EV Digest 3474
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Boy, is my pack weird...
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Pack charge
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Boy, is my pack weird...
by Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Hybrids that Plug IN !
by Steven Lough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Battery pack suicide in 5 easy steps.
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Endgame
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Help with EV motor data
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Yet Another "Super" battery (Fact or Fiction? You decide.)
by "John G. Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Regs...
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Chargers...Most automated for 120v
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: AVCON interface
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Surplus NiCds - how to charge, test & recondition?
by "John Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Help with EV motor data
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Surplus NiCds - how to charge, test & recondition?
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Regs...
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: [Fwd: Re: Fw: Two 8" vs 1 9"...Zombie Gets a BIG motor!]
by Rich Rudman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Regs...
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Regs...
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
On Sunday, April 18, 2004 6:16 AM, John Wayland
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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...
> I had turned a 14.6 or something and
> was pretty happy, when Damon ripped off a clean 14.4.
Thanks for the correction, John. So, with a single big motor, high
voltage pack, and monster controller, his best run ever is about 0.3s
ahead of Rich Brown's 144V Dualin'7 record.
> Remember, he ran a 14.4 on very used, very tired,
> very out of balance batteries.
So the apologists say now ;^>
What his car *might* have done is irrelevant; what it did do was not
particularly impressive for what it should have been capable of,
although a 14.4 is quite respectable by anyone's standards. Just as
Damon's car *might* not have performed to its potential due to
non-motor-releated issues, there are any number of reasons that
multi-motor cars might have under-performed for reasons not related
to the multi-motor configuration.
I don't think that there is much point to us pointing to this single
motor car or that multi-motor car as 'proof' that one or the other
approach is superior; the motor alone doesn't determine the overall
performance. White Zombie is the perfect example: single motor or
multi-motor, it does well regardless, but vehicle weight and battery
type/voltage were changed at the same time as the motor(s), so one
can't point to small differences in performance and say it is due to
the motor(s) in use at the time.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sunday, April 18, 2004 1:30 AM, Rich Rudman
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ROGEEERrrrrr I have to be up in 6 hours to charge EVs. I am getting
> cranky again.
Hey, I didn't chain you to the keyboard! ;^>
I hope you got some sleep and are having a great time with Rod & the
others. Looks like the weather is cooperating for a change.
> You clarly don't understand Buck motor controllers
> Well reading your follow though YOU do understand it...
Whew, you had me worried for a minute there. ;^>
> 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.
Now you've confused me... are they getting my way or not?
I think back EMF and inductance affect things slightly differently.
Lots of back EMF reduces how much current you can jam to the
motor(s), but doesn't affect how *fast* you can change the current.
Inductance reduces the speed at which you can *change* the current,
but doesn't reduce the amount of current.
Just before the S/P shift, I agree with you, you have lots of back
EMF, and lots of inductance due to 2 motors in series, but as soon as
you shift to parallel, you have half the back EMF and 1/4 the
inductance, and if things are working like they should, your
controller is headed for current limit again. Seems to me that a bit
more motor loop inductance might reduce the delay between the shift
and hitting maximum motor loop current.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Running the actual Magnecharger logic on-board and the Prizm's Dolphin
computer. They pull about 120 watts together which is about .4 amps.
The MC was configured for a CV run of 340 volts. Thus when it hits 340,
it's current drops to zero. At which point the pack still has to power
the Dolphin and such, so it loses power till voltage drops below 338 or
so at which point the MC cycles on, goes above 340, repeat.
Chris
Seth wrote:
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 ---
Charged the pack to "full" then took a look at the batteries. Sure
enough the three that I identified as "low" on the current draw and
runtime tests did not come up as high as the rest of the pack. This lead
an equal number of batteries to go too high on the charge.
Replaced the low three with three new batteries. Next step will be to
roll the pack under the car again and run a 10 amp load test for three
hours tops. If the pack can provide 30 ah without going below 300 volts
then I will be more than happy.
