EV Digest 3473
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Boy, is my pack weird...
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) OT: Carbon sequestration
by JD & Heather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Pre-EVent Report from Port Townsend
by Roderick Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Pre-EVent Report from Port Townsend
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Pre-EVent Report from Port Townsend
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Deafscooters MiniHarley
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: one, or more, motors
by Aaron Birenboim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Boy, is my pack weird...
by Seth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Protected Mail Request
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
21) Re: dc/dc converter rec's for 156 volts?
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Power Plants and Excess Capacity
by "Mark Thomasson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hm. Last time I did this I found that I had a net *loss* of power from
the pack. Apparently the MC takes about .4 amps, and it would sometimes
drain more than it put in.
Odd as heck. Are we sure this sort of thing works on long strings? I'm
beginning to doubt the logic that taking the pack to 390 does any good
since the low batteries are not going to come up and more of the high
ones will simply be driven to 17-18 volts.
Chris
Seth wrote:
Set your dolphin to ~13.62 V per module and float it all week. That will
be a good start towards getting them more equal. After you have done
this, then you can start to think of the pack as charged.
Seth
On Apr 17, 2004, at 5:54 PM, Chris Zach wrote:
Well, if it turns out that I dropped this pack because it was cold I
am going to be very upset :-)
That said, I've cut the charge down to the Dolphin's chargers. 2 amps
and now batteries that were reading 16+ volts under charge are now
reading more rational numbers like 14.7. The difference in battery
level between the highest and lowest (that I can get to) is now about
a volt or so (some are in the 13's, some in the 14's)
Hm. However I will say that I checked the temps on the batteries at
16-17 volts and they were not even warm. Does that make sense? Is the
battery gassing when it is not warm to the touch (positive and neg
terminals and the top were cool)
So far though I think I have put 16 amps into the pack after replacing
two batteries and overall pack voltage is about 350. This is good,
since the pack was down 12 amps and those 16 are "corrected" amps from
the E-meter (takes into account battery efficiency on the upside,
actual on the downside)
Getting there.
Chris
Seth wrote:
Temperature makes that much difference. That's one reason why I hate
lead.
Seth
On Apr 17, 2004, at 4:32 PM, Chris Zach wrote:
Ok, first off: I'd really love to know who keeps switching my pack
around. On monday I had batteries that could not handle 12 amps for
45 minutes. Now these same batteries will handle 40 amps for 30
minutes....
And still be in the low 11's. True it was in the 30-40's on Monday
and is now in the warm 70's. Does temp make *that* much of a
difference?
I decided to put the pack back under the car and charge it up. My
thought was to charge it using the MC then discharge it using the
heat system (3,000 watts).
In charging I noticed something *very* interesting: At 375 volts,
some batteries were sitting down at 14 volts and a few were at 16.5
volts. Oooohkay; I need battery regulators. How badly are these
batteries getting baked at this point? Would low charging currents
keep batteries from being cooked?
I'm beginning to wonder: The on-board charger will only charge at
about 2 amps. The MC does it at 18. The pack blew out not while I
was using the Dolphin, but about a month after I started using the
MC. Possibly I dried out some batteries because they were going
sky-high while the laggards never got fully charged.
The big question about regulators is this: When the battery gets to
15 volts or whatever, does the regulator then have to bypass *all*
of the current around the battery in question? IE: Do I have to wire
out cables that can handle 20 amps (12 gauge at least) and do the
regs have to each be able to dissapate 18 amps *15 volts (like close
to 300 watts of heat)
That's a halogen lamp. Each. How the heck does one dissapate that
amount of heat?
I'll take 50 regulators. But either they need to be small enough to
fit in two square inches of space or they have to be wired into a
*very* securely constructed aux connector. I'm concerned about this
one; there is no way I can fit 20 amp relays in the battery
compartment so this connection would have to be un-isolated. With 50
twelve gauge wires in some sort of massive conduit. With up to 300
volts of potential and six hundred if the wrong short happened
anywhere.
Um... Help!
Chris
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've put off asking the list this question because of how most
listers look upon OT posts but I've written to college professors,
chemists, even Scientific American with zero replies so with the recent
discussion of "cleaning the air" I just have to ask for input from the
list. This list is full of some of the smartest people I've met so here
goes. My sincere apologies to the list administrators but I'm desperate
for an answer to this.
