a customer. But normally money are not laying around like that,
and [normally] company
either use personal/invertors resources or borrows from banks; in any
case they have to pay back. After they're done paying, sure the cost of
the product is only ongoing components cost and labor to put them
together, but chances are by then this product is obsolete. There are
ways to predict how aggressively you have to amortize to pay back
development expenses (with interest!) before no one will buy
the product anymore.
To let you know, major cost of Siemens inverters I have is their
software development share, and software, once developed for one unit,
cost nothing to replicate for many. Still, like I said that "one time"
expense is a major portion of the price customer will pay for years to
come, keeping company (Siemens in this case) income allowing them to
develop next version. Pay back can be much more than
spent amount if the product is very successful, good for them if that
happens.
I just finished developing EVision. I'm a hardware engineer and my
time to design and construct it is "free", but I paid about $30k (so
far) to the software developer. Do you think I should just forget about
this one time expense out of my own pocket and charge only for the
parts/assembly labor cost? May be this business model will work for you,
it doesn't for me, so you *will* pay software development share cost
(and my time share) if you want my product. Else - forget it, it's like
asking to develop something for free.
So life is not fair and if you want a product, you pay what manufacturer
thinks it worth, not what you think it should worth; else you don't
get it. Simple as that. One time expense should be tucked in it or not,
is not for a customer to decide.
When you will manufacture something, then welcome to charge as much
as you think it worth so another Dan may start complaining it cost too
much. Until then - it's wasting bandwidth.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tehben,
Count for 4-5 miles range per each 1 kWh on board of good tuned EV.
That will give you idea of the pack size people use based on their
range, with some reserve.
For instance if you want to have 40 miles range you will spend
40/4=10kWh normally or 40/5=8kWh good case, so if you want reserve
for 50% DOD, your pack has to be 20kWh or 16kWh respectively.
Victor
--
'91 ACRX - something different
Tehben Dean wrote:
I know higher voltage less capacity and vise versa, but wondered are
there some general kWh sizes that are used for different types of EVs
e.g. pickups etc.?
Or is it get as much as you can fit in without grossly over weighting
the vehicle? :)
(this is assuming Lead batt's)
TEhben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tehben,
My controller has a max current output of 400amps (I will be useing a
300volt pack) would the Deka Dominator gel marine batteries be
suitable?
Thanks,
TEhben
Your inverter has 400A *rms peak* per phase output (motor) current.
The battery input limit for the inverter is 280A, you will never draw
more than that. In fact you will be hard pressed to see much more than
200A battery current. Dekas are perfectly fine battery for you.
Don Cameron has good discussion on it:
http://www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/Welcome.html
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Some large format batteries (like TS) are in fact individual
cells paralleled inside common enclosure. Any of those can
internally to the battery get shorted and others discharge into it
all inside. There are no fuses in this particular battery (TS),
may be it should have them.
If you assemble the pack using small series-parallel interconnected
cells (A123, 18650 or such) and use fuse in series with each individual
cell a parallel building block is assembled from, make sure that you
have means to detect a blown fuse(s) condition. Else fewer sells will
get bigger the same share of the same total current and 1-2 "off-line"
ones may go unnoticed imbalancing the pack quickly.
Mechanically make sure it is easy to replace any cell within such a
block. ACP had 68 18650's between two "grids" and it would be tough
to replace any one which is not in the most outer (peripheral) row
around the block.
Victor
Lee Hart wrote:
Shaun Williams wrote:
In rough dimensions I'd probably have approximately 40 groups in
series, with 30 paralleled cells in each group, to replace my
current 12 X 12V 100Ah(C20) lead pack.
My first question is; Do the 30 individual cells in a parallel
grouping need individual attention or can I treat them as one
because they are in parallel with each other?
My view is that you're taking chances by simply paralleling so many cells. If
one shorts, the other 29 in parallel will dump all their energy into it. This
is the first step in a disasterous chain reaction.
