EV Digest 3358
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Edan 100Ah cells & New ethanol reformer
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) other batteries for US Electricar S10
by "Gary Graunke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: LED tail lights
by Aaron Birenboim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Report: Investigation of breakdown of the SAFT STM5-100 battery
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Report: Investigation of breakdown of the SAFT STM5-100 battery
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Report: Investigation of breakdown of the SAFT STM5-100 battery, TS li-ion
comment heard
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: XCD install update, questions and a doh!
by "John Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Question about Todd PC-30 DC-DC
by "John Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Report: Investigation of breakdown of the SAFT STM5-100 battery, TS li-ion
comment heard
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Fw: In defense of Twike
by "David (Battery Boy) Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Vacuum Pump Switch
by "Roy LeMeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Hawkers #s vs Deka #s
by "Peter Eckhoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Carbon pile? and blowers
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: In defense of Twike
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) RE: other batteries for US Electricar S10
by "Mason Convey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Tevan part and corporate idiocy
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Charging batteries with negative voltage
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) AC-DC Hybrid drive question
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Hawkers #s vs Deka #s
by "Gary Graunke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Tevan part and corporate idiocy
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Generator engine
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Charging batteries with negative voltage
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Question about Todd PC-30 DC-DC
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: AC-DC Hybrid drive question
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
For good range AND good performances on a motorcycle you need about 50ah
capacity and 10X that for power.
Philippe
Et si le pot d'�chappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lightning Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 4:09 AM
Subject: Re: Edan 100Ah cells & New ethanol reformer
> You know how I enjoy crunching numbers, so here goes...
> A string of 100 cells = 360v @100Ah = 36kWh, 310kg (683 lbs), $17,500.
> $486/kWh! 116wh/kg! 54kW nominal, 180kW max. (2'*8.5"*3'9") 6.38ft^3
>
> So it looks like their density is less than the 'gold standard' t-zero
> at 170 Wh/kg (roughly), but cheaper at $486/kWh which is reasonable!
> They look more capable in the power area, has anyone tested any yet?
>
> How about a string of 7*12Ah cells for my 24v scooters?
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302Wh 3kg (6.6 lbs) ?$145
> These would be great on a motorcycle!
>
> So, is anyone ordering yet?
>
> L8r
> Ryan
>
> PS. A new development in FuelCells, an ethanol reformer, still to large
> for your car, and a lot of energy to produce the corn and ethanol...
> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/02/13/hydrogen.reactors.ap/index.html
>
> >>umm... something odd about those 100AH cells when I looked at their
site:
> >>www.edan.com.tw/Product-2002515153759.html..
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> With the Prism you are locked into the Hawker batteries. There are
> cheap "surplus" batteries available; I have met Eric at SurplusEv in
> person, nice guy and of course his help to our ev community in terms
> of cheap replacement batteries is invaluable. Else, it's ~$100 per
> battery, which is basically a $5k pack cost. You would be better off
> buying a different chemistry for a little more, methinks. Lotsa work
> though.
...
> Removed the bed to inspect the pack last weekend to see what could be
> seen. One dead cell out of 52 isn't a bad deal, though I don't know
> how used the pack is, or how much life is left. The truck drives
> well, though there are some issues. Of course, it used to be a fleet
> vehicle, so that is to be expected I suppose. They didn't use the
> vehicles right, left them charged all the time rather than using the
> range.
While I really like Hawkers if you are going with AGM lead acid, the S10
battery boxes seem to be pretty much designed for only 38AH Hawkers. No way
to fit Optimas or many other batteries in there.
Are there other batteries that would fit nicely?
I am hoping that Evercel will come out with the MB50 NiZn, which are spec'd
at the same dimensions has the 38AH Hawkers. (This may be a bit
optimistic--the MB80's specs were the same size as Optimas, but when the
actual batteries came out they are a bit wider). Those would save me 500 lbs
(1710 lbs down to 1200 lbs), as well as increasing my range. (My theoretical
range with new batteries is 40-60 mi. The most I have driven with my aging
batteries was 38 mi).
Good luck with your new EV!
Gary
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was thinking that my '92 force is probobally not worth
a restoration. Its still a tinny old metro.
