EV Digest 2548
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Preliminary BB600 Report
by Edward Ang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
by "James Jarrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
by "amadare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Fair Radio Charger ammeter replacement?
by "Grannes, Dean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Aquarium Chillers
by "Richard Furniss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Truck (im)possibility
by "Andre Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) RE: Truck (im)possibility
by John Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) ER1 driver loves BEVs. Maybe the ZAP electric is for real.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: ZAP battery press release
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Truck (im)possibility
by "Andre Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: EV talk/lawn mowers (battery electric landscaping)
by "Tim Clevenger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: New AC motors and inverters (was newbie EV questions)
by Chris Weaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: Baby Optima YT's
by "George Tylinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Truck (im)possibility
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: With Friends Like These. . .
by "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Clean Renewable Electricity
by Edward Ang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) LiIon source (was: (ZAP car: 240 miles...)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: LiIon source (was: (ZAP car: 240 miles...)
by Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Truck (im)possibility
by "Kevin Coughlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: With Friends Like These. . .
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) RE: With Friends Like These. . .
by "Steve" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Preliminary BB600 Report
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Preliminary BB600 Report
It has been more than 3000 miles on the BB600 NiCads.
I learned a lot from them. First and most important:
Voltage Does Not Tell You SOC. Second, Memory Effect.
Third, they are tough to break.
I was using a Zivan K2 charger to charge them. It was
terrible to set up because NiCads like to be charged
at constant current. Because of this, I did not fully
recharge them and badly discharged them in a few
instances causing some to spew electrolyte from the
caps. Also, when trying to adjust the charging curve,
the K2 malfunctioned and did not shut off for the
entire night. This caused a few cells to dry out and
caused one cell to melt the casing slightly during the
next drive. It was problematic and I decided to stop
driving it until I get myself a more controllable
charger, the PFC-20.
Also, I was seeing the famous memory effect � voltage
drops sharply after a certain point. This combined
with incorrect charging made the situation hard to
swallow. I was getting frustrated and decided to take
a break.
6 months later �
After getting my PFC-20 charger, I started
experimenting again. I thought I have damaged some
cells because I was only getting about 8Ah out of them
even after a full night of charging at slow 2A rate.
(I left them disconnected but at partially discharged
state for 6 months.) Voltage raised above 1.64V per
cell while charging. I decided to discharge them
slowly and making sure I did not go below .9V per
cell. Amazingly, after 3 deep discharges, they were
up to 25Ah!
After they hit the memory effect, voltage dropped
sharply, but at slower discharge rate (about 25A),
they could still sustain above .9V per cell. However,
at this point, they are basically useless for an EV
because you could hardly go 25mph before pulling them
below .9V.
However, after the memory was �erased�, they maintain
a high voltage even at high discharge rate of about
100-150A. Also, the charging voltage decreased after
the memory was �erased�. At the same 2A charging
rate, I could only get to 1.6V per cell. This may
also be related to temperature, however.
Now, my range is 20 miles at 80% DOD or -25Ah on a
30Ah pack. Next is to figure out how to set the
PFC-20 to stop charging. The battery spec says to
stop charging after putting back 130-140%. I think it
is time to modify my Pocket E-meter to control the
charging cycle. ;)
More to come later.
Ed Ang
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That Sounds like the KAZ not the zap.
http://www.gaura.com/ev/kaz/index_e.html
James F. Jarrett
Information Systems Associate
Charlotte Country Day School
(704)943-4562
Programs: What software used to be, back when we knew how to write it.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of amadare
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
If it is the car they had at the Detroit auto show (in the lower level
vendor area) the thing was huge front to back, almost like a limo. It
could have been carrying a bunch of batteries. It was pretty
aerodynamic looking and the *fact sheet* listed it as the fastest and
longest range EV (hoping i remembered that correctly.) Anybody else at
the auto show go downstairs and see this ?
Bobby
(future ev'er)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Roden
> (Akron OH USA)
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
>
>
> On 21 Jan 2003 at 1:59, Chuck Hursch wrote:
>
> > 24kWh to go this
> > 240 miles
>
> That'd be a pretty efficient EV. My Solectria is about as
> good a watt-
> sipper as you're likely to find, and it uses 150-200 Wh/mile
> at around 45
> mph with careful driving. To go 240 miles on a charge, I'd
> need 36kWh, and
> that wouldn't be at any 70mph. At that speed figure at least
> twice that
> number.