As part of a corrective action concerning global warming, one of the
ideas (on a global scale) is to sequester CO2 underground, probably in
the very holes the oil was pumped out of. I have an idea of trying to
start some sort of "distributed seguestration" movement. Is it possible
to produce a low power device that would either remove CO and/or CO2
from the air and pump it deep enough underground to prevent it from
getting back into the atmosphere or a similar device that would convert
atmospheric carbon into a durable solid that could then be buried? Yes,
I know trees already convert atmospheric carbon to a somewhat durable
solid but at best most woods only hang around for about a hundred years
before decomposing or being destroyed and there is still a lot of
disagreement about how much carbon a tree absorbs and for how long
during it's lifetime the tree will be a carbon sink before leveling off
to a slower rate of carbon absorption.
The design parameters (if that's the right term) I have for this
device would be low power requirement, as close to solid state/no
maintenence as you can get, quiet, home buildable by anyone, and
constant operation. Low power so it can be powered by a single solar
panel or small wind turbine. If you have to use grid power to do this,
which is probably made from coal, you might as well simply put the
electricity from the panel or turbine into the grid. Solid state/ low
maintenence for so it can be a "fire and forget" kind of machine till,
in the case of a device that converts gas CO to solid carbon, you need
to bury it. Which goes hand in hand with quiet, so you can put it in a
corner of your back yard and not worry about neighbors crying NIMBY or
put in a wilderness area away from people without disturbing the
wildlife. An since it would be a low power device it would probably need
to run constantly to do any appreciable amount of sequestration, a
battery pack with the solar panel. I'm sure the process of sequestering
or converting to solid would be devided into sub-processes and the
process with the lowest energy requirement could be done at night.
If a device like this could be built, I could see a movement
beginning where plans would be provided free on the internet and people
around the worl could build there own little carbon sinks in there own
backyard, then build more and spread them like Johnny Appleseeds (Johnny
Carbonsink?). Or, if the prospect of building them isn't doable by your
average layman, more technically capable individuals could build them
and sell them for the cost of parts.
I know this might be a really pie-in-the-sky kind of idea and I have
no idea if it can be done but I know of no other people who I could ask.
Thanks for any ideas or help.
John David
98 Nissan Frontier (soon to be de-ICEed for one of Victor's AC systems)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Howdy Folks
This is not Rod but Roy sending out a last minute promo from Rod's computer.
Rod, Rich, Father Time, and myself have been hammering much of the
day to get the variety of EVs here ready to go for the big show
tomorrow. There will be quite a few so come on down if you are in the
area.
I am sure that I will miss a couple, but here is a list of what we
expect to have there-
Gone Postal, Lightning Rod Street Rod, Lectro Rover, tire-meltin'
golfcar, Rod's "Chick Magnet" NEV, two of Father Time's drag bikes
and the "Blue Dragonfly" human/electric hybrid, 60mph Barstool,
Silver Bullet 300ZX Drag Car, two Morad 1500 scooters, eGo scooter,
EV Global eBike, and Rod's favorite truck, it just barely holds one
adult and it says "700hp" on the hood, but it looks more like he
stole it from a 3 year old boy :^D
I have spent the afternoon/evening custom fabricating various stuff
including an aluminum bed for the golfcar, xtra large fuse holder for
Gone Postal, and assisting the Madman (Rich) installing stuff and
re-routing cabling in Gone Postal. In the morning, we will be washin'
and cleanin' stuff and the usual mad rush to get it all together and
to the EVent.
See Ya There!
Roy LeMeur
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So, just what TIME and exactly WHERE will all this stuff be?
At 09:41 PM 4/17/2004, you wrote:
Howdy Folks
This is not Rod but Roy sending out a last minute promo from Rod's computer.
Rod, Rich, Father Time, and myself have been hammering much of the day to
get the variety of EVs here ready to go for the big show tomorrow. There
will be quite a few so come on down if you are in the area.
I am sure that I will miss a couple, but here is a list of what we expect
to have there-
Gone Postal, Lightning Rod Street Rod, Lectro Rover, tire-meltin' golfcar,
Rod's "Chick Magnet" NEV, two of Father Time's drag bikes and the "Blue
Dragonfly" human/electric hybrid, 60mph Barstool, Silver Bullet 300ZX
Drag Car, two Morad 1500 scooters, eGo scooter, EV Global eBike, and Rod's
favorite truck, it just barely holds one adult and it says "700hp" on the
hood, but it looks more like he stole it from a 3 year old boy :^D
I have spent the afternoon/evening custom fabricating various stuff
including an aluminum bed for the golfcar, xtra large fuse holder for Gone
Postal, and assisting the Madman (Rich) installing stuff and re-routing
cabling in Gone Postal. In the morning, we will be washin' and cleanin'
stuff and the usual mad rush to get it all together and to the EVent.
See Ya There!
Roy LeMeur
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream.... http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Friday, April 16, 2004 9:25 PM, Rich Rudman
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Gee Roger what a long winded wonder way to agree with each other.