Then I will try a modified charge cycle as follows:
Constant current to 375 volts. 18 amps max
At 375 volts, drop current to 2 amps and continue charge to 375 volts.
At 375 volts (again), charge till current draw is <1 amp.
At which point I will take a good look at the batteries and see what is
what. Hopefully this will keep the strong batteries from overcharging
while giving the rest a chance to "catch up". I think the running a full
bore 375 volt charge at 18 amps is causing some of the batteries to just
go to 17 volts plus while carrying 18 amps thru them. Very bad over the
long haul.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sunday, April 18, 2004 12:48 PM, Chris Zach
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The MC was configured for a CV run of 340 volts. Thus when it hits
> 340, it's current drops to zero. At which point the pack still has
> to power the Dolphin and such, so it loses power till voltage
> drops below 338 or so at which point the MC cycles on, goes above
> 340, repeat.
FWIW, this behaviour isn't constant voltage (CV).
Contant voltage behaviour is to charge at maximum (or whatever
configured current) until 340V, then it would hold 340V while the
current gradually tapers off to some small, but non-zero value. It
will continue to hold the pack at 340V forever, not let it discharge
to 338V and then restart.
In fact, if the parasitic load on the pack is about 0.4A, then the
current should never drop below this (and in practice probably
wouldn't drop below about 0.5A since the batteries will continue to
take a small amount of current until they'd been on charge for quite
a long time), since the charger would hold the pack at 340V and
supply the parasitic load current plus whatever the batteries are
taking.
Sounds like your charger is configured for constant current to 340V
and then shuts off until the pack discharges a set amount and then
restarts to top it back up. And, 340V is too low to fully charge the
batteries, 13.xV/battery is a float voltage.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I attended a seminar here in Seattle last week, called
"The New Apollo Energy Project" sponsored in part by US Representative
Jay Inslee of Washington State, and attended by US Senator Maria
Cantwell, and a dozen experts on climate, labor and industry, Energy,
Oil, and politics, etc.
Any way, one gal from Washington DC mentioned that Dalmer/Chrysler was
producing a "Plug-IN Hybrid" and as an avid reader of the EV
Discussion List, and Local EAA Pres.. I was a bit embarrassed to say I
had not heard of it yet...
So below are TWO very informative web sites for any one else who have
not heard yet either...
All about Plug In Hybrids from CalCars:
http://www.calcars.org/vehicles.html
and
from IEEE Spectrum On-Line "The SMART Hybrid"
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/publicfeature/jan04/0104epow1.html
--
Steven S. Lough, Pres.
Seattle EV Association
6021 32nd Ave. N.E.
Seattle, WA 98115-7230
Day: 206 850-8535
Eve: 206 524-1351
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://www.seattleeva.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
Roger Stockton wrote:
> On Sunday, April 18, 2004 6:16 AM, John Wayland
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > 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...
>
> > I had turned a 14.6 or something and
> > was pretty happy, when Damon ripped off a clean 14.4.
>
> Thanks for the correction, John. So, with a single big motor, high
> voltage pack, and monster controller, his best run ever is about 0.3s
> ahead of Rich Brown's 144V Dualin'7 record.
Disclaimer...both Rich Brown and Damon Crocket are good friends of mine, both are smart
guys, both built nice EVs based on RX7's, and both have their strong points.
That said, it's not fair to make the comparison to Rich Brown and his record setting
car
as you're doing, because Rich set his record with very strong, newer batteries, and
let's
face it, all of an EV's power comes from the pack, and the run is only as good as the
power the pack can ultimately deliver. For example, White Zombie ran its best ET of
13.1,
when it had a STRONG pack of Hawkers, in the prime of their life (coincidentally, with
Rich Brown at the wheel on his birthday). The same car with nothing else changed,
would a
year later, only manage high 13's low 14's, or about a full second slower all due to
tired
batteries.
> Remember, he ran a 14.4 on very used, very tired, very out of balance batteries.
