EV Digest 3874
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Relocating the Emergency Brake
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) FAQ?
by Sherry Boschert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Relocating the Emergency Brake
by Andrew Letton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Brake Retraction Springs
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "EAA-contact" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Fwd: Brake Retraction Springs
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: Brake Retraction Springs
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "Mark Thomasson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Sam Thurber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Charging in San Jose downtown
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) AC motor current ratings
by Mike Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Hydrogen fuel
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks, John. That's a great bit of information. I'll definitely see if I
can find one at the local scrap yard.
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sweeney, John P
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 4:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Relocating the Emergency Brake
You should consider the Emergency break lever from a Pontiac Fiero. It
sits on the left side of the driver's seat. You pull it up to activate
it and it folds down without releasing the break if you don't hold the
button down.
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Dennis
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 3:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Reloacing the Emergency Brake
To make room for a couple extra batteries, I'm considering removing the
pull-up emergency brake between the driver and passenger seats and
rerouting
the cable to replace it with either a pedal type, or a straight-pull
type
under the dashboard. Are there any legal or technical issues I need to
consider? Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We're thinking of compiling a FAQ section for the
soon-to-be web site of the San Francisco Electric Auto
Association.
Has anyone already done something like this? Could we
see/borrow what you've got?
thanks,
Sherry Boschert
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I believe that some Saabs have a left side e brake lever too... maybe
mid '70's era model 99's?
cheers,
Andrew
Bill Dennis wrote:
Thanks, John. That's a great bit of information. I'll definitely see if I
can find one at the local scrap yard.
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sweeney, John P
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 4:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Relocating the Emergency Brake
You should consider the Emergency break lever from a Pontiac Fiero. It
sits on the left side of the driver's seat. You pull it up to activate
it and it folds down without releasing the break if you don't hold the
button down.
Pat
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Dennis
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 3:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Reloacing the Emergency Brake
To make room for a couple extra batteries, I'm considering removing the
pull-up emergency brake between the driver and passenger seats and
rerouting
the cable to replace it with either a pedal type, or a straight-pull
type
under the dashboard. Are there any legal or technical issues I need to
consider? Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
With some of us working on as high power chargers as we can, the refill
issue is changing Even for Lion and PbLa.
It's possible to move a LOT of Kwhrs in a short time off the Grid....The
size of the single stinger Can really change the math.
And just how fast CAN a H2 tap move a full charge into the Tank???
It's pretty fast but I don't think it's as fast as a fill of Regular. I
don't know... But at 12 Kw I am Banging into the voltage limits on my Yts in
about 5 minutes.
The grid stays filled also... the H2 supply tank needs to be filled from
somewheres.
I would like to do a race.... a single PFC50 and the new H2 feed station
in Sacramento... that Arnold, blessed Sunday on CNN(I saw this in the
Orlando Fla airport at about 4:30 am).
I bet we could log more miles in a aWeek than the H2 station can move.
Since... there are not many H2 customers......I know of a couple high
mileage EVs in Sac....
This could be a really nice competition......
The charger is going to happen.....And is in the process.....
I have 2 PFC50s on line ... the 3rd will go together this week some
time....... Goldie just can't take 36Kw for more than a couple of
minutes....Not even time enough for a 16tall Oz Mocha and Whipped
cream......
Charging should be As fast as your bariesta!!!
I need to get Gp down here for Mule testing.....
Rod???
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 3:14 PM
Subject: RE: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
> Victor Tikhonov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I believe, fuel cells proponents position is not the cost of
> > it per mile or efficiency of making it. Yes, you can go twice
> > as far if you use electricity directly, but the problem is you
> > cannot store that much electricity on board at one time to go
> > that far.
>
> > Same for hydrogen - you can have many more kWh *on board*
> > than today's battery can hold with large enough tank.
>
> > You can realistically have 50 kWh *on board* with
> > batteries and 200 kWh or more with hydrogen - as much
> > as big tank you dare to put in. AND, fast refill.