Well, I wanted to be clear about where we agreed and where we didn't
;^>
> Roger you don't seam to be buying into What we think we can get out
> of a Bigger motor with all the tricks.
True. I just don't see what your magic motor can have that hasn't
already shown up in one or more of the various motors that have
already been raced (ADC, Prestolite, Kostov, GE, Warp...), not what
tweaks would be applicable to this motor that wouldn't be equally
effective on any of the others.
I don't doubt that you can improve its operation under race
conditions, but I'll remain skeptical of the magnitude of the
improvement until I see some before and after dyno plots.
> One is the effort to keep a motor drawing current from one end of
> the track to the oher, and still have a efficient power conversion.
> This is not easy, Nor comes naturally to a series wound motor.
> But...Movable brushes, field weakening, Gap tightening, 2000 amp
> motor limit regualtion, and I think I have enough to make this
> happen.
Field weakening is an interesting trick to try... it worsens the
power conversion efficiency, but if you can field weaken enough to
keep the controller in/near current limit near the far end of the
track, you might very well end up with more HP to the track.
Of course, you will be field weakening at high voltage and current,
and the imbalanced field and armature currents will further increase
the likelihood of fireballing the motor, so it's a risky proposition.
I'll assume that Wayland's new 12" has interpoles and that you're
betting on adjustable brush rigging to clean the commutation up
further...
> Oh yea and Damon's Rexy 7 did win runs, and classes, I ran it to a
> 15 something at Denver.
To be fair, almost nobody "wins" a NEDRA class; most classes its a
matter of if you make it down the track you hold the record. Damon's
car doesn't hold any records currently, and 15-something is still
behind the 144V Dualin'7's record despite Damon's big bad GE, high
voltage pack, and monster controller. This is why I don't consider
it a particuarly good example of what a big single motor can do.
> The Megawatt monster, is long gone but one set of the tripple
> Prestolite motors lives in the Silver Bullit. Which has been
> setting 120 volt class records every time it's hit the track
> with Orbitals
OK, but again, even with 3 motors and 156V it didn't better Rich
Brown's record with the 144V Dualin'7. At 120V its even further
behind (but understandably, due to the lower voltage).
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Friday, April 16, 2004 5:24 PM, Rich Rudman
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok Ot, I know Dennis has some shit in his CE, that may or may not
> be there. But he has bragged about a large inductor that lets the
> controller get to full amps faster. OK... Could this actually help
> the controller to get bigger motor amps sooner to a set of series
> motors, that got short shifted at say 900 amps?
My 2 cents worth: an inductor is like a flywheel to current, it
opposes any change in current so it certainly isn't obvious how it
would help current build faster.
However, if Dennis's motor mods have resulted in his motor having
particularly low inductance, then perhaps adding additional motor
loop inductance could help the motor loop current to build by
allowing the controller's FETs to stay on for more of each pulse
before current limit shuts them off (current ramps up more slowly),
and keeping the motor loop current from decaying as far between
pulses.
Also, increasing the motor loop inductance will reduce the current
ripple in the motor loop, which will improve motor efficiency.
It seems to me that with a pair of motors in series, the motor loop
inductance is already 2x normal (and smaller motors tend to have more
inductance than large ones), so an external inductor is not likely to
provide much benefit. However, when the motors shift to parallel,
you now have 1/2 the motor loop inductance of a single motor and
adding some additional motor loop inductance might just be
beneficial.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> At 12:34 PM 4/15/04, you wrote:
> >The proofs in the time slips guys. Dennis Berube
>
> Nearest bike is 3 seconds behind. :^)
Try it on 13 Hawkers and a old Raptor 1200.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Gp notes:
>
> I have spent the afternoon/evening custom fabricating various stuff
> including an aluminum bed for the golfcar, xtra large fuse holder for
> Gone Postal, and assisting the Madman (Rich) installing stuff and
> re-routing cabling in Gone Postal. In the morning, we will be washin'
> and cleanin' stuff and the usual mad rush to get it all together and
> to the EVent.
>
> See Ya There!
>
Got the S/P manual swith to program and work. I had to call Ot for the
Options menu, Left my instructions manual at Home.. DuhhOOOO!
disabled the right rear motor, Got the tach to work on from the left
rear motor.
Got the 2nd set of breakers installed Fabbed wired and fired. We now
have 40 batteries that can move both drives or one drive, or Any set of
20 can be hot swapped and isolated on a run. Nice for getting home in EV
mode, or what's left ....off the track.
We should beable to have a pretty good day if Rod can keep the Zorch
under control.
