EV Digest 2590
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: LiIons orientation info
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: General Battery Concensus
by Seth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) (no subject)
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4) Interdisciplinary approach (was: RE: Battery Management (was: Money talk.......))
by "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: EV trading post scam
by gail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: EV trading post scam
by "Ralph Merwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) OT: Solar Cell Advancement
by Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: US Electricar Prizm on Ebay
by "Christian T. Kocmick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: EV trading post scam
by Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
by "Christopher Zach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
13) Shipping parts overseas / Was: EV List help needed in Florida
by "Tom Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re:Charging safety
by Jon Knepher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: EV trading post scam
by Jeremy Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: EV trading post scam
by John Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Conspiracy theorist rant (was: RE: Civic Hybrid Upgrade)
by "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Conspiracy theorist rant (was: RE: Civic Hybrid Upgrade)
by Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) OT: Political, Music, It's about oil.
by Otmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: LiIons orientation info
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: LiIons orientation info
by John Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) RE: Battery Management (was: Money talk.......)
by Lin Tse Hsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: EV trading post scam
by Michael Hoskinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) A very new website
by billdube <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: BMS - getting long but you asked for it :-)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
I asked a similar question of John Grzan of Worley (same batteries???) and he said
that they should be kept as vertical as possible due to the liquid electrolyte.
I think I'd be inclined (ha ha) to mount them upright, just in case :-)
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Victor Tikhonov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 9:14 AM
To: ev
Subject: LiIons orientation info
For those who consider trying Thunder-sky LiIon cells, I finally
received reply to my Dec 2002 (!) email inquiry about possibility
to use the cells laying on their side. I was informed that any
orientation other than up side down is fine.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have never seen a pack go anything like 100,000 miles. I have seen
them fail at 30,000. But that isn't proof one way or the other. And
there is plenty of room for different opinions, in my opinion ;) I also
think/hope/wish that NiMH is getting better.
Seth (not the one in Worcester)
John Wilson wrote:
>
> NiMH does not necessarily have a limited cycle life. Toyota's RAV4 NiMH
> modules have lasted 100,000 miles and are still going strong, according
> to recent reports. That would make them as least as good as NiCd as far
> as cycle life.
>
> Jay
--
vze3v25q@verizondotnet
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
set ev mail digest
set ev mail ack
query ev
end
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bill Dub� wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Electrical engineering versus Mechanical or
> Chemical Engineering
> <<<<<
>
> When an electrical engineer designs a typical circuit,
> selects components,
> and then builds the circuit, most of the time the circuit
> works just as
> planned (unless a design error was made.) This is because electronic
> components typically follow the spec. sheet closely, and are
> well-behaved.
>
> When a chemical or mechanical engineer designs
> something, they are well
> aware that the materials, components, and processes selected
> are NOT well
> behaved and will typically NOT follow the spec. sheet closely
> every time.
> They make designs that are forgiving and will have a built-in
> margin for
> less-than-ideal conditions.
>
> Batteries are more chemical or mechanical components
> than they are
> electrical components. They are complicated, variable, and
> often don't
> behave exactly the way the spec. sheet says they will. A
> battery management
> system is the "margin" that makes the battery system
> "forgiving" when there
> are manufacturing variations or there are less-than-ideal conditions.
Very well said, Bill.
I can't speak with any authority on the subject of battery management.
But Bill raises a point that can help us all.
In my professional experience (as an ME) I have encountered many EEs who
failed to see the many critical subtleties an ME must deal with. It's
hard to blame them. A weld melts two pieces of metal together, hard
metal tools cut softer metals, steel is steel, plastics have specs, a
screw is a screw. How hard could it be? The fact that an EE typically
connects a bunch of known components together, and then devotes most of
his/her time to the complex electrical effects in the resulting system,
only reinforces this take on the physical world.
There are a few on this list who are successful at comprehending the
intricacies of multiple disciplines. I do not count myself among them.
(Anyone who has developed a good controller automatically joins the
club. ;^) Understanding a vehicle covers several disciplines, but many
of us are specialists. As we EV nuts stumble along advancing our craft,
listening to those with a broader view can save lots of time and effort.
It's a real world out there.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This sounds somewhat like the scams we get almost every day from
"officials", "widows", etc. in miscellaneous foreign countries, who have
millions to share if we will just help them get it out. Too bad it is
expanding in the direction of the EV community.
Gail
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Randy Holmquist wrote:
> Just wondering if any one else has had this sort of "offer"
> I realize this has nothing to do with the wonderful work that Mike puts
> into the Trading post.
> Just wanted others to be aware.
> This is the third one of these I have had.
>
> BFN
> Randy
>
>
> ubject:
> treat urgently
> Date:
> Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:48:49 +0800
> From:
> "mark vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dear Randy,
>
> I am happy to notify you that I am interested in
> buying/acquiring
> your Zapi 120 Volt H2 Controller and I am offering
> US$1100
>
> Please,if this offer is acceptable to you, get back to me with
> the
> necessary details and also how it will be picked up. I will
> be needing:
>
> * your full name and home address (note that P.O.Box is not
> acceptable),
> * your reconfirmed phone number (both home and mobile), and
> * fax number (if possible).