>
> Still, Solectria managed range like this with the Sunrise.
> Anyone know how
> much NiMH capacity they carried onboard?
>
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on
> vacation, or
> switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> 1991 Solectria Force 144vac
> 1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
> 1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
> 1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send
> this to all
> thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I
> smite thee.
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
yeah i was starting to wonder when i couldn't find anything on zaps
site.. sorry for the (mis)information.
Bobby
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of James Jarrett
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:29 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
>
>
> That Sounds like the KAZ not the zap.
>
> http://www.gaura.com/ev/kaz/index_e.html
>
> James F. Jarrett
> Information Systems Associate
> Charlotte Country Day School
> (704)943-4562
>
> Programs: What software used to be, back when we knew how to write it.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of amadare
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:44 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
>
>
> If it is the car they had at the Detroit auto show (in the lower level
> vendor area) the thing was huge front to back, almost like a limo. It
> could have been carrying a bunch of batteries. It was pretty
> aerodynamic looking and the *fact sheet* listed it as the fastest and
> longest range EV (hoping i remembered that correctly.)
> Anybody else at
> the auto show go downstairs and see this ?
>
> Bobby
> (future ev'er)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Roden
> > (Akron OH USA)
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:35 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
> >
> >
> > On 21 Jan 2003 at 1:59, Chuck Hursch wrote:
> >
> > > 24kWh to go this
> > > 240 miles
> >
> > That'd be a pretty efficient EV. My Solectria is about as
> > good a watt-
> > sipper as you're likely to find, and it uses 150-200 Wh/mile
> > at around 45
> > mph with careful driving. To go 240 miles on a charge, I'd
> > need 36kWh, and
> > that wouldn't be at any 70mph. At that speed figure at least
> > twice that
> > number.
> >
> > Still, Solectria managed range like this with the Sunrise.
> > Anyone know how
> > much NiMH capacity they carried onboard?
> >
> >
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> = = = = =
> > Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on
> > vacation, or
> > switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> = = = = =
> > David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> > 1991 Solectria Force 144vac
> > 1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
> > 1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
> > 1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> = = = = =
> > Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send
> > this to all
> > thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I
> > smite thee.
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> = = = = =
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Folks,
As you may recall, about a month ago, I sent email to the list asking
about the ammeter on the Fair Radio charger. I got several responses,
including a few who offered me their ammeters from their (no longer
working) Fair Radio chargers. I decided to follow perhaps the simplest
advice and take the meter apart and see if there's something obviously
wrong with it (like a broken solder connection).
Last night I pulled the ammeter out of the charger, ignored the warning
imprinted on the meter "SEALED--DO NOT OPEN", and took the meter apart.
Dozens of tiny little screws later, I had gotten down to the problem
part--a resistor (the shunt) which once had been green and was now
black. There was once writing on the resistor, but that is now
illegibly charred.
Okay, so the meter goes to 20A and says 50mV full scale, so R=V/I which
means 50mV/20A = 2.5milliohms. Is that right? I don't have a good feel
for these things, but would have thought that the connecting wire and
solder connections would be on about that order. Can one go out and get
a 2.5 milliohm resistor? I'm heading out to the electronic surplus
store later today, and thought I'd check, but just wanted to bounce this
off the list and see if that's indeed what I'm looking for. Any
comments or advice would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Dean
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Mitchell,
I'm in the same boat as you are, Las Vegas heat, I don't mind the heat
but the battery's hate it, I have been working on a similar system as you, I
am going to use a 3/8 plywood under the battery's and router it to accept
1/4 inch copper tubing and have the copper tubing stick up just a little bit
above the wood for good contact, just like you I am going to start in the
center of the battery's and move out to the outside for the cooling pattern
and then reverse the water flow for heating in the winter where the outside
battery's will get the heat first and then the water moves to the center.
The only difference is that as my car is a work commuter vehicle it gets
parked in the same spot every night, I am going to use a freon chiller
system with self sealing quick disconnect couplers, and as you and Lee has
mentioned that with it's large thermal mass the cooler might not have to be
run every night, but the "Aquarium Chillers" sounds like a good possibility,
thanks for the link.