The Zilla on the back drive was programmed to 2000 amps... full on. This
would be MY mistake.... and it cost us the Right rear half shaft. Opps
and sorry. Bigger and better stuff is being researched.
Bill, ROger and Otmar.. I gotta read the 1 Big Vs two small. You all
need to keep in mind we don't plan on using or making the one Big out of
anything made by AvDC or smaller than 10 inches. The one Big, will be
aLOT bigger than one 9 incher. So don't sharpen your pencils too sharp
with Load curves from AvDC. We will make our own curves.
Gonna be a lotta fun. I will learn Way much.
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> At 07:46 PM 4/15/04, you wrote:
> >As for the lower interia. How much? It doesn't seem to me that the inertia
> >of an 8 versus 9 inch woud matter much.
>
> An increase in diameter increases the rotational inertia to the
> third power, as I recall.
>
> _ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
> \'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> =(___)=
> U
> Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
You are counting pennys when you should be looking for C notes.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
> Indeed, I could get the bike to go a little quicker if I got fancy
> with the motor brush timing. It is a minor improvement, however. I could
> shave off two or three tenths, maybe a bit more. It certainly isn't going
> to get the bike back into the nines. Until I get decent batteries again,
> there really is not much point in spending time and money on minor
> improvements.
>
> Soon after I get hot batteries again, I plan to jump to a very
> high voltage AC drive (wound rotor) and go around all this brush nonsense
> completely. Why mess with brushes and commutators when you can do a much
> better job with transistors?
>
> _ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
> \'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> =(___)=
> U
> Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
I'll make it blunt
Minor improvements? Is your head is in the sand? Wake up and get back
to building a better motor and or drive.
Why Not AC??? good question Bill you have the power stage the DSP code
writer, and the chassis. You still have not bested anybodies time.
You have underestimated how hard a AC drive is.
Fine you are standing still, it's pretty fair money that somebody will
get past your times BEFORE you get new killer batteries. Waiting 4 years
is not playing the game.
It's getting lucky... Try it with normal batteries.
Something is wrong in your numbers... Otmar couldn't make 400 ftlbs with
1800 motor amps... It takes a full 2000 amps to make 400 ftlbs. I know
the Ft to amps on the 6.7s is quite a bit less than the 8 inchers can
do. What is wrong? Our numbers or your time slip??
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roger Stockton wrote:
>
>
> When you look closely at the 9" data, it looks like you are able to
> get more torque, but much less power, like 2x the torque yields 1/2
> the HP. This might be a great recipe for wheelies, or snapping
> half-shafts, etc. but not for low ETs...
>
> Just trying to understand...
>
> Roger.
Yup to the breaking things.
What we are trying to do is find something that we can measure and
improve on. Raw motor torque is just handy. It's also what Series motors
have in Spades.
The trick stuff in the "Big motor" is making big torque and then getting
the the motor to Stay alive, and keep on pulling.
As you Say it can't be done. Well with movable timing Field weakening,
and a stout controller, you now have a array of varibles to keep waking
up the motor as you go down the srip. Yea it would be nice if Both
motors had this. It's more affordable to do on a single motor. It's darn
near impossible to do it on more than 2 an keep them in sync.
Using a stock 9 is a bad concept. The nine does not offer that great a
improvment from the quite respectable on it's own right 8.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Otmar wrote:
>
> |
> | ____ _________
> | / \ / \
> H | / /\ \
> P | / / \ \
> | / / \ \
> | / / \ \
> | / / \ \
> |// \ \
> ______________________________________________
>
> --
> -Otmar-
> http://www.CafeElectric.com
> Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nice chart Otmar.
I have been looking at Ice shift curves just like this since the mid
80s. Joe and I were doing them in College. Yea I have been thinking
about this for a while.
the %50 point looks real good on paper. This needs to be matched to the
motor output curves, and final drive of the vehicle.
I expect that the wiggle room won't be very large, But fromexperience it
does vary... ALOT and messing with brush timing is going really add
acouple more collums to the matrix.
Just wondering.... I have the manual switch running..... Can't use
it.... no right hand motor....
With 1800 amp batteries, the curves do get up there don't they??
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >It is quite possible that I am missing something, but I think that
> >the focus on torque is a bit misplaced. Yeah, you want torque down
> >low, but what I think you really want is *HP*, and the big torque is
> >what is required to make HP at low RPM. But, if you only spend a few
> >feet of the run in the sub-500RPM range, how much is your ET really
> >going to benefit from having 30-50% more torque below 200RPM vs
> >having 40% more power up to 1500RPM (and perhaps beyond)?