> So the apologists say now ;^>
>
> What his car *might* have done is irrelevant; what it did do was not
> particularly impressive for what it should have been capable of,
> although a 14.4 is quite respectable by anyone's standards.
Figure in the same scenario as described for the Zombie for Damon's car. It's pretty
realistic to imagine the car picking up at least a second with a strong pack.
>
> I don't think that there is much point to us pointing to this single
> motor car or that multi-motor car as 'proof' that one or the other
> approach is superior; the motor alone doesn't determine the overall
> performance. White Zombie is the perfect example: single motor or
> multi-motor, it does well regardless, but vehicle weight and battery
> type/voltage were changed at the same time as the motor(s), so one
> can't point to small differences in performance and say it is due to
> the motor(s) in use at the time.
Good points. There are merits to both designs. Out of interest, when I switched from
the
single Kostov to the twin 8's, I changed nothing else at the time, same pack, same
controller, same tires, etc....it was just the motor swap. The twin motored car
immediately gained a half second, turning a 13.5 or so at the Sacramento Drags, this,
after it had slowed to the high 13's-low 14's with the Kostov due to the aging pack. I
'do' feel there's more motor power with this dual 8 setup than I had with the single 11
inch Kostov...it's too bad I couldn't get Hawker to re-sponsor the car with a fresh
pack
of 28, little Hawkers :-(
Today, my sponsor is Exide, so I'm using larger, heavier, more powerful batteries, but,
I'm down in voltage and starting all over. I'm pretty pleased that I've been able to
inch
my way back into the 13's, with the best ET at 216V being a 13.7 @ 97 mph...not too far
away from the 13.1 @ 99 mph achieved with a much lighter car with much higher voltage.
To be clear...I'm very happy with the dual 8, series-parallel setup. I'll be tweaking
it
more in the coming month, just to see how low in the 13's I can get the car to go.
Also to be clear, I 'am' in the process of building up a race prepped GE 12 incher with
servo controller brush rotation, and it 'will' get dropped into the Zombie and be
ready to
run in the coming months. You won't ever find me bashing the dual motor setup or a
single
BIG motor setup, both work well, both have set records. I like trying new ideas out,
and
right now, playing around with a BIG motor and experimenting with movable brushes seems
like a lot of fun...and, as nutty and wacked out as Rudman is, the guy's got some
pretty
good racing ideas in that head of his. The two of us are pretty scary when we're
together
and both on the amp curve...lot's of arguing, lots of butting in, lots of
energy....somehow, the friendship and collaboration works :-)
See Ya.....John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
'Plasma Boy Racing...we blow stuff up, so you don't have to!'
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm going to have to write a novel on this one. Very very interesting,
if sad.
Well, in the first test run after the charge and swap of 3 batteries,
the pack is down 16 amps and reading 288 volts. Same as before.
In checking individual batteries that I can reach, most are at 12.4, a
few are at 12.0, and one of them is at 10 volts and another at *8*
volts. This is out of the 17 batteries I can reach; my guess is the rest
of the pack matches.
Apparently I have some seriously dead batteries. That hide themselves
very well.
Now for the fun part:
Why?
I'm beginning to wonder if the agressive treatment that the Magnecharger
was set to (by me) screwed up the pack. The original settings I will
have to look up, however I did reconfigure it for a IUI with setpoints
at 375 and 390 volts. Perhaps what is happening here is that the pack
would hit 375 and be charging full-blast. This would have the effect not
of balancing the pack, but of running the "full" batteries into serious
overcharge and dry-out. It's a bad cycle: The weak batteries never get
charged, and the full ones get dried out.
And of course my springtime recussitation attempt by running the MC at
375 volts till battery current dropped below .5 amps (basically 3 hours
at 375) totally toasted the pack instead of helping. Thus the range drop
from 20 miles to 10 in a week or two.
As the top batteries dry out they die much earlier (thus dropping the
range in quantum steps), reverse, and heat up (making them dryer). Say
goodbye to the pack as things go down the tubes.