I have not tried (on my car) to cool my battery's with forced air on the
battery's, but two other EV people here has, the fan netted about 110 to 120
degrees, running water over the battery's got about the same results, last
summer they parked the car in the garage and had the swamp cooler blowing on
it and used the car every other day to keep the battery's at 100 degrees
average. The charger could be part of the problem, its a Lester and they
tend to equalize the hell out of the battery's, I'm thinking battery regs
would be a good idea to help hold down the heat using a Lester charger.
What do you think, regs, to hold down the heat good idea or bad.
www.lasvegasev.com
Richard Furniss
Las Vegas, NV
1986 Mazda EX-7 192v
1981 Lectra Centauri 108v
3 Wheel Trail Master 12v
Board Member, www.lveva.org
Las Vegas Electric Vehicle Association
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mitchell Oates" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: Aquarium Chillers
> On 15 Jan 2003, at 16:22, Thomas Shay wrote:
>
> > Maybe it would just be easier to minimze battery heating.
> > Remove any insulation and allow for good air circulation around each
> > battery. Arrrange for motion of the truck to move air past the
batteries.
> > Park the truck in the shade. Give the truck an occasional day off when
> > the weather is hotter than usual.
> >
> Tried all of the above, including a white tonneau cover over the
> bed for when it's parked in the sun at work. But when normal
> ambient is running close to 35 C, and you have 24 batteries in the
> rear box ( read significant thermal mass ), you're spending more
> time with the truck parked than running for at least 4 months of the
> year in this area.
> Lee Hart has posted before how consistent elevated temps can
> shorten the life of batteries. For flooded golf cart batteries, it's more
> a matter of extending the life of the pack. For those looking at
> using Ni-Zn batteries, with the added cost and the 30 C temp limit
> on charging (unless something has changed in the past year),
> temp control definitely becomes a high priority matter.
> For lead acid batteries, we're not talking high tech here, just
> simple heat transfer and fluid flow. With the insulation inside the
> rear box, it only takes 90 watts of heat to maintain those 24
> batteries at 25 C when ambient temps are close to or below 0 C - a
> 25 C delta T. For cooling, again maintaining their temp at 25 C,
> we're talking a 10 C delta T or less. The same idea as your
> refrigerator or freezer - use insulation to keep heat out and
> minimize run time necessary to maintain temp, and allow you to
> get by with a smaller heat transfer system than would be
> necessary without the insulation.
> Also, with 24 batteries you have a lot of thermal mass. Once
> down to the correct temp, they'll be able to absorb a lot of heat
> without a significant temp rise. Same idea as your freezer, when
> they advise you to keep it as full as possible to minimize energy
> useage. Once frozen, the thermal mass of the food will help
> maintain temperature.
> I envisage the system as being plugged in and operating for the
> 14 hours that the truck would be idle overnight. Instead of a brute
> force high capacity cooling system designed to remove as much
> heat as possible in as short a period as possible, a lower capacity
> and lower power draw system that will operate over a long period at
> night and early morning when ambient temps are lowest.
> For cooling the batteries, two loops of either copper tube or 3/8"
> ID tygon inside 1/2" C channel aluminum rail in the bottom of the
> box, with a metal plate on top to maximize heat transfer area. The
> loops would initially run down the center of the box, the coldest
> water thus going to the center of the box and area of highest heat,
> and then loop out to the outside areas of the box before exiting.
> I'm leaning toward copper tube, as there's one less transition for
> heat transfer to occur over. Instead of battery/plate/rail/plastic
> tube/water, you would have battery/plate/copper tube/water. Also, if
> I remember correctly, metal will conduct heat better than soft
> plastic.
> As far as the heat removal part of the system, it could be as
> low tech as a small pump and an ice chest that you could dump a
> couple bags of ice in, if that proves sufficient to remove the
> necessary amount of heat. It would also be easily removeable
> during the winter months. On the down side, from trying this route
> with the Icester for air conditioning, it does get tiresome having to
> daily drain and refill the ice chest and ensuring an adequate supply
> of ice.