>
> As a matter of fact, one of my clients
> based in U.S.A is owing me some money and the amount is $6,000
> and on my request he shall forward a cashier check / amount to
> you.
>
> After deducting the cost, can I trust you to send the
> rest of the amount (i.e the excess fund) to me via western
> union money transfer. If you are ok with doing this favour for
> me, get me the information needed to send the cashier check to
> you.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation while anticipating your earliest
> response.
>
> --
> Canadian Electric Vehicles Ltd.
> PO, Box 616, 1184 Middlegate Rd.
> Errington, British Columbia,
> Canada, V0R 1V0
> Phone: (250) 954-2230
> Fax: (250) 954-2235
> Website: http://www.canev.com
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Manufactures of: "Might-E Truck"
> EV conversion Kits and components
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm surprised he didn't ask for banking information so he could wire the
funds directly your account.
It looks like a money laundering scheme.
Ralph
Randy Holmquist writes:
>
> Just wondering if any one else has had this sort of "offer"
> I realize this has nothing to do with the wonderful work that Mike puts
> into the Trading post.
> Just wanted others to be aware.
> This is the third one of these I have had.
>
> BFN
> Randy
>
>
> ubject:
> treat urgently
> Date:
> Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:48:49 +0800
> From:
> "mark vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dear Randy,
>
> I am happy to notify you that I am interested in
> buying/acquiring
> your Zapi 120 Volt H2 Controller and I am offering
> US$1100
>
> Please,if this offer is acceptable to you, get back to me with
> the
> necessary details and also how it will be picked up. I will
> be needing:
>
> * your full name and home address (note that P.O.Box is not
> acceptable),
> * your reconfirmed phone number (both home and mobile), and
> * fax number (if possible).
>
> As a matter of fact, one of my clients
> based in U.S.A is owing me some money and the amount is $6,000
> and on my request he shall forward a cashier check / amount to
> you.
>
> After deducting the cost, can I trust you to send the
> rest of the amount (i.e the excess fund) to me via western
> union money transfer. If you are ok with doing this favour for
> me, get me the information needed to send the cashier check to
> you.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation while anticipating your earliest
> response.
>
> --
> Canadian Electric Vehicles Ltd.
> PO, Box 616, 1184 Middlegate Rd.
> Errington, British Columbia,
> Canada, V0R 1V0
> Phone: (250) 954-2230
> Fax: (250) 954-2235
> Website: http://www.canev.com
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Manufactures of: "Might-E Truck"
> EV conversion Kits and components
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Neat article. This allows for more options of solar cell placement, and
at the same time recycles waste silicon from the chip making industry.
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993380
TTFN,
Lonnie Borntreger
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I fail to see the issue here, in fact I would say that the design of the
Prius could have easily been tweaked to make a great plug-in hybrid, it just
wasn't within the original design spec and price point goals.
The Prius is a car that already has the ability to run electric under a
light load and for a short distance. The light load is a function of
software and the short distance is a function of battery capacity.
Essentially they said in order to maximize battery life we will never let
the batteries get below this SOC, we will avoid this by restarting the ICE.
So the same car could have easily been designed to run EV under higher
loads, tweak the software and perhaps upgrade the Electric motor. It also
could have been give longer range by increasing the size of the battery
pack. The electronics could still baby the pack be starting the ice at the
exact same SOC as the current Prius.
I really believe that many on this list would be happy with a Prius type
hybrid that could do 10 miles of 45mph and under EVing with any needed
additional range and freeway speeds being provided by the ICE. All those
short trips could be done fully EV and longer trips would not have to be
planned out or abandoned due to charging requirements.
I still believe that one of the main reasons you do not see anyone
considering plug-in hybrids is that the marketing research has convinced the
automakers that this would be seen as a negative rather than a positive.
Why else would they so consistently beat the "you never have to plug it in"
drum.
damon
I have trouble envisioning a plug-in hybrid that would be sufficiently
bullet-proof for Joe Average. It seems to me that you would want to build
a car with effectively unlimited range (i.e. same conditions as a current
gasoline auto), but which would use primarily battery power for shorter
trips. But how do you handle the middle-length trips without risking the
pack? Would you always count on the car being plugged in at the
destination? How do you plan for that when you don't know in advance how
long the trip is? En route, you'd have to have a pretty sophisticated
algorithm in there for monitoring state of charge and kicking in the gas
engine before the pack was put at risk, but that could have a dramatic
effect on the power available.
It seems to me that it would be a pretty tricky engineering problem to get
the performance that would sell and still have a car that could reliably
handle extended trips while it is expecting to be recharged at some
indefinable moment in the future.
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris:
I looked at the car online. When you say 300 volts, does that mean I'll have
to plug it into a 240? Also, what is your range?