>
> I would argue a slightly different take, which is that it is irrelevant
> how many kWh of energy you can store on board, all that is important is
> how far you can go on however much energy you have stored.
>
> In this case, the efficiency advantage of the battery EV helps to offset
> the lower energy density of present batteries since it is entirely
> possible to have a 300mi EV today using LiIon batteries for storage and
> yet present FCEVs are limited to about the same range (or less!) due to
> the difficulty of storing sufficient hydrogen onboard.
>
> It is unfortunately the case that FCEVs will always have an edge in
> terms of refill speed, however, with energy-dense storage such aa LiIon,
> the battery pack weight decreases and may reduce the physical challenges
> associated with battery pack swapping such that it becomes a practical
> option for fast battery 'refils'.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Are you trying decrease drag? The pads, pistons and such are retracted by
the rubber seals on the ends of the cylinders and pistons. You could try
using a warped rotor, one that will "push" the pistons back into the
cylinders, but that presents a whole new problem. Disc brakes are designed
for the pad to be at the disc surface at all times, dragging. The total
volume of all the wheel cylinders in the system is huge, compared to the
volume of the master cylinder. Therefore, the pistons in the caliper barely
move, while the master cylinder moves a great deal, relatively speaking. If
there is a too large an air gap between the disc and rotor, the master
cylinder may go "to the floor" without applying enough pressure to the rotor
to stop. Anyone here that has experience in these matters, feel free to
contradict, corroborate or just chime in.
David C. Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Maston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 3:26 PM
Subject: Brake Retraction Springs
How do I rig brake retraction springs on front disk brakes?
Thanks,
Patrick Maston
1981 Jet Electrica
ut
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Maston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 2:50 PM
Subject: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
If the state is liquid hydrogen, the potential for fire and
> explosion is very high. How do they propose to transport this fuel to
> the refueling stations and who is going to refuel the cars? If your
> average person is going to refuel a car with liquid hydrogen, I say
> that's a recipe for disaster.
>
> Patrick Maston
> 1981 Jet Electrica
>
Ah the unspoken draw backs of new technology. Can Grandma refill her H2
car?????
Without some really trained help....
There are folks on this list that know....
How easy is it to do a H2 fill up???
How easy do the nozzeles mate? how easy is it really? And how long does it
take once mated?
What's the Stop to Go time frame for a fillup?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
And typically H2 fill requires high level of anti-static control. The fuel-cell
partnership site in West Sacramento requires anti-static suits to used during the
refueling process. Can you say "zap-caboom"? -Ed--- On Tue 10/26, Rich Rudman <
[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:Ah the unspoken draw backs of new technology. Can Grandma
refill her H2car?????Without some really trained help....There are folks on this list
that know....How easy is it to do a H2 fill up???How easy do the nozzeles mate? how
easy is it really? And how long does ittake once mated?What's the Stop to Go time
frame for a fillup?
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dave Cover wrote:
It doesn't have
to go very far to essentially relieve all the friction between the pad and disc. We're
talking
maybe a few thousands of clearance, but it's as good free. In theory, of course.
Dave Cover
Yes, in theory. In real life I had (and still have) this issue with CRX
brakes - pistons are not
totally rust free and the friction is more that ability of flexing
rubber ring to move it.
So it moves, but you can still hear some friction if the wheel is
suspended and turned by hand.
This deag may be hardly noticeable in therms of Wh/mile, but it is there
and I wish
it would be a way to make pistons move easy without changing them. Is
cleaning
with WD4 and replacing square rubber rings enough? One more project...
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rich Rudman wrote:
With some of us working on as high power chargers as we can, the refill
issue is changing Even for Lion and PbLa.
It's possible to move a LOT of Kwhrs in a short time off the Grid....The
size of the single stinger Can really change the math.
Issue is the mains rich. Suppose you already have PFC500 for $100 and
the pack absorbing
500A with no problem. How many can take advantage of it with only 50A
240V mains best case
and 120V 16A worst case? Only people with 3 phase 480V industial feeds
which makes
500A charger kinda pointless to have, even for free.