> Another option would be to combine the ice chest with several
> of the Cool Works IceProbes. You would already be starting with
> an insulated tank, and the feature of having the cold side of the
> probe in direct contact with the water would seem to promise more
> efficient heat transfer. If thru additional driving other than your
> normal commute, heat is being added faster than the system's
> ability to remove it, you would have the option as above of adding a
> couple bags of ice to the chest to boost heat removal. Additionally,
> since the Iceprobe runs off of 12 or 24 V DC, they could be
> configured so that the system runs 24/7.
> With any of the larger in-line or remote coil thermoelectric or
> freon chillers, the system starts getting more complex and taking
> up more space, along with more expensive and being limited to AC
> plug-in-at-home operation. You'd still need an insulated tank and
> circulation pump for the battery box coils. Given the recommended
> flow rates for some of these larger chillers ( 8 gpm and up ), you
> might also need a separate circulation pump and tubing from the
> chiller to the tank to ensure proper operation.
>
> Mitch Oates
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have pulled a 5000lb. trailer with a 3/4 ton pickup up over mountains and
I would not want to do it without engine/compression braking. Normal brakes
are good for bringing a vehicle to a stop but they are not intended too be
used for extended periods of time to control the vehicle speed.
Now and electric would not likely be used for pulling a heavy load over
mountains but you may have to go down a large hill from time to time and it
is nice to have more then one means of keeping the speed down.
Andre' B. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If something cannot be defined, it does not exist.
Isaac Newton
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of John Lussmyer
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Truck (im)possibility
At 09:56 AM 1/21/2003 -0500, Chris Tromley stated:
>I know very little about heavy-duty hauling. It seems to me, though,
>that regen would be very important in a heavy vehicle with no
>compression braking. It might be worth investigating whether operating
>a heavy truck without compression braking or regen is even legal. The
>laws requiring trucks to descend hills in gear are based on the
>supposition that compression braking is present.
Remember that we are talking about a pickup truck, which isn't "Heavy Duty
Hauling" by any means. 6,000 lb truck + 10,000 lb trailer isn't
much. It's a normal pickup truck duty. No air brakes or compression
brakes needed.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 01:10 PM 1/21/2003 -0600, Andre Blanchard stated:
I have pulled a 5000lb. trailer with a 3/4 ton pickup up over mountains and
I would not want to do it without engine/compression braking. Normal brakes
You DID have brakes on the trailer didn't you?
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is a snippet from EV world. It makes me believe ZAP isn't lying.
Lawrence Rhodes....
"I love those thins (BEVs)," he said. "We can get excellent range with our
battery cells." He confided that he and his partner L.G. Chem in Korea are
developing some very promising new cells. We asked him to speculate on what
kind of range might be possible in a small, family sedan like the Honda EV
Plus or the ATT R and D Parade. He responded that he had little doubt that
the new batteries currently being tested could give a Civic or Corolla-class
vehicle a range of between 250-300 miles.
Rivers estimates that because LG Chem is using lower cost materials than is
used in cellphone batteries, he believes that in mass production Compact
Power batteries could cost between $150 to $200 per kilowatt hour. A single
kilowatt is roughly equivalent to about 3 miles range in a modern EV. The
more kilowatt hours available on the vehicle, the further it can travel.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why would you want to go 300 miles in an NEV? Why bother? I would have a
hard time driving 25 miles in an NEV. I could see it if you brought the
pack down to a very small size reduced weight and made charging time faster.
Lawrence Rhodes.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce EVangel Parmenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: ZAP battery press release
> So,
>
> -is it firm that the ZAP EV has a Li-ion pack?
>
> -can people order these EVs 'now'?
>
> -Does this apply to the nEVs or the EV?
>
>
>
>
> =====
> ' ____
> ~/__|o\__
> '@----- @'---(=
> . http://geocities.com/brucedp/
> . EV List Editor & RE newswires
> . (originator of the above ASCII art)
> =====
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Are you talking about the Japanese EV? Lawrence Rhodes.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "amadare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 8:44 AM
Subject: RE: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
> If it is the car they had at the Detroit auto show (in the lower level
> vendor area) the thing was huge front to back, almost like a limo. It
> could have been carrying a bunch of batteries. It was pretty
> aerodynamic looking and the *fact sheet* listed it as the fastest and
> longest range EV (hoping i remembered that correctly.) Anybody else at
> the auto show go downstairs and see this ?