Christian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Zach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: US Electricar Prizm on Ebay
> Alan:
>
> > Do you have a feel for the cost of shipping cross-country? FL to OR is
> > about as far as you can go roughly East/West and not get wet ;-)
>
> Don't know; it cost $500 to get it from Fla to MD. Really nice tow
company.
>
> > For real? I was under the impression that most of the commercial
> > conversions ran at the low end of the performance curve. I'm also
> concerned
> > that it has an automatic transmission, and finally, that the batteries
are
> > more accessible than they are on the S10s, especially as it will likely
> need
> > a new set. But it does look like a possible way for me to get back into
> > an electric...
>
> For real, at least according to the speedo. Took everything to get it
there,
> but it is a pretty quick little car. No problems doing 70 on a warm day.
> When it's cold like winter.... Well, she is a bit more pokey.
>
> The transmission is interesting. It's actually locked into second gear
> forever, and the motor has all the torque you need. Actually the motor and
> controller have a nice programmed mode to put out lots of torque on the
> bottom end, then once past 3600 it shifts into a speed mode. Really nice.
It
> does not have a torque converter that I can see or feel. Would screw with
> the regen.
>
> The batteries are a real pain to get to. You have to drop the whole pack
> down; which requires a lot of stuff. Not impossible; but not simple. I've
> found a pallet jack, a plate made of 1 inch plywood, 4*4's, and three
jacks
> do the job pretty well. And two engine hoists and an electric tractor :-)
>
> It is without a doubt a nice conversion. These were the guys who designed
> the EV1. Very clean job. The biggest weakness to be honest is it's main
> feature: The fact that you need 300 volts to run the AC drive. This
> percludes using T105's (you're going to fit 50 of them in there how :-)
and
> the Hawker Genesis batteries though tough are small and pack only a total
> size of 15kw of lead. I guess I could put 25 80-100ah batteries in the
back
> seat and trunk, but I like having a back seat and trunk :-)
>
> I love mine.
>
> Chris
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This sounds like a set up for what is known as a Pigeon Drop. At some
point, you would be asked to put up some "good faith" money or processing
fee or some such.
Shari Prange
Electro Automotive POB 1113 Felton CA 95018-1113 Telephone 831-429-1989
http://www.electroauto.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Electric Car Conversion Kits * Components * Books * Videos * Since 1979
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, one issue here is goals. In this case: efficiency.
On my Prizm, I carry a big heavy 50kw motor, and a big, heavy battery pack.
I could probably put a small ICE engine in it, but in order to run 100% ICE,
the motor would have to be at least a 60hp model. Plus a gas tank with 10
gallons of gas, exhaust, emissions, etc.... Where are you going to put this
other than making the car bigger?
This is going to result in more weight, which is going to reduce the range
of the car in electric mode. A lot.
Now, turning it around: Prius. A lot closer to your goal than an Insight,
however you would need an AVCon charger on board and a substantially bigger
pack to carry it in electric-only mode. Which would increase the weight,
which would require bigger motors which would increase the weight...
By the time you matched everything up, you would have a less efficient car.
Which was not the goal: The goal was to build something that had the max
efficiency with unlimited range. And that's a Prius.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
> I fail to see the issue here, in fact I would say that the design of the
> Prius could have easily been tweaked to make a great plug-in hybrid, it
just
> wasn't within the original design spec and price point goals.
>
> The Prius is a car that already has the ability to run electric under a
> light load and for a short distance. The light load is a function of
> software and the short distance is a function of battery capacity.
> Essentially they said in order to maximize battery life we will never let
> the batteries get below this SOC, we will avoid this by restarting the
ICE.
>
> So the same car could have easily been designed to run EV under higher
> loads, tweak the software and perhaps upgrade the Electric motor. It also
> could have been give longer range by increasing the size of the battery
> pack. The electronics could still baby the pack be starting the ice at
the
> exact same SOC as the current Prius.
>
> I really believe that many on this list would be happy with a Prius type
> hybrid that could do 10 miles of 45mph and under EVing with any needed
> additional range and freeway speeds being provided by the ICE. All those
> short trips could be done fully EV and longer trips would not have to be
> planned out or abandoned due to charging requirements.
>
> I still believe that one of the main reasons you do not see anyone
> considering plug-in hybrids is that the marketing research has convinced
the
> automakers that this would be seen as a negative rather than a positive.
> Why else would they so consistently beat the "you never have to plug it
in"
> drum.
>
> damon
>
> >I have trouble envisioning a plug-in hybrid that would be sufficiently
> >bullet-proof for Joe Average. It seems to me that you would want to
build
> >a car with effectively unlimited range (i.e. same conditions as a current
> >gasoline auto), but which would use primarily battery power for shorter
> >trips. But how do you handle the middle-length trips without risking the
> >pack? Would you always count on the car being plugged in at the
> >destination? How do you plan for that when you don't know in advance how
> >long the trip is? En route, you'd have to have a pretty sophisticated
> >algorithm in there for monitoring state of charge and kicking in the gas
> >engine before the pack was put at risk, but that could have a dramatic
> >effect on the power available.