So, If I am to dress it up, it seems like some sort
of art-car treatment might be better.
But what kind of art befits an EV.
The idea we came up with was to put a lot of flashy
instrumentation on the outside in LED's.
like...
The ideal center brake light, where more LEDs light up (wider)
depending on braking force. Green tachometer on the front of the hood...
shows speed. Red on one side, greed on the other to show
accelleration/regen current.
Problem is.. whats legal? I guess that as some point i'd
get in trouble for too distracting of a vehicle.
--
Aaron Birenboim | This space available!
Albuquerque, NM |
aaron_at_birenboim.com |
>http://aaron.boim.com |
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
These are STM5-100R = air cooled version ! bad solution for an heavy EV.
the STM5-100RE have a sort of cover that make them flat sides (water flow
space)
Philippe
Et si le pot d'�chappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 7:14 AM
Subject: Re: Report: Investigation of breakdown of the SAFT STM5-100 battery
> At 04:24 PM 2/13/04, you wrote:
>
> >"Wow" indeed! The report does talk about similar symptoms to what I saw,
> >and a couple of the photos could easily be of batteries in my old pack
> >(little volvano shaped holes in the sides).
> >
> >Here are some pictures of the more severely damages modules in my old
pack:
> >http://www.aracnet.com/~rmerwin/prizm/nicadboom.html
> >
> >Ralph
>
> I looked at your pictures once again. Now that I have installed
> these batteries myself, I noticed that you didn't install the required
> water cooling system on your battery pack. This is pretty likely to be the
> reason that you burned up some batteries.
>
> I can relate to the difficulty of installing the cooling system
> for these batteries. I spent many weekends doing the plumbing. I spent
> several more weekends finding and fixing leaks. In a nutshell, installing
> the cooling system was a major pain in the butt.
>
> The reason I made the effort, however, is that these batteries
> have no hope of surviving without the cooling system. The water jackets
> actually insulate the batteries if you don't run water through them,
> greatly exacerbating the problem. If, on top of not cooling them, you were
> typically running the batteries at over the rated continuous discharge,
> they were doomed.
>
>
> _ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
> \'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> =(___)=
> U
> Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 13 Feb 2004 at 23:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I noticed that you didn't install the required water cooling
> system on your battery pack.
Ralph had the air-cooled modules. So do I. They're the same as the liquid
cooled ones, but they don't have the outer plastic sheet that forms the
channels in the sides of the modules.
You have the right type, IMO. I think the liquid cooled modules are a much
better idea.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
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
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Americans are satisfied with things because they are large; and
if not large, they must have cost a great deal of money.
-- Lepel Henry Griffin, ca. 1885
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 14 Feb 2004 at 9:25, Philippe Borges wrote:
> now more
> than 1500 cycle 80%DOD dixit Saft
This is most puzzling, as Saft's specs on the older STM5-100MR suggested
they would perform well for 3000 cycles! As published by them:
http://www2.ald.net/~roden/ev/images/saft_cyc.jpg
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
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
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Americans are satisfied with things because they are large; and
if not large, they must have cost a great deal of money.
-- Lepel Henry Griffin, ca. 1885
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Thats exactly how we did the interconnects.
> It's the high current connections to the side posts that has me concerned.
Hi Ben,
I don't know what the side posts are rated for current wise,
but like it was pointed out, I'm just using them for charging.
I've never seen anyone using the side posts for high currents,
probably because it's much better to use a full wraparound clamp
on the top post. The side posts might loosen over time due to
creeping of the lead under pressure.
...John
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello All,
I've started to wonder about my DC-DC converter,
since I've been told that it will melt down if the input
voltage falls too low. The other day, driving with battery
temps in the teens, going a bit further than I usually go,
running the heater the whole time....by the time I was
heading back home, my pack voltage was dropping down
into the 170's during accelertions. I know that's high enough
to be a safe level, but my question is, where does the unsafe
voltage level begin?
Also, my understanding is that the Todd will draw whatever
current is necessary to maintain the output, without a limit except
for meltdown of the DC-DC. If this is the case, then would
limiting the loads (turning off the stereo) allow me to drop the
input voltage lower without exceeding the allowable current?