>
> The ET is very dependent on the launch. The faster you put on
> speed, the quicker you get to the end of the track. Any improvement in the
> launch gets multiplied during the rest of the run.
>
> _ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
> \'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> =(___)=
> U
> Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
Yea you can say that again!!
Oh Bill Was that 800 motor ft lbs or 800 ftlbs at the tire surface. 1.33
Gs makes 798 pounds of thrust on the tire sruface for a average of 1.4
seconds in the 60 ft.
That's a whole lot less at the motor shaft, and quite belivable. And
within my numbers if what you "Could" do.
800 ft lbs on the motors would give you 2444 lbs of thrust on the tire
surface... or 4.07 Gs, And that's a REALLY quick 60 ft..
No Bill you can't do that, The Gone Poastal should do that, If we can
keep the drive in one piece. With 4300 lbs of Van to shove, this is as
underwheling as it would be over whelming on a bike....
The point with all this massive torque data is HOW long can we hold
these torque values? Backed against Ot's Peaks and valleys... It's where
do you want it, and how to get it that really counts.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 20:31:55 -0000
From: "deafscooter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Deafscooter's Another Mini Harley Scooter
Craig Uyeda ( Deafscooter ) got Another Pepboy's $299.00
(special price) on Brand new Harley E- Scooter
#88906 at PepBoy Store
And Craig going on High Modifications the Harley Frame and
strong add-on metal as strong frame than china's welding job
for high speed mini Harley Scooter
as my Crusin Every day during Summer time
Deafscooter will install Custom made parts
1. Custom made 20k-35k Watts E-Motor By Deafscooter
2. Special 48V Speed Controller By Deafscooter
3. Four Doped Battery packs will handle 1500 Amps Peak
4. Guage #2 or #4 Power cable Hook up ( not #12 or #10 )
5. Add on Rear Disc Brake to Crap "Band Brake"
6. Special High Speed Tires be mount on Both Rear and Front
7. Custom made Wheel for Rear end and special tires
8. #35 Chain Super strong with Custom made freewheel
sprocket
9. Steeing stable (Damper be install)
10. Electric systerm (Horn,Signal, Headlight ,Tail light
will Operation as Factory's Specifics)
============================================
Projects it will Go Fast as "Freeway Speed" you know......
Deafscooter will post Picture at VisForVoltage Forum
Craig Uyeda
Deafscooter
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> I see this adjustable brush timing thing as a similar dead end.
> Yes, it could shave off a couple of tenths, but it would be time and money
> taken away from more productive work on better batteries, an AC drive, or a
> host of other more fruitful paths.
>
> _ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
> \'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> =(___)=
> U
> Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
OK Bill I see your point..
You don't see the brutal improvemments that can be made to stock
motors. It's not just brush timing. You also don't see or know how bad
the timing really gets.
I have... and I am preaching what I have learned. So much so that I am
sinking thousands of Bucks into the Dyno to prove to you all that there
is a LOT to be gained.
Like twice the power, and without the poping and backfiring that you are
at the verge of on every run.
You haven't moved your brushes much since you installed the motors. You
don't know. You are Poohing something because "You know better" Try
it... you might be surprised.
I was , the motor darn near knocked me over!!!
You have been working on AC stuff for about as long as I have been out
of it. There is no Fruit Set yet. We both have running DC machines, lets
Play Ball!
The SOB that keeps making his motors better simply gets even faster when
the next Big thing gets here in Batteries.
For a matter of Fact We both have running AC machines.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roger Stockton wrote:
>
> On Friday, April 16, 2004 5:24 PM, Rich Rudman
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Ok Ot, I know Dennis has some shit in his CE, that may or may not
> > be there. But he has bragged about a large inductor that lets the
> > controller get to full amps faster. OK... Could this actually help
> > the controller to get bigger motor amps sooner to a set of series
> > motors, that got short shifted at say 900 amps?
>
> My 2 cents worth: an inductor is like a flywheel to current, it
> opposes any change in current so it certainly isn't obvious how it
> would help current build faster.
>
> However, if Dennis's motor mods have resulted in his motor having
> particularly low inductance, then perhaps adding additional motor
> loop inductance could help the motor loop current to build by
> allowing the controller's FETs to stay on for more of each pulse
> before current limit shuts them off (current ramps up more slowly),
> and keeping the motor loop current from decaying as far between
> pulses.
>
> Also, increasing the motor loop inductance will reduce the current
> ripple in the motor loop, which will improve motor efficiency.
>
> It seems to me that with a pair of motors in series, the motor loop
> inductance is already 2x normal (and smaller motors tend to have more
> inductance than large ones), so an external inductor is not likely to
> provide much benefit. However, when the motors shift to parallel,
> you now have 1/2 the motor loop inductance of a single motor and
> adding some additional motor loop inductance might just be
> beneficial.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
ROGEEERrrrrr I have to be up in 6 hours to charge EVs. I am getting
cranky again.