> >
> >It seems to me that it would be a pretty tricky engineering problem to
get
> >the performance that would sell and still have a car that could reliably
> >handle extended trips while it is expecting to be recharged at some
> >indefinable moment in the future.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Adam,
I think you miss the point of the plug-in Hybrid.
With a PIHEV, the vehicle should function as hybrid-depleting when the
battery pack is full down whatever the saftety threshold of the pack is, say
80% DOC. Then it should function as hybrid-systaining, where the gas engine
provides power and recharging to the battery pack, but only to sustain this
minimal DOC level. Then, when the driver stops and plugs in, the pack is
fully recharged from the wall.
This is the model developed and implemented at UC Davis. It makes a lot of
sense and is idiot-proof for typical joe driver. If joe driver doesn't want
to plug in until the weekend, then the start of the week is mostly EV
driving until this DOC level is reached, then gas/electric until he plugs
in. If he's smart and wants the best bang-for-buck (cheap power) he will
plug in every day or whenever he reaches the DOC level.
Look at: http://mae.ucdavis.edu/~futurcar/
-Ed Thorpe
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Kuehn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 12:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Civic Hybrid Upgrade
Lee Hart wrote:
>But, every degree of hybridization is possible, from 99% gas / 1%
>electric to 1% gas / 99% electric. You could modify the car's control
>systems (with difficulty) for any desired balance between gas and
>electric.
Sure, it's possible, but I wonder how many combinations are truly
practical. It seems to me that one of the biggest advantages in the
current setup of the Insight/Prius is that there is virtually no
battery management since the DOD on the batteries is so low and when
the battery does get discharged it is immediately charged right up
again.
I have trouble envisioning a plug-in hybrid that would be
sufficiently bullet-proof for Joe Average. It seems to me that you
would want to build a car with effectively unlimited range (i.e. same
conditions as a current gasoline auto), but which would use primarily
battery power for shorter trips. But how do you handle the
middle-length trips without risking the pack? Would you always count
on the car being plugged in at the destination? How do you plan for
that when you don't know in advance how long the trip is? En route,
you'd have to have a pretty sophisticated algorithm in there for
monitoring state of charge and kicking in the gas engine before the
pack was put at risk, but that could have a dramatic effect on the
power available.
It seems to me that it would be a pretty tricky engineering problem
to get the performance that would sell and still have a car that
could reliably handle extended trips while it is expecting to be
recharged at some indefinable moment in the future.
I'm curious what you more technical types think of this problem.
--
-Adam Kuehn
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Last year, I had to ship a Brusa battery charger to Switzerland to have it
upgraded. Getting it over there was the easy part -- I sent it via FedEx
and they got it pretty quickly. (I had to deal with a lot of paperwork,
though, and I was lucky that the charger's value was under a certain level,
otherwise I needed to fill out a MUCH larger form). The real trick was
getting the darn thing back!
On the way back, I was supposed to have a customs agent, and if you don't do
this sort of thing all the time, it's a royal pain. The problem was that it
was my unit, bought and paid for years ago, and I was shipping it for the
upgrade necessary to charge NiCDs. I had to prove that it was mine and
needed documentation to show the value of what was added to it, otherwise
they were going to charge an import duty for its full value. At the local
customs office, for a while there it didn't look like I was going to be able
to get it back at all.
Fortunately, my argument with the customs agent was accepted and I was able
to go get the thing, but I sympathize with our friend from the UK -- This
kind of stuff is very complicated and confusing if you aren't doing it all
the time.
-Tom
Thomas Hudson
http://portdistrict5.org -- 5th District Aldermanic Website
http://portev.org -- Electric Vehicles, Solar Power & More
http://portgardenclub.org -- Port Washington Garden Club
http://portlightstation.org -- Light Station Restoration
http://klanky.com -- Animation projects
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, it works with the think city, but I now see exactly the unsafe path.
I've only had to use this very rarely; it was better than loading it onto a tow
truck
(and I was supervising the plugs)... I'll crush this circuit with the car in a
couple months. :(
Thanks for your review!
Jon
> ----- Message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------
> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 21:47:46 -0800
> From: Joe Smalley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re:Charging safety
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Here is the concern over how it could shock someone:
>
> Both plugs are properly inserted into their outlets then Plug K2 is removed.
>
> If the charger has an input transformer with a load on it, there will be
> some resistance in that coil but it will conduct from T1 to T2 at the top of
> the schematic.
>
> When the power is removed from K2, the transformer primary will conduct from
> T1 to T2 causing K9 to remain closed if N2 is connected to neutral.
>
> Since N2 is only connected to K9 and K8, the voltage is split between the
> coils on K9 and K8 in series. The voltage must be high enough to energize K8
> to break the pilot line or low enough to de-energize K9 to break the pilot
> line.
>
> If this condition is not met, then the circuit will put 120 VAC on the hot
> pin to K2 that is exposed to the user.
>
> Joe Smalley
> Rural Kitsap County WA
> Fiesta 48 volts
> NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
* LP8.2: HTML/Attachments detected, removed from message *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have gotten two different versions of that offer. From different
email addresses. The first one didn't come out with the strange scheme
immediately but waited until I had sent them a few emails and then sent
the stuff about the cashiers checks.