Thanks,
John
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Real life was and still is much less...will see with new separator but don't
expect a miracle.
3000 cycles ? maybe at 50%DOD because at 80%DOD it seems impossible to me
with limit fixed at 80% capacity left, i prefer only trusting the 100 000km
advertised.
http://www.saft.fr/130-Catalogue/PDF/data_STM_en.pdf
just imagine 3000 cycle at 80%DOD, with 100km range its 3000X80km = 240
000km !!! dream mode here.
No one obtained even 100 000km out of Saft STM5-100 pack, probably the
charge and BMS are not adequate, heat kill them quickly.
More i seen is 5 years usage, about 3000 cycles out of STM5-100R on a rental
go-kart track in Paris, capacity was reduced at the end and modules dying
slowly from year 4 to 5, a very good life in such application.
(1 to 2C current near all the race time)
Philippe
Et si le pot d'�chappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: Report: Investigation of breakdown of the SAFT STM5-100
battery, TS li-ion comment heard
> On 14 Feb 2004 at 9:25, Philippe Borges wrote:
>
> > now more
> > than 1500 cycle 80%DOD dixit Saft
>
> This is most puzzling, as Saft's specs on the older STM5-100MR suggested
> they would perform well for 3000 cycles! As published by them:
>
> http://www2.ald.net/~roden/ev/images/saft_cyc.jpg
>
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> 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
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Americans are satisfied with things because they are large; and
> if not large, they must have cost a great deal of money.
>
> -- Lepel Henry Griffin, ca. 1885
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
All,
I'm behind on the list again, but I'm assuming this didn't make it to the
discussion list since Mike isn't a member. I've known Mike for a long time
and he was a member of our local EV club, so I've been forwarding Twike
comments to him.
Dave (B.B.) Hawkins
Officer with the Denver Electric Vehicle Council
http://www.devc.org/
Card carrying member and racer with The National Electric Drag Racing
Association
http://www.nedra.com/
Lyons, CO
1979 Mazda RX-7 EV (192V of YT's, but with a dead DCP controller the 15
year-old daughter is screwed!)
1989 Chevy S10 Ext. Cab (144V of floodies, for Ma and Pa only!)
>Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:38:36 -0500
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("David (Battery Boy) Hawkins")
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: In defense of Twike
>
>Hi guys,
>
>Thanks for forwarding these messages to me, Dave.
>
>I'm a big fan of the Twike, and getting involved with them in the USA.
>There are a lot of hurdles to ownership, including the price, though used
>ones are about half of new. It helps if you think of it as "The Ferrari
>of Bicycles", as I do.
>
>>>Steven Lough wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I found them overly complex. All the gears and pedals for human assist
>>>> could have / should have been left off.
>
>The Twike IS available without pedals. The point of the vehicle is that
>it is a human/electric hybrid. The pedals allow one to build leg strength
>while commuting to work, rather than just sitting in a car, sliding
>towards sedentary illnesses like diabetes and heart disease. They extend
>range by about 10%, or about as much again as the regen braking. Its also
>an all-weather athletic trainer, and using the Twike for an hour or three
>per day for commuting and errands can put anyone into Olympic condition,
>without time and money wasted on a health club.
>
>>>> All those C-cell nicads in series/paralell were asking for
>>>> bad connection failures.
>
>Some of the battery packs have had very long lifespans. I don't think
>they have a problem with connection failures, but there is a problem with
>batteries draining to zero when the bike is not plugged in, and then being
>impossible to restart.
>
>>>The 300 volt battery packs, were so scarey that even I backed off trying
>>>to service them.
>
>Definitely no user serviceable parts inside! Only a licensed electrician
>or somebody with factory training should work on the battery pack. I
>think they do exchages on packs, and in Europe they have a battery leasing
>system...
>
>>>The price was just unbelivably high, like $20 for a pedal assist 2
>>>seater. If Eric had spendt this on solid Ev componets and service they
>>>would have had a much longer hang time in the full sized EV market.
>
>Its hard to say. ALL EVs are expensive. Its brutally tough out there!
>But the Twike is one of the only factory built EVs, other than the EV1,
>that I've driven and been really blown away by. That's partially because
>I like the pedalling feature, if you're not into cycling, the machine
>loses a lot of its appeal right away.