I'm learning. Slowly.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sunday, April 18, 2004 1:02 PM, John Wayland
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Disclaimer...both Rich Brown and Damon Crocket are good friends of
> mine, both are smart guys, both built nice EVs based on RX7's, and
> both have their strong points.
I've had the pleasure of meeting both of these guys, and watching
their cars run, and agree with you 100%.
I don't mean to bash Damon's car, It's just a convenient example of a
car with a big (the biggest I've seen in a car yet!) single motor
that, for whatever reason, didn't live up to its potential.
Likewise, I am using Rich's car as an example of a dual-motored car
that does better than most would expect. It is convenient for
comparison's sake that both are RX7s, although Rich's is a heavier
later model while Damon's is the older, lighter version.
I suppose my point all along was just that sticking a big motor in a
car doesn't guarantee it will perfrom well, anymore than sticking
multiple motors in one guarantees it will perform worse than a single
motor car.
> There are merits to both designs.
Absolutely!
> Also to be clear, I 'am' in the process of building up a race
> prepped GE 12 incher with servo controller brush rotation, and
> it 'will' get dropped into the Zombie and be ready to
> run in the coming months. You won't ever find me bashing the dual
> motor setup or a single BIG motor setup, both work well, both have
> set records. I like trying new ideas out, and right now, playing
> around with a BIG motor and experimenting with movable brushes
> seems like a lot of fun...and, as nutty and wacked out as Rudman
> is, the guy's got some pretty good racing ideas in that head of
> his.
That's for sure, and yes, it does sound like a lot of fun!
I look forward both to hearing how quick you get the twin 8's to go,
and how the monster GE responds to Madman prep (I hope that you guys
do throw us a dyno plot or two from the 'skunkworks' now an then...).
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Please rember ALL I have been using movable brush rigging for over 2 years
now on a ge type motor.It does work,my time slips prove it.It is worth.6
seconds(I know Bill its not much to you)John Force would kill for .6 sec.To the
person that said my car is no quicker than it was in Denver years ago at 10.20...it
has run 9.67 with the same type battery only 8 fewer on board.If I could have
hooked the track in Vegas a couple months ago it should have gone 9.40
Bill Dube you know we had the same type and number of batteries in Vegas the
SVR.You had a PRO riding the KILL cycle and I had my cousin driving a dragster for
the 1st time in his life,The Current Eliminator still was 1.3 seconds quicker
and over 300lbs. heaver.(with a smaller controller)You Had Much More Power to
Weight Than My Car but still lost by a lot.The things I have done to my motor
circuit and continue to try are what makes The CE quicker...When I get the
new HOT batteries CE will blow its old record away. Being a betting man Bill
Dube I will bet the CE that you cannot beat the CE with the Killacycle with the
same amount and kind of battery,even with your bigger controller.I will make
it even more intresting Bill I will let you set my controller up 300 motor
amps less than your lighter bike controller,I just want to use my moving brush
assembly. Stay on coarse John You Will See a much quicker car with the moving
brushes. Dennis Kilowatt Berube 3700+ runs in an EV
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Pack dropped. 30 of the 50 batteries can't maintain any reasonable
voltage under load. Funny: Only eight actually read below 12 volts, yet
if you put a 30 amp load on the rest for 5 seconds, the other 22 drop to
10 volts no problem.
I give up. Car is coming down; entire pack is a write-off. Anyone want a
94 Prizm no batteries? 4k and it's yours...
*grumble*
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am writing a little application to simulate a drag race between 2
electric vehicles, I got the weight transfer launch established and I
have a question about the amps a motor will pull.
lets say I've made the first few feet and the motor is now spinning 100
rpm. Now I need
1. pack voltage @ battery amps minus [EMAIL PROTECTED] to come up with the
voltage accros the motor, then divide by the winding resistance to see
what the motor will take?
If so, where do I get the winding resistances for motors?
2. Is there a chart for the controllers that give the battery amps vs
motor amps at various rpm's?