-Jeremy
On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 10:55 AM, Randy Holmquist wrote:
Just wondering if any one else has had this sort of "offer"
I realize this has nothing to do with the wonderful work that Mike puts
into the Trading post.
Just wanted others to be aware.
This is the third one of these I have had.
BFN
Randy
ubject:
treat urgently
Date:
Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:48:49 +0800
From:
"mark vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Randy,
I am happy to notify you that I am interested in
buying/acquiring
your Zapi 120 Volt H2 Controller and I am offering
US$1100
Please,if this offer is acceptable to you, get back to me with
the
necessary details and also how it will be picked up. I will
be needing:
* your full name and home address (note that P.O.Box is not
acceptable),
* your reconfirmed phone number (both home and mobile), and
* fax number (if possible).
As a matter of fact, one of my clients
based in U.S.A is owing me some money and the amount is $6,000
and on my request he shall forward a cashier check / amount to
you.
After deducting the cost, can I trust you to send the
rest of the amount (i.e the excess fund) to me via western
union money transfer. If you are ok with doing this favour for
me, get me the information needed to send the cashier check to
you.
Thank you for your cooperation while anticipating your earliest
response.
--
Canadian Electric Vehicles Ltd.
PO, Box 616, 1184 Middlegate Rd.
Errington, British Columbia,
Canada, V0R 1V0
Phone: (250) 954-2230
Fax: (250) 954-2235
Website: http://www.canev.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manufactures of: "Might-E Truck"
EV conversion Kits and components
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 02:35 PM 2/14/2003 -0500, Jeremy Green stated:
I have gotten two different versions of that offer. From different email
addresses. The first one didn't come out with the strange scheme
immediately but waited until I had sent them a few emails and then sent
the stuff about the cashiers checks.
Last I heard, these scams are based on bad Cashiers checks. It can take a
couple of weeks for a bad Cashiers check to come back to you - by which
time you've already sent the extra "money" (and your item for sale) to the
theif.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Damon Henry wrote:
> I still believe that one of the main reasons you do not see anyone
> considering plug-in hybrids is that the marketing research
> has convinced the
> automakers that this would be seen as a negative rather than
> a positive.
> Why else would they so consistently beat the "you never have
> to plug it in"
> drum.
Hi Damon,
I think you're right for the most part, the automakers are led around by
their market research. But who are they asking? How many respondents
have any experience at all with a car that needs to be plugged in? So
the automakers are making their decisions based on responses from people
who have no idea what they're talking about.
Of course, the other question that needs to be asked is where these
uninformed people are getting their opinions? If you asked a group who
truly had never thought before about plugging in their car, and asked in
a genuinely neutral fashion, do you think they would be strongly biased
against it? I find that hard to accept. Especially when they realize
they wouldn't have to pump gas. I have to assume, therefore, that
either they go in thinking that plugging in is a pain (because they've
seen the commercials) or the survey itself is biasing the answers.
I personally believe the automakers have done extensive analysis of the
effect of EVs on their business, and they don't like what they see.
Anything that detracts from maximum profits is the enemy. But this
particular enemy has some substantial backers in the environmental and
national security camps. A direct assault would be seen as politically
incorrect, so they've taken an indirect approach.
I'm well aware that this might read like a conspiracy theorist's rant.
But so far I've found not a single action by the automakers that
demonstrates they are in any way open-minded toward EVs. Every "good
thing" they've done was a result of government coercion. Every program
was terminated as early as possible and loudly declared a marketing
failure. All the automakers are behaving in a remarkably uniform
fashion. Not because they're conspiring, but because they've all
reached the same conclusion and have similar goals.
I think the automakers and I share a common belief. As soon as a
highway-capable EV is available from a company who will actually promote
them, the game is over. Favorable publicity, happy owners' comments,
test reports, etc. all tend to legitimize what the automakers have
worked hard to ridicule.
That's why I worry about Rick Woodbury. As I've said before, if the
Tango is certified it will become the finest urban assault vehicle on
the planet. It has incredible acceleration and handling in a package
that can slice through traffic like a motorcycle. With its
Corvette-killer performance, it wouldn't be just a mild irritant to the
ICE status quo. It would draw big attention. It's a full-on punch in
the nose to Detroit's stance on EVs. Detroit knows the stakes are high.
I hope David can beat Goliath again. But this time, Goliath will be
much more indirect.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:44, Chris Tromley wrote:
> Of course, the other question that needs to be asked is where these
> uninformed people are getting their opinions? If you asked a group who
> truly had never thought before about plugging in their car, and asked in
> a genuinely neutral fashion, do you think they would be strongly biased
> against it? I find that hard to accept. Especially when they realize
> they wouldn't have to pump gas. I have to assume, therefore, that
> either they go in thinking that plugging in is a pain (because they've
> seen the commercials) or the survey itself is biasing the answers.