You clarly don't understand Buck motor controllers
The Ilim loop needs a longer ramp up. If not the current gets to high
too quick. A inductor lets the controller get the Big amps flowing
faster with out the long off DANGER cool down times. You get more amps
faster and smoother into a large low inductance motor. Or multi motors
in paralel.
Ot's stuff Groans while the event is in progress. You can hear it.
Damon's stuff vaporized.
Well reading your follow though YOU do understand it...
400 volt coontrollers don't use FETs, they use Igs.
And this whole post was not supposed to go to the whole list.
Ummm I got ya here, at the S/P point you have about LOT of back EMF.. so
you DON't need any more Henerys. No they are getting your way.
Think the Curtis Boooogg. Even 2000 amp controllers have some of thes
issues. It's the nature of the Beast. That wonder full bog just before
teh drive line twists off!!
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
Roger Stockton wrote:
>
>
> > Oh yea and Damon's Rexy 7 did win runs, and classes, I ran it to a
> > 15 something at Denver.
>
> To be fair, almost nobody "wins" a NEDRA class; most classes its a
> matter of if you make it down the track you hold the record. Damon's
> car doesn't hold any records currently, and 15-something is still
> behind the 144V Dualin'7's record despite Damon's big bad GE, high
> voltage pack, and monster controller. This is why I don't consider
> it a particuarly good example of what a big single motor can do.
You guys have Damon's ET wrong. I was dicing it out with Damon the day he turned his
best
time with his 12" GE powered RX7...let me tell ya, I was getting worried! Damon and I
are
good friends, but on that day, there was lots of trash talk between us...me in the
Zombie
with my 11" Kostov, Damon with his monster 12 incher. I had turned a 14.6 or something
and
was pretty happy, when Damon ripped off a clean 14.4. He was grinning like the Cheshire
Cat as he waved his time slip at me, thinking he had just set the best ET of the day. I
came back at him though, and triumphed with a 14.0, or something very close to that
(it's
been years), and 'that' wiped that grin from his face :-)...it also shut Rudman up for
the
day as well, as he had predicted Damon's car would beat mine.
My point is this. Damon's car with his BIG GE motor 'was' impressive. Remember, he ran
a
14.4 on very used, very tired, very out of balance batteries. I bet if his car had new,
strong batteries that day, a low 13 was easily in the cards, who knows, maybe even
better.
It's really not fair to say his car's performance with that motor wasn't good, because
again I stress this...he had bad batteries and turned a 14.4! There still aren't many
street legal EVs that turn times like that today with new batteries!
See Ya....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It sure seems to me like one motor/drive wheel
could be a more efficient and simpler solution
for a series/parallel system than two motors
tied together.
The practical problem is... how can a backyard
mechanic hook up two motors to two drive wheels
in a typical ICE chassis. Something common like
a Honda (insight perhaps?), 914, rabbit, fiero...
I don't think you'd want the motors hard-coupled
to the wheels. I don't think they'd appreciate the
shock and vibration. But... where's the room
to insert a drive shaft with some motion?
I'm pretty far from an M.E., and I have no idea
how one could isolate the motor from wheel motion
on a hobbiest level.
It sure seems elegant to me if we can get rid
of the clutch/transmission/differentials for some
sort of simple reduction gear or belt to
drive shafts.
Might there be room to align the motor axis in parallel
with the wheel axis? Or should I get used to the idea
of a turn in my drive train?
Seems to me like the way to go would be 2 motors
on independent rear suspension drive.
Did the EV1 do that?
I'd think that it might be more difficult to
couple two motors into a front-wheel drive system.
Do any available AC systems have series/parallel switching
available? (Zilla is DC...)
Just dreaming....
--
Aaron Birenboim | This space available!
Albuquerque, NM |
aaron_at_birenboim.com |
>http://aaron.boim.com |
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes this does good, and it works on strings. WHat has a 0.4A parasitic
load? If the pack was at different temperatures from start to finish,
then capacity would be different...
Seth
On Apr 17, 2004, at 11:59 PM, Chris Zach wrote:
Hm. Last time I did this I found that I had a net *loss* of power from
the pack. Apparently the MC takes about .4 amps, and it would
sometimes drain more than it put in.
Odd as heck. Are we sure this sort of thing works on long strings? I'm
beginning to doubt the logic that taking the pack to 390 does any good
since the low batteries are not going to come up and more of the high
ones will simply be driven to 17-18 volts.