Is this a simple linear ratio or does switching and conduction
losses make it complicated?
looking at Uve's motor page I see the way of getting the voltage on rpm
and load, i assume that is the BEMF equation
Thanks, I promise to share if the idea works well.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
http://www.blacklightpower.com/
The claims for battery technology -
http://www.blacklightpower.com/battery.shtml - are startling if true; 1800
times the energy density of Lithium batteries, or 222WHr per gram, so a
1Kg battery would provide enough energy to operate an electric car for
over 600 miles.
Put a couple of Kg of that in a Prius and it would be a full EV - unless
you needed to drive more than 1000 miles between charges.
Just seems a tad too good to be true - and yet they seem to have attracted
a lot of investment.
--
John G. Lussmyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dragons soar and Tigers prowl while I dream.... http://www.CasaDelGato.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, I'm done pouting now. Feel a bit better.
Now for the pledge: Now that I have incinerated my lovely AGM pack I
will not put it back into the car without a serious battery management
system. This includes regulators (50), and a telemetry system to allow
me to charge a battery at random as well as monitor each battery in the
pack at will on a nice little display.
Rudman makes a regulator, looks interesting but I assume I would need
to: (a) mount it externally to the pack and (b) set it up to support up
to 10 amps of bypass current. Then again I have two strings and my
charger could put out up to 18amps of current. Perhaps I should size my
loads to support 18 amps of overcharge each? Or is there a way to have
the MC sense.... something. It can support constant current or constant
voltage charging in any combination.
Big difference between running 2 amp cables outside the pack and 20 amp
cables. Given that I would need over 50 cables, this is a lot. But
there's nothing that says that one battery would be fully charged while
the rest would be flat dead; causing the battery pack voltage to be low
while one of the batteries was getting lovingly bathed in 18 volts....
Am I on the right track? Or do I need to dumpster the MC and get myself
a PFC30 (Hm, another $2,000. Add it onto the $3,000 for a pack and $2000
for regulators. 7k. And that's not including the telemetry system.)
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have a PFC-20 that is controlled by an MSDOS 486 computer. I normally run
it from 120 VAC.
It both discharges and charges battery packs from 6 to 360 volts.
It also charges as small as single AA NiCad cells although it won't
discharge anything below 4 volts.
The discharge option can be deleted to save some bucks.
Talk to Rich if you want a copy.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Ganapoler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 2:36 PM
Subject: Chargers...Most automated for 120v
> I've heard that Zivan or PFC are good ones. Anyone have any idea which
> would be best for a battery pack of 10 12v acid flood batteries?
>
> Dave Ganapoler
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Try http://www.eaaev.org/avcon1450.html
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 11:47 AM
Subject: AVCON interface
> Is anyone able to point me to some information on how to attach an AVCON
receptacle to my charger?
>
> I've got a US Electricar S10, and would like to be able to plug it into
public charging spots. It came with an AVCON receptacle in the bed box, but
it was not attached.
>
> Thanks
> Scott
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
We have a lot of NiCds bought surplus from Translink, probably were used
for Skytrain in Vancouver.
How to test & recondition them? Any suggestions on automatically cycling
them? I was planning to cycle them with two timers, a 12V charger, a
bucket of water and nichrome wire. But if I have to individually
discharge each cell, it will be much harder.
If they are low capacity, can I replace the caustic? ... is this a diy
activity?
What are these batteries worth?
We have two kinds:
Saft SRX130P
130Ah modules: 5cells strapped together= 12V nominal.
~7.25 x 17.75 x 13.5" tall including post. ~84lbs per module.
Big honkin' 12mm posts! According to Saft website, these are for
emergency power backup in trains.
I did 2 cycles at ~130A, got about 70Ah before some cells reversed.
Hoppecke FNC-KFMP
C5=100Ah - individual little plastic cube cells
~5x5x7"tall including cap.
Not tested any yet.