>
> Bobby
> (future ev'er)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Roden
> > (Akron OH USA)
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:35 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: EVLN(ZAP car: 240 miles on a single charge at 70 mph)
> >
> >
> > On 21 Jan 2003 at 1:59, Chuck Hursch wrote:
> >
> > > 24kWh to go this
> > > 240 miles
> >
> > That'd be a pretty efficient EV. My Solectria is about as
> > good a watt-
> > sipper as you're likely to find, and it uses 150-200 Wh/mile
> > at around 45
> > mph with careful driving. To go 240 miles on a charge, I'd
> > need 36kWh, and
> > that wouldn't be at any 70mph. At that speed figure at least
> > twice that
> > number.
> >
> > Still, Solectria managed range like this with the Sunrise.
> > Anyone know how
> > much NiMH capacity they carried onboard?
> >
> >
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> > Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on
> > vacation, or
> > switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> > David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> > 1991 Solectria Force 144vac
> > 1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
> > 1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
> > 1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> > Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send
> > this to all
> > thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I
> > smite thee.
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yep.
They even worked. Checked them before, during and after the trip.
Andre' B. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If something cannot be defined, it does not exist.
Isaac Newton
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of John Lussmyer
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 1:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Truck (im)possibility
At 01:10 PM 1/21/2003 -0600, Andre Blanchard stated:
>I have pulled a 5000lb. trailer with a 3/4 ton pickup up over mountains and
>I would not want to do it without engine/compression braking. Normal
brakes
You DID have brakes on the trailer didn't you?
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From�:� "Roy LeMeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> � To�:�
[EMAIL PROTECTED] �
Subject�:� Re: EV talk/lawn mowers (battery electric landscaping) �
Date�:� Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:08:28 -0800 �
<snip Roy's talk about an electric yard maintenance business, which my
Hotmail munsoned>
This sounds like a job for John's increasingly theoretical F250 conversion.
:-) Get a truck with enough range to haul a decent trailer (4,000 pounds.)
Build your mowers, weedeaters, etc. with a stack of three Evercells (or
other sealed batteries) strapped together. (Use smaller Evercells for
smaller devices, larger for larger devices.) Tie them together with a
quick-disconnect, and build your trailer with 2,000 pounds of batteries
underneath the bed, a PFC-20 (or 50), and 36V chargers to recharge sets of
batteries while you're working. If you have enough spares, you could even
quick-disconnect the batteries from the mower, drop them in the trailer,
hook them up to charge, unhook a freshly charged set, drop them on the
mower, and you're off.
You can charge the trailer anywhere, and if you need to go long distances,
you can hook the trailer up to an ICE pickup and still go battery-powered
anywhere. For jobs needing a chainsaw or other large tool, hook up straight
to the pack in the trailer and go corded.
I can think of many places that would pay more for "quiet" or
"non-foul-smelling" mowing/trimming, especially in your higher-dollar
neighborhoods where the homeowner's association picks up the tab for the
yardwork. (Yes, this has been bounding around in _my_ head for a long time,
too.) :-)
Tim
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Can anyone recommend any books for someone considering an AC system for a
conversion?
Thanks,
Chris
At 08:48 AM 1/19/2003 -0800, Paul G wrote:
Victor wrote:
Also, newer inverters (Simotion) are available too.
Smaller, smarter software, about the same power. These don't
have integrated DC-DC though. I'll update web site soon,
just heads up.
Interesting stuff you are looking at Victor. Anyway, this one part brought
one thought into my head. Why, other than smaller, would a person want the
newer "Simotion" inverter? Especially if the price is expected to be
slightly higher.
That stout built in DC>DC is one of the high points of your current
offerings (its not easy to find 50 amps or more of DC>DC at a reasonable
price).
Neon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The baby Optimas were for a GM hybrid program that was dropped and the
various suppliers were left holding the bags. 'Course, GM gets a lot of
R&D money from the gov't (PNGV etc.)... Money down a deep dark hole not
that you asked me...