>
>It's been years
>>>since I was in a Ev's Nw store. I should look him up and see if he got
>>>to ride the Ev scooter wave. They certainly tried hard enough.
>
>It had been a long time since I had seen Eric, too, but I just went into
>the store a week ago. It was good to see him, and he's still cranking
>away, I think the store is pretty well established now and will continue
>to have staying power.
>
>-Mike Patterson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A couple of people have recently mentioned problems with vacuum pump
cycling....
Scott Davis wrote:
The cutoff switch for the vacuum on the brakes isn't operating. The
pump runs all the time. At first I figured it was because the vacuum
lines were cracked. Replaced two of them, now it draws 26" vacuum
but still doesn't shut off. I'll try replacing the switch, unless
someone else has a bright idea.
Chris Zach responded:
Yeah, I have this problem too. The switch is wired directly to the pump
motor without benefit of a relay. Thus the vacuum switch points stick
closed and open from time to time. On mine, when it does switch it never
keeps *quite* enough vacuum which led to a scary stop while waiting for it
to "pump up"
I leave my pump on all the time while I figure this out.
Everyone seems to like this switch-
http://www.evparts.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=&product_id=1577
I have installed a few, and also sold them while working for Roderick.
From the evparts item description-
"This simple lightweight vacuum switch turns pump on
only when needed. Adjustable vacuum setting. Has COM,
NC and NO connections. The switch comes from the
factory set with a cut off at 18 to 22 inches of mercury.
The hysteresis is 15% to 20% of the 20 inches nominal
so it's about 3 to 4 in/Hg"
"Measures 2.25"L X 1.5"W X 1.5"H and weighs 0.8 oz."
No separate relay needed, and they appear to be reliable over time.
Of course using a sizable vacuum reservoir will also help reduce pump
cycling (and provide additional quantity of available vacuum)
HTH
Roy LeMeur Olympia, WA
Updated!
My Electric Vehicle Pages:
http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/evpage.html
Informative Electric Vehicle Links:
http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/renewables/evlinks.html
_________________________________________________________________
Check out the great features of the new MSN 9 Dial-up, with the MSN Dial-up
Accelerator. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
* LP8.2: HTML/Attachments detected, removed from message *
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 10:52 PM
Subject: Re: Carbon pile? and blowers
> Rod Hower wrote:
> >
> > Rich,
> > Sounds like you need one of Ameteks blowers.
> > We were testing one today that puts out
> > 1300 CFM at 20 inches of H2O.
> > It's only 14 inches in diameter and 5" thick
> > not including the 3HP 230Vac drive motor at
> > 9,000 RPM.
> > Rod
> > Serious air
> >
> That's more than my buddie's SuperFlow 110 Flow Bench!!!
> I rather boil water, or recycle the watts.
Rich, why not hook the blower in series with the load? That way you can keep
your cool and not "waste" watts? DC.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "David (Battery Boy) Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 1:34 PM
Subject: Fw: In defense of Twike
> All,
> I'm behind on the list again, but I'm assuming this didn't make it to the
> discussion list since Mike isn't a member. I've known Mike for a long time
> and he was a member of our local EV club, so I've been forwarding Twike
> comments to him.
>
> Dave (B.B.) Hawkins
Snipped for Brevity
> >Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:38:36 -0500
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("David (Battery Boy) Hawkins")
> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: In defense of Twike
> >
> >Hi guys,
> >
> >Thanks for forwarding these messages to me, Dave.
> >
> >I'm a big fan of the Twike, and getting involved with them in the USA.
> >There are a lot of hurdles to ownership, including the price, though used
> >ones are about half of new. It helps if you think of it as "The Ferrari
> >of Bicycles", as I do.
> >
> >>>Steven Lough wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I found them overly complex. All the gears and pedals for human
assist
> >>>> could have / should have been left off.
> >
> >The Twike IS available without pedals. The point of the vehicle is that
> >it is a human/electric hybrid. The pedals allow one to build leg
strength
> >while commuting to work, rather than just sitting in a car, sliding
> >towards sedentary illnesses like diabetes and heart disease. They extend
> >range by about 10%, or about as much again as the regen braking. Its
also
> >an all-weather athletic trainer, and using the Twike for an hour or three
> >per day for commuting and errands can put anyone into Olympic condition,
> >without time and money wasted on a health club.