Thanks,
john
John Foster
VEVA Tresurer,
Dynasty Electric Car Co Engineer/Assembler
1980 Dodge Omni 128V
"Cars are for Women with Children, real men ride Bromptons"
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You are using "Permanent Magnet Motor" equations.
Most EVs use either "Series Wound Motors" (with DC controllers) or
"Induction or Synchronous Motors" (with AC controllers).
The only motor that follows the "Permanent Magnet Motor" equations is the
synchronous motor. It only follows that model when the rotor current is held
constant. I don't know of any controllers that do that. Victor may know if
any do.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Shanab" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EVlist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 6:43 PM
Subject: Help with EV motor data
> I am writing a little application to simulate a drag race between 2
> electric vehicles, I got the weight transfer launch established and I
> have a question about the amps a motor will pull.
>
> lets say I've made the first few feet and the motor is now spinning 100
> rpm. Now I need
> 1. pack voltage @ battery amps minus [EMAIL PROTECTED] to come up with the
> voltage accros the motor, then divide by the winding resistance to see
> what the motor will take?
> If so, where do I get the winding resistances for motors?
> 2. Is there a chart for the controllers that give the battery amps vs
> motor amps at various rpm's?
> Is this a simple linear ratio or does switching and conduction
> losses make it complicated?
> looking at Uve's motor page I see the way of getting the voltage on rpm
> and load, i assume that is the BEMF equation
>
>
> Thanks, I promise to share if the idea works well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 12:58 PM 4/17/04, you wrote:
Hello to All,
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
> If you look at how well Otmar's car performs with two motors, (and Rich
Brown's car with
> two motors) it becomes pretty clear that this
> approach has merit.
Hey Bill, just curious...any reason you left White Zombie out of this
part? As the current
record holder for the SC/B class, and having accomplished it with the dual
motor,
series-parallel thing, and gee, with the above subject title and
all....well, it just
seems odd it was left out :-)
I forgot you were running series/parallel.
I agree with Bill, that this setup has merit...so do the poor gas car guys
my car toasts
at the strip. They can't get over my 1.81 60 ft. times! I will definitely
be experimenting
more with this setup before the motors are pulled, that's for sure.
On the other hand, Rudman's and Berube's ideas are valid as well, and, I
still have not
been able to match the performance of when the car was , yes, lighter and
at higher
voltage, but also yes, when it had a single larger motor.
As I recall, you had a Hawker battery pack when you made your
quickest runs. This pack was a tad larger than your SVR pack, but much
smaller than your present pack of Excide batteries. The battery pack
probably has the greatest single influence on performance. Right now, your
battery pack weighs way too much. You probably should go back to SVRs or
Hawkers, but run more of them, perhaps twice as many. This would allow you
to give the controller all the peak amps it wants, but would keep the
weight reasonably low.
_ /| Bill "Wisenheimer" Dube'
\'o.O' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=(___)=
U
Check out the bike -> http://www.KillaCycle.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
1. Use the commissioning charge procedure recommended by the manufacturer.
2. Discharge to measure capacity.
3. Repeat until discharge results stabilize (typically two cycles)
Individual cell measurements are not required if you are testing five (or
fewer) cells in series.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "evlist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 10:09 PM
Subject: Surplus NiCds - how to charge, test & recondition?
> Hello,
>
> We have a lot of NiCds bought surplus from Translink, probably were used
> for Skytrain in Vancouver.
>
> How to test & recondition them? Any suggestions on automatically cycling
> them? I was planning to cycle them with two timers, a 12V charger, a
> bucket of water and nichrome wire. But if I have to individually
> discharge each cell, it will be much harder.
>
> If they are low capacity, can I replace the caustic? ... is this a diy
> activity?
>
> What are these batteries worth?
>
>
> We have two kinds:
>
> Saft SRX130P
> 130Ah modules: 5cells strapped together= 12V nominal.
> ~7.25 x 17.75 x 13.5" tall including post. ~84lbs per module.
> Big honkin' 12mm posts! According to Saft website, these are for
> emergency power backup in trains.