- GT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter VanDerWal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 8:20 AM
> To: EV
> Subject: Re: Baby Optima YT's
>
>
> On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 08:33, James Jarrett wrote:
> > Does anyone out there have a source for Baby optima YT's?
> My boss saw
> > the picture of the one in The Blue Meanie and he wants to
> get one for
> > some custom work he is doing to his Miata. I can't seem to find
> > anyplace locally or on the web that sells them.
> >
>
> There is no source for Baby YTs.
>
> Optima developed them for a series of hybrid vehicle
> experiments (commissioned by the government IIRC). The only
> ones in existence are the few that survived those experiments.
>
> FWIW you can build something similar using six Hawker
> Cyclons. J Cells for a 12.5Ah capacity, or BC cells for a
> 25Ah capacity. http://www.hepi.com/scprod.htm
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Money aside, two main advantages of AC setup for hilly terrain will be:
- Regen - two fold - brake pads (and possible trouble) saver and long
downhills recharge better than any kind of charger. Just 5 min of
downhill at -250A battery current (charging) will put back more than
20 Ah. Is it a lot? Well, one Optima has about 30-40Ah of useful
capacity, so if you're dead 0% SOC but on top of the hill, 5 minutes
later you may have more than 50% SOC pack.
- Water cooling - taking continuous load as long as you pump the water
in. In my opinion AC powered truck will be more versatile than DC one
with more raw power, but it's up to a user to decide if these advantages
of AC setup worth the money.
Victor
ps. powerful DC controllers are also water cooled. I'm yet to see
water cooled DC motor, regen or not.
>
> They exist, and there are probably at least a few on the
> interstate system over 5%. My favorite is the one west of Denver
> on I-70, going up into the Rockies. My impression is it's like a
> 7% grade, and the speed limit is 65mph. Going from about 5800ft
> elev up to 7000ft or so in one pretty quick swoop, and then there
> are some more uphills a few more miles down, 'er up the road.
> There are also some steep grades (probably close to 7%) on I-70
> closer to the Continental Divide, near the Eisenhower Tunnel at
> about 11,000ft elev. I used to take I-70 up into the mountains a
> lot when I lived in Denver from the 1960s through the 1980s. I
> moved out to the Bay Area, CA in 1989, and as a result I don't do
> it so much anymore, and my memories of the grade percentages are
> starting to get a little fuzzy. But when my mom moved out from
> Denver to here in 2000, I drove her out, and I had my altimeter
> watch by then, and we were gaining about 320ft/min on the first
> uphill stretch on I-70 in her Saturn at 55-60mph. That works out
> to about 6.5-7.0%. The trucks certainly do crawl on the ascents.
> By the way, you have to be able to haul your rig down on the
> descent. There are lots of warning signs on I-70 going down into
> Denver, and I remember reading about the truck wipeouts at
> Deadman's Curve... I've seen trucks pouring smoke out of their
> brakes near Vail Pass, CO. Smells awful. Some serious regen
> would be nice for downhills. How about the steep grade on I-80
> going west out of Reno and Verdi, NV and up near Donner Pass in t
> he Sierras? These grades are all over the place if you do any
> driving near mountains. Why, we've even got one that's probably
> a good 5% right here in Marin on Hi101 southbound onto the Golden
> Gate Bridge, known as the Waldo Grade.
>
> Chuck Hursch
> Larkspur, CA
> NBEAA treasurer and webmaster
> www.geocities.com/nbeaa
> http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/339.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> On 20 Jan 2003 at 13:09, Steve wrote:
>
> > implying that ZEVs are truly
> > effectively emissionless vehicles when powered by the current electrical
> > infrastructure can also amount to misinformation if it implies that this
> > pollution would just go away if we all drove them instead.
>
> As I understand it, assuming they're charged at night, it's going to be a
> LONG time before charging EVs has any measureable effect on the
> emissions of
> power plants. They use idle capacity and thus actually ^improve^ the
> plants' efficiency. When it comes to emissions, EVs are as close to true
> zero as you can get (except for a bicycle).