Agreed! Just pedalling one around Alemeda made me feel something!! I sat
down for awhile and it went away tho. As it was explained to me by the swiss
Twike home office guys the Twike production was financed by a fund put
together primarily from doctors and that the funds most important rule is
that anything they invest in must be health related. Thus the pedals.
Anyway, the pedals do add to the range somewhat and the top speed attainable
by quite a factor. IIRC Gary and I had one up to right at 50 mph, maybe a
little more, by pedalling like crazy. I would dare say that a couple of
trained cyclists in good condition and with practice could make that thing
go like a rocket. Stopping and turning might be another thing. Bonneville
maybe?
Snipped for brevity
> >>>The price was just unbelivably high, like $20 for a pedal assist 2
> >>>seater. If Eric had spendt this on solid Ev componets and service they
> >>>would have had a much longer hang time in the full sized EV market.
> >
> >Its hard to say. ALL EVs are expensive. Its brutally tough out there!
> >But the Twike is one of the only factory built EVs, other than the EV1,
> >that I've driven and been really blown away by. That's partially because
> >I like the pedalling feature, if you're not into cycling, the machine
> >loses a lot of its appeal right away.
I always though they should be built both ways. Would be neat as a NEV,
parking control and stealth law enforcement unit, downtown use in major
cities etc. Could probably park 6 of them where on of todays cars park.
The Twikes are/were being built in Rudy Eggenbergers <sp> F-1 race car shop
on an almost hand built basis. Labor factor and cost at around $ 85.00 per
hour. Unnecessarily expensive techniques, materials and componants being
used such as the Schweitzer canopy I mentioned before. With a redesign with
an eye to modern batteries and drive , more cost effective production
tecniques on a limited production basis these could be built in the US and
marketed at a profit for 12K or less. Much less without the pedals.
Regards, David Chapman.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Are there other batteries that would fit nicely?
Yes. Leoch. They make several, several batteries that are "coincidentally"
the same footprint as many of the Hawker batteries. At the 10-hour rate,
they're actually better than Hawkers in many of their models. Unfortunately,
at EV discharge levels, their internal resistance makes their capacities
slightly less than Hawkers. But for the price, you cannot beat these.
They're Chinese-made and distributed in the U.S. out of California. As a
point of reference, the company I work ordered about 50 of the Leoch 90Ah
batteries that are the same size as the Hawker Genesis 70Ah modules. With
shipping to Phoenix, the cost was just over $50 per battery! For the smaller
batteries that fit the U Electricar trucks (and the even smaller batteries
that fit the US Electricar cars), you can probably expect to pay even
less...
http://www.leochusa.com/
-~-~- mason s. convey -~-~-
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rod Hower" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 6:19 PM
Subject: Tevan part and corporate idiocy
> I talked to my source at Chrysler today and he
> said they have 'an official process' of scrapping
> parts. He tried his best to get the goods for
> me to support the EV drivers and TEVan operators.
> Chrysler must 'contract' a company to dispose of
> these parts. That means they will pay somebody to
> pick up and distroy parts that can be used as opposed
> to somebody picking them up for free.
> Something is seriously wrong with this picture!!!!!
> I will try to contact the 'demolision company', but
> my guess is they'll tell me to get lost, lawyers will
> not accept reasonable use of surpluss parts.
Rod,
Would you perhaps like a second job with Arizona Electropulsion /
Fine-Junque as a contract "employee" ? Someone that would formulate a bid
and deliver it to the appropriate people at Chrysler for the scrapping of
these TEVans and parts? You would need to be sure and charge them enough
(lots of $$) to cover all upfront expenses and also nail down the salvage
desposal requirements. Worked for EPRI. I got 2 van loads of computer office
equipment in that deal too. Oh, and saved a TEVan from the scrappers too.
Regards, David Chapman.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You guys are really gonna love this one. But I am thick skinned so feel free
to rip away LOL!!