At the very least, I think you need a fuse in series with each cell. It will
blow if that cell sees excessive current. If you make it a thermal fuse that
will open if the cell temperature exceeds X degrees, it will also disconnect
the cell if it ever overheats.
--
I would not waste my life in friction when it could be turned into momentum. --
Frances Willard
--
Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There are situations where design costs are negligible, like on toasters and
hard drives. Both cost about the same (I think someone else mentioned this in
the list before). They both have the same materials costs. The reason the hard
drive can be so cheap is that it's design has been amortized by millions of
units sold. That's the only time you can "ignore" design costs, if something is
mass produced.
If you look at high end audio (not Sony, but Cary, Audio Note, etc), the costs
of the amplifiers, pre-amps, etc, are many many times the materials cost, since
they only sell hundreds, sometimes even double digits of a design.
- Tony
----- Original Message ----
From: Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:40:06 PM
Subject: Re: Make it
Dan Frederiksen wrote:
> is either of those super expensive in your opinion and if so which and
> how much?
> I don't consider the design a cost since that's a one off so don't
> mention that
It has to be considered because it is *major* expense which has to be
spread and amortized over units to be sold. Not millions as you might
think, at best thousands because this is the life of the product unless
it goes mainstream GM way (every person has to have an EV with that
unit) is relatively short.
My European partner company I work with has developed power inverter we
will offer for sale to individuals. The components cost may be half of
what the customer's price is. Few [outside motion control pro company]
engineers worked on the software for months and it cost may be half a
mil Euro to pay them, I'm not sure. You cannot ignore that cost as
one-time expense as if it does not exist just because it's one time one.
If I find a half-mil Euro
laying on a freeway, I'd pick it up and hired the same motion control
company to develop inverter for me - that's the only way to get it to
you as a customer. But normally money are not laying around like that,
and [normally] company
either use personal/invertors resources or borrows from banks; in any
case they have to pay back. After they're done paying, sure the cost of
the product is only ongoing components cost and labor to put them
together, but chances are by then this product is obsolete. There are
ways to predict how aggressively you have to amortize to pay back
development expenses (with interest!) before no one will buy
the product anymore.
To let you know, major cost of Siemens inverters I have is their
software development share, and software, once developed for one unit,
cost nothing to replicate for many. Still, like I said that "one time"
expense is a major portion of the price customer will pay for years to
come, keeping company (Siemens in this case) income allowing them to
develop next version. Pay back can be much more than
spent amount if the product is very successful, good for them if that
happens.
I just finished developing EVision. I'm a hardware engineer and my
time to design and construct it is "free", but I paid about $30k (so
far) to the software developer. Do you think I should just forget about
this one time expense out of my own pocket and charge only for the
parts/assembly labor cost? May be this business model will work for you,
it doesn't for me, so you *will* pay software development share cost
(and my time share) if you want my product. Else - forget it, it's like
asking to develop something for free.
So life is not fair and if you want a product, you pay what manufacturer
thinks it worth, not what you think it should worth; else you don't
get it. Simple as that. One time expense should be tucked in it or not,
is not for a customer to decide.
When you will manufacture something, then welcome to charge as much
as you think it worth so another Dan may start complaining it cost too
much. Until then - it's wasting bandwidth.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hmm...If I want a 24 volt pack of A123's (for a little scooter) what
would happen since 24 volts would be 6.6 batteries? It's okay to just
have 7 or 8 batteries and then it just wouldn't be fully charged,
which I believe is good for these types of batteries.
How much would 8 cells cost?
On 6/27/07, Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unless you are talking about 100,000 cells, you don't have much hope
of getting a discount. These are very popular cells.
In nutshell, these cells are not going to be inexpensive in
the near term.
The BMS is the hard part. Someone must make one that will
work for the home EVer market. No one has.
Bill Dube'
>I'm very excited about the potential for A123 batteries to change the
>automotive industry, particularly with PHEVs initially. They appear to
>be a very "switched on" company, backed up by a superb product.