Chris
Seth wrote:
Set your dolphin to ~13.62 V per module and float it all week. That
will be a good start towards getting them more equal. After you have
done this, then you can start to think of the pack as charged.
Seth
On Apr 17, 2004, at 5:54 PM, Chris Zach wrote:
Well, if it turns out that I dropped this pack because it was cold I
am going to be very upset :-)
That said, I've cut the charge down to the Dolphin's chargers. 2
amps and now batteries that were reading 16+ volts under charge are
now reading more rational numbers like 14.7. The difference in
battery level between the highest and lowest (that I can get to) is
now about a volt or so (some are in the 13's, some in the 14's)
Hm. However I will say that I checked the temps on the batteries at
16-17 volts and they were not even warm. Does that make sense? Is
the battery gassing when it is not warm to the touch (positive and
neg terminals and the top were cool)
So far though I think I have put 16 amps into the pack after
replacing two batteries and overall pack voltage is about 350. This
is good, since the pack was down 12 amps and those 16 are
"corrected" amps from the E-meter (takes into account battery
efficiency on the upside, actual on the downside)
Getting there.
Chris
Seth wrote:
Temperature makes that much difference. That's one reason why I
hate lead.
Seth
On Apr 17, 2004, at 4:32 PM, Chris Zach wrote:
Ok, first off: I'd really love to know who keeps switching my pack
around. On monday I had batteries that could not handle 12 amps
for 45 minutes. Now these same batteries will handle 40 amps for
30 minutes....
And still be in the low 11's. True it was in the 30-40's on Monday
and is now in the warm 70's. Does temp make *that* much of a
difference?
I decided to put the pack back under the car and charge it up. My
thought was to charge it using the MC then discharge it using the
heat system (3,000 watts).
In charging I noticed something *very* interesting: At 375 volts,
some batteries were sitting down at 14 volts and a few were at
16.5 volts. Oooohkay; I need battery regulators. How badly are
these batteries getting baked at this point? Would low charging
currents keep batteries from being cooked?
I'm beginning to wonder: The on-board charger will only charge at
about 2 amps. The MC does it at 18. The pack blew out not while I
was using the Dolphin, but about a month after I started using the
MC. Possibly I dried out some batteries because they were going
sky-high while the laggards never got fully charged.
The big question about regulators is this: When the battery gets
to 15 volts or whatever, does the regulator then have to bypass
*all* of the current around the battery in question? IE: Do I have
to wire out cables that can handle 20 amps (12 gauge at least) and
do the regs have to each be able to dissapate 18 amps *15 volts
(like close to 300 watts of heat)
That's a halogen lamp. Each. How the heck does one dissapate that
amount of heat?
I'll take 50 regulators. But either they need to be small enough
to fit in two square inches of space or they have to be wired into
a *very* securely constructed aux connector. I'm concerned about
this one; there is no way I can fit 20 amp relays in the battery
compartment so this connection would have to be un-isolated. With
50 twelve gauge wires in some sort of massive conduit. With up to
300 volts of potential and six hundred if the wrong short happened
anywhere.
Um... Help!
Chris
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
------------------ Virus Warning Message (on hestia)
Found virus WORM_NETSKY.P in file data.pif
The file data.pif is moved to /var/tmp/virXNTC0439z.
---------------------------------------------------------
Bad Gateway: The message has been attached.
------------------ Virus Warning Message (on hestia)
data.pif is removed from here because it contains a virus.
---------------------------------------------------------
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You can if and only if the outputs are isolated
--
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://infoarchive.net/
http://nnytech.net/
elaine chiu wrote:
Is it possible to take 4 of the 36-48 volt to 12 volt modules they sell
surplus and connect them across 3-4 batteries at a time, paralleling the
12 volt outputs together? I can't tell if these modules need to have a
common ground to the 12 volts, where obviously this idea wouldn't work.
what do you guys think?
or, once I figure how much night driving we do, the cheapest may still
be to charge the auxiliary battery separately when I charge the main pack?
elaine
'76 citicar and, now, a '87 mitsubishi/dodge converted pickup
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Judebert, See my comments below. Maybe some of the electric utility people
on the list can add to this or make corrections. Mark T.
Most coal fired utility plants use pulverized coal. The fine powder coal is
blown into the boiler combustion section and totally burned in seconds. The
heat from this combustion is absorbed by water in tubes that circulate it to
the steam drum at the top of the boiler. Water boils mostly in the tubes
and the steam drum separates the liquid water from the steam. Steam then
flows to the steam turbine, where a valve controls how much steam enters the
turbine and thus how much power is generated. Steam exits the turbine at
very low pressure and is condensed by cooling it with water or air. This
condensate is sent back to the boiler to produce more steam. Large coal
fired plants (500 Mw) can cut-back or crank-up at a rate of 5% per minute.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jude Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 11:12 PM
Subject: Power Plants and Excess Capacity
> I'm in Florida, and I'm told most of our generation here is coal. I'm
> not too concerned with environmental issues, I just want something
> ultra-reliable.