They obviously haven't asked people in the "North" (Upper Peninsula of
MI, MN, Canada, .....). When I went to college in the UP, 95% of the
cars had cords hanging out of the grill, and they were all plugged in
every night during the winter to make sure the cars would start in the
morning (it was for engine block heaters). Most of these were factory
or dealer installed options, so I really doubt they would ask the
question "would it bother you if you had to plug in your car every
night" of people that they know have to do exactly that for 6-8 months
out of the year anyway - plus they have to still pay for gas.
TTFN,
Lonnie Borntreger
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello All,
I have no desire to start a big politics discussion here, but that
said, I found this bit of a free music download that is both funny
and timely. Some of you may not agree, I understand, but I figure
many of you will enjoy it.
The song is called "It's About Oil" and it's available for free here:
http://www.amy-martin.com/
Have fun!
-Otmar-
http://www.CafeElectric.com/ New Zilla controllers, now available.
http://www.evcl.com/914 My electric 914
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Adam Kuehn wrote:
> It seems to me that one of the biggest advantages in the current
> setup of the Insight/Prius is that there is virtually no battery
> management since the DOD on the batteries is so low and when
> the battery does get discharged it is immediately charged right up
> again.
Actually, this behaviour is proof that aggressive battery management is
going on!
> I have trouble envisioning a plug-in hybrid that would be
> sufficiently bullet-proof for Joe Average...
The car can start the gasoline engine when needed to prevent serious
battery discharge. It can also keep driving on electric when "nearly"
out of gas (or oil or coolant) to prevent damage to the engine or its
fuel system. These are both *improvements* over standard cars, and makes
them *more* bullet-proof.
When there are two fuels, then you need two fuel gauges -- one for
gasoline, and one for electricity. Operating such a system should be
pretty obvious to most people. Lots of consumer devices are already
battery/AC "hybrids". They run on AC when plugged in, and battery when
not plugged in. There is a time needed to recharge the battery. People
quickly figure out they can run it for X hours on battery, and then must
allow Y hours for it to recharge.
> It seems to me that it would be a pretty tricky engineering problem
> to get the performance that would sell and still have a car that
> could reliably handle extended trips while it is expecting to be
> recharged at some indefinable moment in the future.
If the engineers assume customers are idiots, and try to do all the
thinking for them (when to use gasoline or electric, when to switch
between them etc.) then I think they will fail. They will fall far short
of the full capabilities of the system. The automated system will make
lots of bad choices.
For example, I just drove our Prius 1/2 mile to the convenience store to
pick up an item my wife needed. It could have driven all the way there
and back on electric. But since there is no way to tell it how far I was
going, the Prius started its gas engine, and ran it all the way to the
store to warm it up. I parked, turned the Prius off, and got my one
item. When I turned on the Prius, it again started the gas engine, to
continue warm-up. Just before I got home, the engine finally warmed up
and shut off. I drove into the garage on pure electric, and shifted to
park. It automatically started the gas engine, because it *always*
starts the gas engine in park, even though there is nothing to do (a bug
in the software). Of course, it only ran for 1 second before I turned
off the key.
Now, there was no need to start the gas engine at all. The battery was
already fully charged, and the trip to the store wouldn't have run it
down enough to trigger recharging. But there is no way to tell the car.
Just as people can be trusted to have manual transmissions, they can be
trusted to decide when to use gasoline or electric. Sure, not all
people; but give them the choice!
--
Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that still can ring
814 8th Ave. N. Forget your perfect offering
Sartell, MN 56377 USA There is a crack in everything
leeahart_at_earthlink.net That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I asked John too, and got the same reply - upright.
This is safe answer if he has no idea but wants to save face.
John gets sells from Thundersky and is re-seller.
He may or may not know everything thundersky must know.
Not saying he's wrong, I'm saying to tell it can work on the side
requires knowledge about it and responsibility for answers;
To tell [just in case] it cannot work on the side requires nothing.
So take your pick.
Victor
Mark Fowler wrote:
>
> I asked a similar question of John Grzan of Worley (same batteries???) and he said
>that they should be kept as vertical as possible due to the liquid electrolyte.
>
> I think I'd be inclined (ha ha) to mount them upright, just in case :-)
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Victor Tikhonov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 9:14 AM
> To: ev
> Subject: LiIons orientation info
>
> For those who consider trying Thunder-sky LiIon cells, I finally
> received reply to my Dec 2002 (!) email inquiry about possibility
> to use the cells laying on their side. I was informed that any
> orientation other than up side down is fine.
>
> Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 03:03 PM 2/14/2003 -0800, Victor Tikhonov stated:
Not saying he's wrong, I'm saying to tell it can work on the side
requires knowledge about it and responsibility for answers;
To tell [just in case] it cannot work on the side requires nothing.
So take your pick.
Well, we will know as soon as I can get a pack of them. At least 1/2 will
have to be on their side to fit in my battery boxes.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Yes, we need to keep an eye on Li-Ion batteries.
>Whether that is a fully integrated BMS, or a good old
>multimeter (not fully charging).