Anyway, last nite Rick and I were looking over a rather large 120 V input
24Vdc output power supply from a PBX system that I acquired with an eye to
deciding whether to market the whole rig as-is or pare the power supply out
of the deal to use for a battery charger. I noticed that this power supply
output + 24vdc @ 9.6 A , 5.2 vdc @ 12 A, and -24 vdc at 8.6 A!! The negative
voltage is what got me, I admit to being very confused about this. Could one
say charge a battery with this negative side simply by switching the
polarity of the wire connections and it would then become +24V? I admit I am
probably the lists electrical "Goober" but I am really puzzled over this
negative electricity thing. Also any suggestions as to how to hack this PS
to output all +24 volts would be appreciated. Would be perfect for bulk
charging my nicad packs especially @ 18 amps. Looks to have a lot of high
quality components and is obviously well filtered. TIA David Chapman.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is primarily for Lee but all feel free to chime in. In my earlier post
on this subject I was talking about a Lincoln welder I scrapped out and how
it had an AC as well as DC armature on the same shaft. Lee said that this
was a motor generator setup. I have a couple of these laying around already
so I am pretty familiar with this. However, in the Lincolns case I tend to
question this as the entire armature was driven by a Wisconsin cyl ICE and
there were no rectifiers in the case (if there were there probably would be
no reason for the DC portion of the armature) that would lead me to suspect
that the AC output was being rectified for DC welding use. I tend to believe
that this was Lincolns way of getting an AC and DC output in the simplest
way. Might be wrong. Anyway if this is correct wouldn't this be more
correctly a generator/generator? And then by extension could one not motor
the gen/gen by applying power to either the DC segment or the AC segment
thereby accomplishing the AC-DC hybrid motor drive that was being discussed?
Seems like it might have been big enough for a small EV as I believe the
output was listed as 225 amps and the operating voltage was something like
100 V. I hope you don't mind me questioning this Lee, just trying to learn
and apply some of what you have endeavored to teach me over the years.
Electrical theory I am not so good at yet, but I do think I have good
thinking outside the box skills. And as a demented purchasing agent,
peerless. LOL. Regards to all David Chapman.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter Eckhoff writes:
> In the vehicle I've been looking over, the Hawker G12v38AH 10C batteries
were
> replaced by a lesser number of Deka 8G27. In the technical specs of both
> batteries, the Hawkers have a stated capacity of 38 Ah at a battery weight
of
> 16Kg (74 pounds) while the Deka have a stated capacity of 86 Ah, at a
battery
> weight of 14Kg (64 pounds). If you go by just the capacity numbers, a Deka
> should go over twice as far yet the battery weighs 15% less. This does not
seem
> right. Does this have something to do with the 10C (discharge rate?) in
the
> Hawker's part number above? If so, at a two hour discharge rate, the
Deka's
> figure (interpolated form a pdf table) is approximately 33 A which would
be more
> in line with an apples to apples comparison. Then the 86 Ah value would
then be
> a 1C (20 hour) value (4.32A * 20 hours)? In terms of interpretation, is
this
> the way you all see it?
I think the two are pretty close in terms of specific energy.
I have about 101 Hawker 12V 38AH C10 Genesis batteries. They are about 33
lbs each.
The newer equivalent is the 12V GE42EP 42AH at C20, which weighs 32.9 lbs.
So I'm pretty sure your figures are incorrect (also, just a nit, it is C10
not 10C--C10 means 10 hours to discharge the rated capacity, while 10C at
38AH would be a 380 A discharge!).
More to the point for EV usage is the shorter discharge capabilities
(Peukert and all).
The 42AH Hawker 60 minute discharge rate is 33.8A (or 33.8 AH total).
For my S10 pickup, this would mean going 33.8 mph for an hour, as it gets
about 1 mile per AH real life efficiency in traffic, hills, etc., with a
312V (two strings of 26) pack. Since my pack is 10 years old, the most I
have driven is 38 mi on a charge. However, with new batteries the claimed
40-60 mi range seems about right. Hawkers are great power batteries--I have
pulled 170A while going up a 6% grade for 3 minutes at 45 mph with the 5000
lb truck. Also, they only lose about 1% per month. They can sit for years if
charged, but it is best to keep them on a float charge.