> I did 2 cycles at ~130A, got about 70Ah before some cells reversed.
>
> Hoppecke FNC-KFMP
> C5=100Ah - individual little plastic cube cells
> ~5x5x7"tall including cap.
> Not tested any yet.
>
> Thanks,
> john
>
> John Foster
> VEVA Tresurer,
> Dynasty Electric Car Co Engineer/Assembler
> 1980 Dodge Omni 128V
> "Cars are for Women with Children, real men ride Bromptons"
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris Zach wrote:
>
> Ok, I'm done pouting now. Feel a bit better.
>
> Now for the pledge: Now that I have incinerated my lovely AGM pack I
> will not put it back into the car without a serious battery management
> system. This includes regulators (50), and a telemetry system to allow
> me to charge a battery at random as well as monitor each battery in the
> pack at will on a nice little display.
>
> Rudman makes a regulator, looks interesting but I assume I would need
> to: (a) mount it externally to the pack and (b) set it up to support up
> to 10 amps of bypass current. Then again I have two strings and my
> charger could put out up to 18amps of current. Perhaps I should size my
> loads to support 18 amps of overcharge each? Or is there a way to have
> the MC sense.... something. It can support constant current or constant
> voltage charging in any combination.
>
> Big difference between running 2 amp cables outside the pack and 20 amp
> cables. Given that I would need over 50 cables, this is a lot. But
> there's nothing that says that one battery would be fully charged while
> the rest would be flat dead; causing the battery pack voltage to be low
> while one of the batteries was getting lovingly bathed in 18 volts....
>
> Am I on the right track? Or do I need to dumpster the MC and get myself
> a PFC30 (Hm, another $2,000. Add it onto the $3,000 for a pack and $2000
> for regulators. 7k. And that's not including the telemetry system.)
>
> Chris
Ouch Man! You are going about this the hard way, from fried stuff and
frustration.
I don't know much about the MC charger, but I thought it was fully
programmable.
I would think the MC would be a usable chunck of gear.
But Hey... I'll sell ya a PFC30.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Roger Stockton wrote:
>
> On Sunday, April 18, 2004 1:30 AM, Rich Rudman
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > ROGEEERrrrrr I have to be up in 6 hours to charge EVs. I am getting
> > cranky again.
>
> Hey, I didn't chain you to the keyboard! ;^>
>
> I hope you got some sleep and are having a great time with Rod & the
> others. Looks like the weather is cooperating for a change.
>
> > You clarly don't understand Buck motor controllers
>
> > Well reading your follow though YOU do understand it...
>
> Whew, you had me worried for a minute there. ;^>
>
> > 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.
>
> Now you've confused me... are they getting my way or not?
>
> I think back EMF and inductance affect things slightly differently.
> Lots of back EMF reduces how much current you can jam to the
> motor(s), but doesn't affect how *fast* you can change the current.
> Inductance reduces the speed at which you can *change* the current,
> but doesn't reduce the amount of current.
>
> Just before the S/P shift, I agree with you, you have lots of back
> EMF, and lots of inductance due to 2 motors in series, but as soon as
> you shift to parallel, you have half the back EMF and 1/4 the
> inductance, and if things are working like they should, your
> controller is headed for current limit again. Seems to me that a bit
> more motor loop inductance might reduce the delay between the shift
> and hitting maximum motor loop current.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
Yea, ..... good point. Coming from the locked rotor point of NO BEMF,
and 2 motor's inductance... a Inductor would make sense. With the motors
at a couple 1000 rpm, I think the effrects would be a LOT less. BUT
I have seen from Waylands runs that if you switch too soon the
controller boggs... this is where inductance would help. The work around
is letting the amps drop more before you shift. Increasing the BEMF by
just a little.
More amps sooner at the cost of 20 to 40 lbs of iron, or just let the
amps taper more...Very good at the track question.
I spent some time today playing with the GP front drives... 1500 motor
amps and 200 battery amps....Coool!!! I have more seat time on her.