>
>We can all talk about the benefits and problems of
>new technology
>until we are blue in the face, extrapolating from
>completely
>unrelated situations to suit whichever argument we
>are making, but it
>all means nothing until someone actually puts it in
>their car and
>tries it out.
>
>That's what we need to do. Try it out. Discover the
>real problems.
>Work out solutions.
The thing is that we already know about the failure
mechanisms of LiION batteries from experiences with
laptop computers. If you read battery charger app
notes, there are dire warnings about accurately
controlling charge voltage. And, there is a wide
spectrum of laptop battery lifetimes. Some will last
for years, and others will last for weeks. Everybody
keeps reiterating the mantra that laptop experience
will make EV acceptance of the technology easier. It
won't unless one can reuse the (hard) experiences from
the laptop world. These batteries die, and they die
easily, and they die hard. What makes you think that
the EV case is any different? I bet many elements are
the same.
>b.t.w. failure rate for 30 x 5% is (1 - (0.95 ^ 30))
= 0.78536... =
>79%, not %150.
This is correct. The 150% number is ridiculous.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Exactly what happened to a woman from Calgary recently. She is
trying to sue the bank for letting her send the money to some
European account before clearing the (phoney) cashier's cheque.
She had responded to one of those Nigerian scams. Not money
laundering, just money stealing.
P.S. Hi, Randy. Still pluggin' away on the D. Redoing stuff.
Hoping to get it to Vancouver in June. To quote #2: "By hook or
by crook, we will!".
Mike Hoskinson
John Lussmyer wrote:
At 02:35 PM 2/14/2003 -0500, Jeremy Green stated:
I have gotten two different versions of that offer. From different
email addresses. The first one didn't come out with the strange
scheme immediately but waited until I had sent them a few emails and
then sent the stuff about the cashiers checks.
Last I heard, these scams are based on bad Cashiers checks. It can take
a couple of weeks for a bad Cashiers check to come back to you - by
which time you've already sent the extra "money" (and your item for
sale) to the theif.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream....
http://www.CasaDelGato.Com
.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 17:32:58 -0800
From: Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: BMS - getting long but you asked for it :-)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
>
> If you are planning to use Li-Ion batteries, you absolutely need an
> automatic battery management system (BMS) that works on a cell level. To
> run these cells without a BMS in place is foolhardy.
I suppose this message is mainly a reply to my previous email.
I can respond with what I know. I'll be taking from a non-racer point
of view and also without bias of using laptop type LiIons for years
with all their problems.
> Lead acid batteries, like the several sets of Optima batteries you have
> gone through, are pretty robust and will withstand a substantial amount of
> abuse before failing. This is not the case with Li-Ion batteries. Minor
> mistreatment will cause damage. Mistreatment with any regularity will cause
> complete and rapid failure.
I'm not disagreeing, but this is just an opinion. Data please.
> Self-discharge is a function of temperature and is also is strongly
> altered by minor manufacturing differences. Charge efficiency is also a
> function of temperature and is also strongly altered by minor manufacturing
> differences. These differences "stack up" in a high-voltage pack.
What do you mean stack up? DO you mean in 90 cells pack it's going
to be more than one out of balance? It will always be a fixed
percentage of out of balance cells (number depends on manufacturer).
So?
> A > high-voltage pack can get out of balance quite easily and relatively quickly.
>
> The statistics eat you alive. With each cell you add, the frequency and
> severity of the imbalance increases Even though you might be able to "get
> away with" no BMS on a low-voltage pack of three or four cells, it doesn't
> extrapolate to many cells in series
I already posted some data available to me: these 18 cells in series
work without any integrated BMS for a half year in a real life vehicle:
http://www.metricmind.com/misc/bat_comparison.jpg
http://www.metricmind.com/misc/carboot.jpg
The cells are checked by human being often and when any gets out of
average by the amount the owner believes is too much, he corrects it.
All I know the correction was needed a few times since the pack
was installed; the rest of the time the pack was (and is) being
closely watched for, but nothing was done to it.
> There are a few computer Li-Ion battery packs that have three carefully
> matched cells that have no balancing electronics. The manufacturer knows
> that, say, 5% of these packs will fail in warranty. They also know that the
> warranty replacement of 5% of their products costs less than installing the
> balancing electronics. No BMS works for them because the pack voltage is
> low, the cells are carefully manufactured, and the temperature of the three
> adjacent cells will be closely matched.
This is your mistake - you know too much :-)
Experience with computer related LiIons biases you and you inadvertainly
apply this experience to valved EV sized LiIons.
The major differences are:
Computer LiIons are always totally sealed and encapsulated
in plastic - if doe any reason pressure builds up, they crack.
At least Thunder-sky ones have pressure relief valve - similar
to Optima valve.
Computer LiIons as you mentioned almost always have internal chip
measuring cell(s) condition and not allowing to charge or
drain too much. It uses MOSFETs in series (often two - Nch and Pch)
to disconnect the battery, and shunts to measure current.