>
>The RC guys (oh, for a "cheap" hobby!) seem to have done a lot of
>excellent real-world testing of the M1 cells at the micro level and
>are very pleased with the results, particularly when compared with
>other's like Kokam etc. and that's good enough for me.
>
>There are two hurdles that I see obstructing my investment in them however.
> 1. Upfront Cost.
> 2. BMS.
>
>I've had a quote from A123 Systems for 1500 of the M1 cells and their
>price was competitive with other Li when life-cycle is considered
>(10,000 cycles to 50% is awesome), however I'd hope that a "group
>purchase" might bring this price down closer to what I can
>realistically afford upfront. I'm not asking for you to comment on
>this because I know it's not your area.
>
>So, on the BMS issue;
>In rough dimensions I'd probably have approximately 40 groups in
>series, with 30 paralleled cells in each group, to replace my current
>12 X 12V 100Ah(C20) lead pack.
>
>My first question is; Do the 30 individual cells in a parallel
>grouping need individual attention or can I treat them as one because
>they are in parallel with each other? In other words, when charging
>"all" that I need to do is make sure each group of 30 cells reaches
>3.6V but no more?
>
>Sorry if you've answered this question before but I haven't managed to
>stumble across it in the archives.
>
>Thanks for your time and thank-you to all the other outstanding
>participants in the wonderful EVlist community.
>
>Shaun Williams.
>
>www.electric-echo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why not just buy a 36 volt Dewalt tool battery for your scooter. You can
get the battery and charger for around $200 which is less then anyplace you
try to buy individual cells. Just realize that these cells are less than 3
ahr each, so will provide limited range, probably less than the batteries
which originally came with the scooter.
damon
From: "Joseph T. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Cheap "balancer" for A123 pack
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:36:02 -0400
Hmm...If I want a 24 volt pack of A123's (for a little scooter) what
would happen since 24 volts would be 6.6 batteries? It's okay to just
have 7 or 8 batteries and then it just wouldn't be fully charged,
which I believe is good for these types of batteries.
How much would 8 cells cost?
On 6/27/07, Bill Dube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unless you are talking about 100,000 cells, you don't have much hope
of getting a discount. These are very popular cells.
In nutshell, these cells are not going to be inexpensive in
the near term.
The BMS is the hard part. Someone must make one that will
work for the home EVer market. No one has.
Bill Dube'
>I'm very excited about the potential for A123 batteries to change the
>automotive industry, particularly with PHEVs initially. They appear to
>be a very "switched on" company, backed up by a superb product.
>
>The RC guys (oh, for a "cheap" hobby!) seem to have done a lot of
>excellent real-world testing of the M1 cells at the micro level and
>are very pleased with the results, particularly when compared with
>other's like Kokam etc. and that's good enough for me.
>
>There are two hurdles that I see obstructing my investment in them
however.
> 1. Upfront Cost.
> 2. BMS.
>
>I've had a quote from A123 Systems for 1500 of the M1 cells and their
>price was competitive with other Li when life-cycle is considered
>(10,000 cycles to 50% is awesome), however I'd hope that a "group
>purchase" might bring this price down closer to what I can
>realistically afford upfront. I'm not asking for you to comment on
>this because I know it's not your area.
>
>So, on the BMS issue;
>In rough dimensions I'd probably have approximately 40 groups in
>series, with 30 paralleled cells in each group, to replace my current
>12 X 12V 100Ah(C20) lead pack.
>
>My first question is; Do the 30 individual cells in a parallel
>grouping need individual attention or can I treat them as one because
>they are in parallel with each other? In other words, when charging
>"all" that I need to do is make sure each group of 30 cells reaches
>3.6V but no more?
>
>Sorry if you've answered this question before but I haven't managed to
>stumble across it in the archives.
>
>Thanks for your time and thank-you to all the other outstanding
>participants in the wonderful EVlist community.
>
>Shaun Williams.
>
>www.electric-echo.com
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507
--- End Message ---