I mean if some one offers me 100A and 500A (bigger and heavier but *cost
the same*)
charger, why would I take 500A one if I only have 50A mains ever? Can't
take advantage
of it.
The charger is going to happen.....And is in the process.....
I have 2 PFC50s on line ... the 3rd will go together this week some
time....... Goldie just can't take 36Kw for more than a couple of
minutes....Not even time enough for a 16tall Oz Mocha and Whipped
cream......
Charging should be As fast as your bariesta!!!
High ams amps are sure addictive, aren't they? Racing is special case
and special
market. The rest of people can refill as fast (or as slow) as they need
to get it full
by the next time they need to drive. And if they drive all day long
(~200 miles EV)
they have all night to do it, it's about 50 kWh in, say, 8 hrs, or
6.25kW of charging
power you already have today. Is it like a sport who's gonna charge
faster to
set a record? Not saying you have bad plans, just curious to hear your
justification
for them.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rich Rudman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> With some of us working on as high power chargers as we can,
> the refill issue is changing Even for Lion and PbLa. It's
> possible to move a LOT of Kwhrs in a short time off the
> Grid....
> But at 12 Kw I am
> Banging into the voltage limits on my Yts in about 5
> minutes.
Ah yes, but banging into the voltage limits doesn't mean they are full.
You can't fill sealed PbA in just a few minutes no matter how big the
hose; you can only get about 80-90% full before you have to throttle
back and let the battery control the flow.
No offense Rich, but Goldie's YTs take her what, about 8-12mi when
filled up? ;^> Let's be generous and say its capable of 20mi if driven
modestly.
The time to safely connect/disconnect for a 36kW drink is probably going
to be similar to that required for an H2 hose, and the time required to
pay for said fill-up is going to be similar, so if it takes 10min to
fill the tank on a FCEV vs 1min to fill your YTs, the FCEV still comes
out *way* ahead in refueling time since the single fillup allows it to
go for about 300mi while you'll have to refill at least 14 more times to
travel the same distance, which in this hypothetical example means you
will spend a total of 15min filling your YTs vs 10min for the FCEV, plus
you have the additional 14x the connect/disconnect and pay time overhead
associated with the extra fill-ups.
If you want to compete with the FCEV refill time, your EV needs to have
a battery capable of storing enough energy to take it a similar
distance, and such a battery is going to take significantly longer to
fill or a significantly bigger hose...
> Goldie just can't take 36Kw for more
> than a couple of minutes....Not even time enough for a 16tall
> Oz Mocha and Whipped cream...... Charging should be As fast
> as your bariesta!!!
I agree with your charge time requirements ;^> but...
36kW into a 156V nominal pack implies about a 200A charge rate, or 3.6C
for YTs. There are some indications that LiIon may not fare well (cycle
life) if charged at highish rates like this, so I don't think it is
assured yet that we can arbitrarily decrease refill time by arbitrarily
increasing the size of the hose. Last, but not least, as charge rates
increase, so does the chance for rapid and serious battery failure; I
suspect that if 30-50kW (or higher) 'pumps' became available they would
only be 'full serve' with qualified attendants... same issue as Granny
wanting to fill her FCEV at a self-serve.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, in theory. In real life I had (and still have) this
> issue with CRX brakes - pistons are not
> totally rust free and the friction is more that ability of flexing
> rubber ring to move it.
> So it moves, but you can still hear some friction if the wheel is
> suspended and turned by hand.
> This deag may be hardly noticeable in therms of Wh/mile, but
> it is there and I wish
> it would be a way to make pistons move easy without changing them. Is
> cleaning
> with WD4 and replacing square rubber rings enough? One more project...
Don't use WD40 or other oils near brake system rubber components!!!
As far as I know it is still the case that brake system rubber
components are formulated to be resistant to brake fluid and will
degrade rapidly if exposed to grease or oil.