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
Doesn't Idle Capacity just refer to the *capability* of a plant to generate
power during otherwise idle times? It's my understanding that there is
indeed enough unused capacity during the evenings to charge a great many EVs
without requiring upgrades to the infrastructure. However, as far as
emissions goes, it's not as if the plant produces the same pollution whether
it's employing that unused capacity or not, right? That is, won't charging
EVs, even in the evening, still require the utilities to produce the
additional emissions that come from generating the power the EVs require to
charge?
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have to ask this question since I am going no where
in my search. How do I switch my electricity from
PG&E to some renewable sources? I am in SF Bay Area.
I don't have the budget to put a PV system.
Thanks.
Ed Ang
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Chuck,
>
> Running the numbers:
> 240 miles @ 100wpm (extremely efficient, like an EV1) at 70mph
> 24kwh pack is required - which is doable
The way I look at it - say 100 cells (36 kWh pack) can move the car
240 miles as only long as you spend 36,000/240=150Wh/mile. This is
doable, (in the vehicle of Think or City Bee type) but I think
in the press release they meant:
"It can go 240 miles AND 70 MPH", this does not imply
240 miles AT 70 mph. Just the vehicle is capable of
reaching 70 mph OR going for 240 miles (at NEV speeds).
The catch: 100 cells pack from thundersky cost $15k. ($150/cell).
Whole ZAP cost $10k. If I want LiIon pack, I better buy ZAP,
pull the batteries out, trash the car and be better off
(I'm in wrong business, am I? :-). Heck, if I buy and trash
two ZAPs, I still may be better off than buying LiIons
directly from Thunder. BMS included! This is possible only if
ZAP get a deep discount paying no more than about $40/cell.
They might, if secured orders for hundreds of thousands of cells.
ZAP may be a good source of batteries - they must carry them as
a spare parts...
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> The way I look at it - say 100 cells (36 kWh pack) can move the car
> 240 miles as only long as you spend 36,000/240=150Wh/mile. This is
> doable, (in the vehicle of Think or City Bee type) but I think
> in the press release they meant:
>
> "It can go 240 miles AND 70 MPH", this does not imply
> 240 miles AT 70 mph. Just the vehicle is capable of
> reaching 70 mph OR going for 240 miles (at NEV speeds).
Generally people are pretty careful of the wording on press releases.
If they mean "It can go 240 miles AND 70 MPH" then they should have said
that.
What they actually wrote was:
"In a vehicle like (the Zap car), the car can go 240 miles on a single
charge, at 70 miles per hour," says Zap CEO Steve Schneider.
That's a direct quote from the article.
They also said it would only cost a penny a mile. They don't say at
what rate they are quoting, but the national average price for
electricity is now over $0.10/kwh
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Some larger trucks (fire trucks are what I know) have generators that run
off a PTO on the driveline. This is great for having a BUNCH of electricity
to run big lights at accident scenes - the big diesel idles as much as
needed, and you just switch in the generator and it idles faster.
We also have retarders that come on as you get off the accelerator.... some
of them that I have read about actually switch on the fields for the
generator on the driveline, and dissipate the electricity into a big heat
sink. All a braking system is, is a way to change kinetic energy to heat,
after all. So how about adding a bypass so that after you have regenned (is
that a word?) all you can back into the pack, anything more gets dumped into
a big heat sink? That way, you CAN have engine braking for long downhills,
even with your batteries topped off.
KC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andre Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:10 AM
Subject: RE: Truck (im)possibility
> I have pulled a 5000lb. trailer with a 3/4 ton pickup up over mountains
and
> I would not want to do it without engine/compression braking. Normal
brakes
> are good for bringing a vehicle to a stop but they are not intended too be
> used for extended periods of time to control the vehicle speed.
> Now and electric would not likely be used for pulling a heavy load over
> mountains but you may have to go down a large hill from time to time and
it
> is nice to have more then one means of keeping the speed down.
>
> Andre' B. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> If something cannot be defined, it does not exist.
> Isaac Newton
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of John Lussmyer
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:15 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Truck (im)possibility
>
> At 09:56 AM 1/21/2003 -0500, Chris Tromley stated:
> >I know very little about heavy-duty hauling. It seems to me, though,
> >that regen would be very important in a heavy vehicle with no
> >compression braking. It might be worth investigating whether operating
> >a heavy truck without compression braking or regen is even legal. The
> >laws requiring trucks to descend hills in gear are based on the
> >supposition that compression braking is present.