>
> But environmental issues aren't completely lost on me, either. I'd like
> to know if I'm actually hurting the environment here, but I don't know
> where to get the figures.
>
> All that aside, my real issue is something said on the "cleaner than an
> EV" thread, I believe. Someone said that the less load on the power
> plant, the less fuel burned, or the less uranium reacted. I'm having
> trouble understanding how this can be the case.
Nothing is free. The energy in electricity is derived from burning the
coal. Some of the energy from the coal escapes out the exhaust stack, is
used to run auxilliary equipment, or is lost to the cooling water in the
condensor. All the input energy from the coal and where is goes can be
precisely accounted for.
>
> Certainly the coal will burn at its prescribed rate and produce a given
> amount of heat, regardless of the load on the generator. I *can* see
> that the steam produced will not lose as much energy on its trip around
> the generator circuit, since it doesn't have to "push as hard" on the
> generator, and therefore won't be able to absorb as much heat from the
> coal fire as if it had been cooled pushing a loaded generator. I can
> guess that someone will therefore try to burn a little less coal.
Power to the steam turbine is controlled by controlling the steam flow rate
to the turbine. On a "per pound" basis, the steam always loses about the
same amount of energy passing through the steam turbine. To produce half as
much electrical power, half as much steam goes through the steam turbine.
Which therefore means half as much steam is produced, and half as much coal
is burned.
> But
> surely when I turn off my lights the coal doesn't slow down its burning
> or produce less heat; in fact, a little more of the coal fire's heat
> will be wasted to the atmosphere instead of going to the steam.
Say Joe Refinery starts a 1000 hp electric motor on ABC Electric Utility's
power grid. This is a small load by today's standards, so Joe Refinery did
not need to warn ABC that this load was being added to ABC's grid. The 1000
hp load comes on is seconds, and ABC's power plants cannot respond
immediately by producing more power. Initially voltage (I*R) losses
increase in the system because more current if flowing in the distribution
lines, transformers, amd generators. Everyone on the grid gets a little
less voltage and therefore less power (P = I*V). The extra load on the
gernerators back at ABC's power plants causes them to slow down, and the
frequency on the grid drops slightly from its usual 60 hz. All the AC
motors on the grid also slow down slightly and use less power (
P=T*S=torque*speed). Essentially, Joe Refinery is borrowing a little power
from everyone else on the grid when the 1000 hp motor first comes on line.
ABC has an agreement with everyone to keep voltage and frequency within
certain limits. ABC's closed loop control system sees the drop in voltage
and frequency and corrects by adjusting generator excitation and opening the
steam valve to the turbine (feedback control). The control system knows
that more steam needs to be generated and doesn't wait around for steam drum
pressure to drop. It immediately adds more coal and feedwater to the boiler
(feedforward control). Most users do not notice all this taking place
because the load change is small in relation to the entire system. But
ocassionally you can see the lights flicker at night. This is sometimes
caused by a large industrial load starting up.
So more coal is not immediatly burned when you turn on your EV charger.
Your are borrowing a little from all the other users on the grid. Also, in
the power plant, the steam drum has extra capacity that allows the system to
swing without the need to vent steam or hot gases. With coal powder as the
fuel, heat to the boiler can be added or reduced quickly.
>
> The upshot of this line of reasoning is that charging during off-peak
> hours could be environmentally conscious.
It is definitely cheaper and more efficient.
> They're probably burning
> enough coal to provide what they think they're peak load at any given
> moment will be -- so when a bunch of people turn on the lights, they
> don't get dim lights.
No, as discribed above, there is a one to one relationship between
electrical energy used and the amount of coal burned. The lights do get
dimmer, just not enough to notice.
> My charging will just take a little of that
> excess, and nobody gets hurt. Unless they all decide to turn the lights
> on at the same time.
If this were the case, why can you claim the exeess belongs to you, and not
to Joe Refinery or the Qwicky Mart, or any of the other users on the grid.
And if someone does start using the excess capacity the utiltiy keeps
online, the utility will need to add more to replace it. If you are going
to use energy, its going to have some environmental impact. To totally
absolve my conscience, I bicycle as much as possible. Solar power is good
to, but costs big $'s. Mark T
>
> Judebert
>
--- End Message ---