For my 2100 lb Insight with a temporary pack of 168V (one string of 14
12V38C10's),
I'm taking about 168 Wh/mi at 35 mph, so again a steady 33.8 mph would get
in theory use 33.8 AH in an hour. In practice I drive a bit faster, and 25
miles would be pretty much the best case limit (maybe more if the batteries
weren't 10 years old).
So the C1 rate is probably more realistic. The high power (low internal
resistance) of the Hawkers and low self-discharge rate is very helpful.
However, the specific energy seems to be very close at C20: 84AH for 66 lbs
for 2 Hawkers vs Deka 86AH for 64 lbs.
However, if the C1 rate is 33.8AH for the Hawkers, this is a bit better than
the C2 (2 hour) 33AH rate that you calculated for the Dekas. In reality, the
C1 rate is more realistic, unless you have the ultimate Red Beastie-style
lead sled (a pickup full of batteries).
Gary
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David,
Sign me up! I would like to help 'scrap' things
out with your company. Let me know how we get
this joint venture going.
Rod
--- David Chapman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rod Hower" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 6:19 PM
> Subject: Tevan part and corporate idiocy
>
>
> > I talked to my source at Chrysler today and he
> > said they have 'an official process' of scrapping
> > parts. He tried his best to get the goods for
> > me to support the EV drivers and TEVan operators.
> > Chrysler must 'contract' a company to dispose of
> > these parts. That means they will pay somebody to
> > pick up and distroy parts that can be used as
> opposed
> > to somebody picking them up for free.
> > Something is seriously wrong with this
> picture!!!!!
> > I will try to contact the 'demolision company',
> but
> > my guess is they'll tell me to get lost, lawyers
> will
> > not accept reasonable use of surpluss parts.
>
> Rod,
> Would you perhaps like a second job with Arizona
> Electropulsion /
> Fine-Junque as a contract "employee" ? Someone that
> would formulate a bid
> and deliver it to the appropriate people at Chrysler
> for the scrapping of
> these TEVans and parts? You would need to be sure
> and charge them enough
> (lots of $$) to cover all upfront expenses and also
> nail down the salvage
> desposal requirements. Worked for EPRI. I got 2 van
> loads of computer office
> equipment in that deal too. Oh, and saved a TEVan
> from the scrappers too.
> Regards, David Chapman.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
After buying a 10hp electric start Tecumseh engine
I got some good feedback for a generator engine
for the TEVan.
A couple of posts said I needed 15-20Hp and another
post said a used Insight engine would be ideal.
So this 10hp engine might go on my son's go cart and
I'm still looking for an Insight engine.
Any good leads on where I can find these?
Rod.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello David,
The +24 VDC is normally reference to ground and the -24 VDC is also
reference to the same ground.
You can do this by connecting four 12 volt batteries no.1, no.2, no.3 and
no.4 in series.
Now we choose a grounding or a common point on battery connection between
battery no.2 and no.3
If we read the voltage from battery no.1 which is the positive end to
battery no.4 which is the negative end, you should read 48 VDC.
Now if you read the voltage from battery no.1 to ground, you get +24 vdc.
Also if you read the voltage from battery no.4 to ground, you get -24 vdc.
Sometimes in a power supply, this common reference point may not be
grounded.
When reading this with a volt meter, keep the common lead of the meter,
normally black lead on the ground or common. Read the +24 VDC and -24 VDC
with the same meter test lead, normally a Red lead.
This will give a +24 VDC or -24 VDC meter reading.
If you want to used two 24 VDC volt sources from a battery pack, you just
connect of the first two batteries for one circuit and the next two
batteries for the other circuit.
If it is a power supply that has a grounded common point, you may have to
disconnect the common point from the ground.
Then just connect to the two 24 volt sources. The common point with be a
negative for the first voltage, but will be also a positive for the second
voltage.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 5:52 PM
Subject: Charging batteries with negative voltage
> You guys are really gonna love this one. But I am thick skinned so feel
> free
> to rip away LOL!!