>
> Remember that we are talking about a pickup truck, which isn't "Heavy Duty
> Hauling" by any means. 6,000 lb truck + 10,000 lb trailer isn't
> much. It's a normal pickup truck duty. No air brakes or compression
> brakes needed.
>
> --
> John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
> http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not saying this is how things are done, but there is enough excess
capacity at night that you could pick the cleanest plant(s) to make
your electricity. During the day the system is often nearly maxed out
(witness California), so you can't really pick just the cleanest
power plants, you have to take what is available, dirty or not.
--- Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doesn't Idle Capacity just refer to the *capability* of a plant to
> generate
> power during otherwise idle times? It's my understanding that
> there is
> indeed enough unused capacity during the evenings to charge a great
> many EVs
> without requiring upgrades to the infrastructure. However, as far
> as
> emissions goes, it's not as if the plant produces the same
> pollution whether
> it's employing that unused capacity or not, right? That is, won't
> charging
> EVs, even in the evening, still require the utilities to produce
> the
> additional emissions that come from generating the power the EVs
> require to
> charge?
=====
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Good point. I agree that driving EVs could effectively be a truely zero
emission experience *if* those EVs were charged from only zero emission
sources.
Anyone have any data on how likely that could be? Is there any
consideration by the utilities for cleaning the generation of electricity
during off peak times? It seems one would probably have to take
photovoltaics out of the equation for generation of power in the evening but
that most other means could be factored in.
It would be nice to have some hard figures that we could use in the
"elsewhere emission" debates although I admit it would be hard to predict
them accurately.
Steve
> Not saying this is how things are done, but there is enough excess
> capacity at night that you could pick the cleanest plant(s) to make
> your electricity. During the day the system is often nearly maxed out
> (witness California), so you can't really pick just the cleanest
> power plants, you have to take what is available, dirty or not.
>
> --- Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Doesn't Idle Capacity just refer to the *capability* of a plant to
> > generate
> > power during otherwise idle times? It's my understanding that
> > there is
> > indeed enough unused capacity during the evenings to charge a great
> > many EVs
> > without requiring upgrades to the infrastructure. However, as far
> > as
> > emissions goes, it's not as if the plant produces the same
> > pollution whether
> > it's employing that unused capacity or not, right? That is, won't
> > charging
> > EVs, even in the evening, still require the utilities to produce
> > the
> > additional emissions that come from generating the power the EVs
> > require to
> > charge?
>
>
> =====
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 21 Jan 2003 at 9:04, Edward Ang wrote:
> Also, I was seeing the famous memory effect � voltage
> drops sharply after a certain point.
I may be misunderstanding what you're trying to say, but I don't think
what you're seeing is "memory effect." Memory effect is a more or less
pathological cell condition caused by repeated discharge to ^exactly^ the
same point, no more, no less. I mean ^exactly^ to the fraction of an amp-
hour. This almost never happens in real life, period.
So you aren't experiencing memory effect, just reduced capacity.
Periodically (especially after a period of inactivity -- the cells', not
yours <g>) you have to re-commission nicads. This begins with a controlled
C/20 discharge (some recommend to zero volts, but only if you have access to
the individual cells; batteries should not be discharged to zero). This is
followed by a C/10 charge for 15 hours with temperature the only limitation.
This procedure will usually restore normal capacity. (Don't you wish it
were this easy with lead batteries?)
In fact what you describe above is a normal characteristic of nicads. They
hold a very stable voltage until just before they poop out, then the voltage
drops like a rock. Forget 0.9 volts; when you see 1.0 vpc, you'd better
find a receptacle Right Now!
The only reliable way I know of to determine SOC with nicads is an amp-hour
counter. Voltage is just too stable. This in my book is an advantage.
> The battery spec says to
> stop charging after putting back 130-140%.
That sounds high to me. Saft recommends replacing all the amp-hours
consumed at C/5 constant current, then adding another 15% at C/20 constant
current. Saft used to recommend 20% overcharge for the older cells and
modules. It's hard to imagine that yours would require that much more.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation, or
switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
1991 Solectria Force 144vac
1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send this to all
thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I smite thee.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