Motor amps come real easy with a 4000 lbs tank, and a 2000 amp
controller.
--
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
www.manzanitamicro.com
1-360-297-7383,Cell 1-360-620-6266
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Comments inserted..
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Zach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 8:38 PM
Subject: Regs...
> Ok, I'm done pouting now. Feel a bit better.
>
> Now for the pledge: Now that I have incinerated my lovely AGM pack I
> will not put it back into the car without a serious battery management
> system. This includes regulators (50), and a telemetry system to allow
> me to charge a battery at random as well as monitor each battery in the
> pack at will on a nice little display.
If you do buddy pairs, then you only need 25 regulators.
> Rudman makes a regulator, looks interesting but I assume I would need
> to: (a) mount it externally to the pack and (b) set it up to support up
> to 10 amps of bypass current. Then again I have two strings and my
> charger could put out up to 18amps of current. Perhaps I should size my
> loads to support 18 amps of overcharge each? Or is there a way to have
> the MC sense.... something. It can support constant current or constant
> voltage charging in any combination.
The normal load on the regs is only a couple amps. 30 watts of bypass is all
the on-board heat sinks can dissipate without overheating. The overheating
line can be connected to an optocoupler to tell the charger to back off.
No, you do not need to pass more than 2 amps through the cables. You can
couple the regs back to the charger to tell it to shut off (or down) when
the regs get hot saving both your regs and your batteries. Big loads are
only needed for tapped packs (bad idea in the first place).
> Big difference between running 2 amp cables outside the pack and 20 amp
> cables. Given that I would need over 50 cables, this is a lot. But
> there's nothing that says that one battery would be fully charged while
> the rest would be flat dead; causing the battery pack voltage to be low
> while one of the batteries was getting lovingly bathed in 18 volts....
The only ways a battery will be full in one part of the string and another
battery be empty in the same string is:
1) to install a replacement battery with one in a radically different state
of charge or
2) to have a tapped pack where the lower voltage load is run without the
higher voltage load.
The first is a very bad maintenance practice and the second is very poor
engineering.
> Am I on the right track? Or do I need to dumpster the MC and get myself
> a PFC30 (Hm, another $2,000. Add it onto the $3,000 for a pack and $2000
> for regulators. 7k. And that's not including the telemetry system.)
If you can find a shutdown pin on the MC, then you should be able to couple
the optocoupler signal to it in some fashion.
You should also be aware that the period of time that regulators work is a
very small percentage of the charge time. Right after installation, you may
see them lighting up during the last 30% of the ampere hours returned. As
the batteries become more equalized, the time shrinks to 1 to 5% of the
total ampere hours returned.
> Chris
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don't give up until you've run a 12v charger on each feeble module. Put it
on as Lee suggested with a tail light in series, and run it for a week. If
they're already dead it won't hurt anything, and it might help.
Seems to me I've read that this was the standard failure mode for USE cars -
no BMS, so the modules got further and further out of balance until they
died. Maybe some inconsistencies in temperature too. I could be wrong.
BTW, did you make sure all the new modules were at the same state of charge
before you put them into the car? Did you run capacity tests on each one
(lots of work)?
Solectria Forces routinely get 3-5 years of service out of Sonnenschein /
East Penn gel batteries, without a BMS. They were lucky to get 1-2 years
with Hawkers. That's why Solectria quit using Hawkers about 1996. There
are probably lots of reasons for the difference. I think one of them is
that the East Penn batteries are more consistent and so less apt to get out
of balance. Also, Hawkers have a documented need for high current initial
charging which I've mentioned to you before. Of course a lot of this is
precision guesswork! <g>
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation, or
switch to digest mode? See http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
1991 Solectria Force 144vac
1991 Ford Escort Green/EV 128vdc
1970 GE Elec-trak E15 36vdc
1974 Avco New Idea rider 36vdc
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Thou shalt not send me any thing which says unto thee, "send this
to all thou knowest." Neither shalt thou send me any spam, lest I
smite thee.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