This is not the case for EV cells, and this is good - with such
devises we would not be able to use them 180 MOSFETs in series
will never allow it to draw any meaningful current.
Computer packs are subjected to a large temp gradients -
one side always facing out (ambient) and opposite side is near
hottest components (CPU and stuff). This is great source of
internal leakage and uneven self-discharge rates.
EV cells can be placed in one enclosure - it's not easy but
doable and up to the user.
Computer cells have no thermal management - just monitoring.
EV cells can be cooled off, heated, whatever.
Large cells are not as fragile and far more robust than you may
believe. From the safety tests report I have (translated),
200Ah cell shorted only start smoking 10 min later, providing
about 900A current all this time. Cylindrical cell heated to
100'C (boiling water temp) for 2 hours did not show degradation
in appearance; no data how (if) the capacity changed are given
though.
Now, to be fair, I'm not presenting This battery as ideal one.
Problems are to be discovered yet. SAft LiIons are better
quality, and JSB ones are better yet. Just saying that they are
not as fragile as laptop experiences might have made you to
believe.
Where was I... Safety tests.
Deep discharges - they discharged it to 0V and kept it this way
for 10 minutes. No sign of degradation. They overcharged other cell
at 22'C with C/3 current to 4.63V and kept charging for 2.8 hours.
Temp raised to 39'C, no problems reported. They kept overcharging
further: to 4.86V (10A) for 13 min, 37'C, no problem. Further
to 5.04V at 20A for 10 more minutes. 54'C but no other problems.
Kept further with 30A for 2 min. Voltage reached 18V, temp 88'C
and then the cell catched fire and exploded.
Well, for 324V pack this means 450V on charge is still safe,
although one must be an idiot still allowing 20A being pumped in
450V pack and providing no other means to shut off failed charger.
Point being, imbalance seem to stay with the cells and within
normal conditions does not get progressively worse.
I have my 2 cells within 0.01V and I know which one is always
higher. I deliberately left it at that and cycled once. Throughout
the cycle this delta kept being 0.01V. Yes, one cycle means nothing
statistically, but I don't have resources to test many just to
prove my or disprove someone else's point. As I mentioned, the
vehicle above works without *integrated* BMS just fine, but
the balancing is being done (by human being) and the pack is
far from being neglected.
Do you have a data from the real vehicle where initially
balanced multiple cells were installed and they got out of balance
in short order and destroyed the pack? Answer is...
I thought so. This is not to disprove you Bill, this is just
to say we don't have enough info and most of us have never seen
LiIon cells working in a EV. But with this, nevertheless assuming
that they need this and this and this based on laptops is
at least inaccurate.
>
> Now let's run the same scheme on a pack with 90 cells. We now have 30
> times the cells. The failure rate is now 5% X 30 = 150%. Zero battery packs
> will survive through warranty.
Sorry, wrong, check your math. If you start out with <100% failed
cells, no matter how large the pack, the pack failure rate will
always be less than 100% as well, just closer to 100%.
> It's even worse than that. The cells you are talking about buying are NOT
> carefully matched. In a large pack, the temperature will vary greatly
Not necessarily, depends on the box construction. Mix the air or
water forcefully. LiIon Think City prototype is built this way.
> The end cells will run close to ambient temperature and the interior cells will
> run much hotter. In winter, there will be a major temperature gradient on
> the pack. (The cables that go from the pack to the controller act as large
> "fins" that transfer heat very well to and from the end cells/batteries.)
Racer heads... :-D
The "cables" you're talking about are just gauge 4 wires. Remember,
you're the one calculated and suggested this for me a while ago?
As of the temp, in my case doesn't change at all as I drive. Vented box
will do just fine.
> It's even worse than THAT. In a three-cell pack, a low or high cell
> voltage will significantly alter the overall pack voltage. Thus, the extent
> of overcharge or over-discharge is likely to be quite small. The device
> with shut off or the charger will top out before the voltage gets too wild
> on any one cell. In a high-voltage pack, the voltage of a single cell is
> buried in the noise. The severity of the overcharge or over-discharge of a
> single out-of-balance cell is much greater and failure will thus occur much
> sooner in a high-voltage pack.
All you have to do, Bill, is clamp the max to 4.2V per cell. Just like
MK2 do. When last cell is clamped, the charger throttles back.
Nothing more complex than that really needed (provided some other
conditions like equal temp are met).
> In a nutshell, without a BMS, high-voltage Li-Ion pack failure is a certainty.
Welcome to do it any way you wish. I never said you don't need BMS.
I said you don't need integrated BMS because other means exist;
let me point you to above photo third time.
However, of course, integrated system is preferred way, and if
you have resources to develop or buy one - go right ahead.
My final point is, if you don't have hardware BMS but not
neglecting your pack, keeping eye on it and correct things
promptly, its failure not only far from certainty, it will be less
chances than with unattended automated BMS. And so far experiments
I'm aware of show that effort is far less than with PbA which
happen to be ill sensitive to everything, thus cheap.
As always, welcome to disagree, there is no winner or looser here.
Victor
--- End Message ---