>
> Anyway, last nite Rick and I were looking over a rather large 120 V input
> 24Vdc output power supply from a PBX system that I acquired with an eye to
> deciding whether to market the whole rig as-is or pare the power supply
> out
> of the deal to use for a battery charger. I noticed that this power supply
> output + 24vdc @ 9.6 A , 5.2 vdc @ 12 A, and -24 vdc at 8.6 A!! The
> negative
> voltage is what got me, I admit to being very confused about this. Could
> one
> say charge a battery with this negative side simply by switching the
> polarity of the wire connections and it would then become +24V? I admit I
> am
> probably the lists electrical "Goober" but I am really puzzled over this
> negative electricity thing. Also any suggestions as to how to hack this PS
> to output all +24 volts would be appreciated. Would be perfect for bulk
> charging my nicad packs especially @ 18 amps. Looks to have a lot of high
> quality components and is obviously well filtered. TIA David Chapman.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
My good buddy JB wrote:
> I've started to wonder about my DC-DC converter,
> since I've been told that it will melt down if the input
> voltage falls too low. The other day, driving with battery
> temps in the teens, going a bit further than I usually go,
> running the heater the whole time....by the time I was
> heading back home, my pack voltage was dropping down
> into the 170's during accelertions. I know that's high enough
> to be a safe level, but my question is, where does the unsafe
> voltage level begin?
JB, you're not even close to getting into trouble at 170V. The PC30 was a non-LV type,
so
yes, it's critical not to dip down to the 'blow-up' voltage level, which in this case,
is
right around 105V. I've blown up two of the PC30's, one in Lou Tauber's car, the
Screaming
Yellow Zonker Renault, when we had pushed the pack too far after an hour of tire
smoking
runs, when the 192V pack was shamefully, taken to cell reversal levels. I remember
seeing
the Emeter dip to 105V as we limped it home...that's the exact point where smoke rolled
out of the PC30, and poof, 'It's dead, Jim!'
I also toasted another PC30, with a 120V system that again, dipped into the low 100V
range.
For a while, both Rod and I were custom ordering PC30HV's from Todd, where they'd mount
higher voltage filter caps inside, 250V rated instead of the standard 200V caps, to
better
take the fully charged voltage of a 192V pack, which can get up to near 240V.
Some of the old Todds with the LV designation, such as the PC20LV and PC40LV could run
at
inputs as low as 70V or so and up to around 144V...the 'LV' was to designate that these
units could run on a 'low voltage' input source. The LV series was introduced back in
the
mid-nineties, aimed at being used with 96V-120V packs made up of 6V golf car batteries.
See Ya.....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Chapman wrote:
> This is primarily for Lee but all feel free to chime in... a Lincoln
> welder I scrapped out had an AC as well as DC armature on the same
> shaft. Lee said that this was a motor generator setup.
First, there is no physical difference between a 'motor' and a
'generator'. The same machine can be used for either function; any motor
can be used as a generator, and any generator can be used as a motor.
The machine I was talking about was a 'rotary converter'. This is a
normal-looking DC motor, but it also has a set of slip rings at the
opposite end of the armature from the commutator. The slip rings can
connect to the same windings as the commutator; in this case the output
is NOT isolated, and the peak AC voltage is always the same as the DC
voltage. For example, 120vac = 170v peak = 170vdc.
Some rotary converters have two *isolated* sets of windings on the
armature. One set connects to the commutator, and the second set
connects to the slip rings. Now the DC and AC sides can have different
voltages, and are isolated from each other. For example, I have a 36vdc
to 120vac rotary converter.
> wouldn't this be more correctly a generator/generator?
If you spin the armature with an external power source, then you are
using both halves of the rotary converter as a generator; it is indeed a
generator/generator.
But if you leave the shaft free to spin and *apply* power to one set of
windings (DC to the commutator, or AC to the slip rings), then it
functions as a motor/generator. DC in gives you AC out, or AC in gives
you DC out.
People may think rotary converters are ancient, inefficient, worthless
technology. You might be surprised to learn that they are HALF the size
and weight of a separate motor and generator, and have HALF the losses
(thus higher efficiency). The DC side is essentially pure DC, and the AC
side is a pure sinewave. The rotary converter I have is 37.5vdc at
30amps input, 114vac at 9amps output, which is 91.2% efficiency.
--
"Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the
world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!" -- Margaret Meade
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