Cleaning the rust from the pistons should cure this situation...
temporarily. Once the pistons have rusted, the rust will return. You
would need to remove the piston from the caliper to clean the rust from
it. Rebuilding a caliper is not a difficult task, but you may find it
almost as cheap and a better use of your time to simply replace the
calipers with rebuilt ones.
You *might* be able to unmount the caliper and insert a thin piece of
wood, etc. in the space where the rotor normally fits, then gently press
on the brake pedal to force the piston to travel a bit further out of
the caliper than it normally would (the wood/spacer should be a bit
thinner than the rotor, but thick enough to prevent the piston from
travelling too far out of the caliper). This should expose the rusted
portion of the piston so you can carefully clena the rust from it with a
bit of crocus (fine emery) cloth. Then use a large screwdriver/prybar
to force the piston back into the caliper sufficently to remove the wood
spacer and reinstall the caliper on the rotor.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<The government likes it because it can be easily
> taxed and the oil companies since it can be metered through them.> Mark
>
I am no fan of the hydrogen economy either, but does this argument against
it make any sense? Isn't it just as easy to tax electricity? Electricity
is certainly easier to meter than hydrogen. And, I don't see why the oil
companies would be any more likely than the electric utilities to conspire
against the American public. Mark T.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:43:07 -0600, "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Actually, it's not vaporware. Metallic Power currently markets Zinc-Air
>fuel cells as generators, UPS, etc. But as part of the investment money
>they received to develop their product, they had to show a working vehicle
>using the fuel cell. They did. They rigged up a car (quiet ugly, I might
>add) with a 1500W zinc-air fuel cell and got it to run 100 miles at 45 MPH.
>After that, though, they dropped their development for EVs to concentrate on
>the UPS market.
Have you ever seen one in operation or a photo of a production unit? I
saw a lot of "will be" statements but no "are".
To me, it's not production until I can call them up with a PO or CC
number, order one and have it delivered from stock. If they're doing that
I can't tell it from their web page.
John
---
John De Armond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/johngd/
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 5:43 PM -0600 on 10/26/04, Bill Dennis wrote:
Actually, it's not vaporware. Metallic Power currently markets Zinc-Air
fuel cells as generators, UPS, etc. But as part of the investment money
they received to develop their product, they had to show a working vehicle
using the fuel cell. They did. They rigged up a car (quiet ugly, I might
add) with a 1500W zinc-air fuel cell and got it to run 100 miles at 45 MPH.
After that, though, they dropped their development for EVs to concentrate on
the UPS market.
A quick correction. The squeezed not one, but four of their
stationary units into a Solectria Force, replacing the battery pack.
It was indeed quite ugly, but then, stationary UPS systems aren't
really designed to be small and pretty.
Some other firms besides Metallic Power have working versions of Zinc-Air
fuel cell busses in daily operation, especially in China. I mentioned
Metallic Power mainly because their systems calls for refueling with
pellets, whereas most other firms require the zinc anode to be removed and
shipped back to a factory for recharging.
There is another reason the pellet (or in the case of Metallic Power,
powder) style of metallic fuel cell is interesting is that it greatly
increases reaction surface area, theoretically allowing for much more
efficient performance.
--
Auf wiedersehen!
______________________________________________________
"..Um..Something strange happened to me this morning."
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort
of Sun God robes on a pyramid with a thousand naked
women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
"..No."
"Why am I the only person that has that dream?"
-Real Genius
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 9:39 PM -0400 on 10/26/04, Neon John wrote:
To me, it's not production until I can call them up with a PO or CC
number, order one and have it delivered from stock. If they're doing that
I can't tell it from their web page.
Did you even look? Two clicks; Products and Applications, Stationary.
Second paragraph, first sentence. "The first of these products is now
shipping and is suited to providing extended backup power..." and
further down a link to a datasheet. You want delivery info I suggest
you click the little contact button and email them.
--
Auf wiedersehen!
______________________________________________________
"..Um..Something strange happened to me this morning."
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort
of Sun God robes on a pyramid with a thousand naked
women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?"
"..No."
"Why am I the only person that has that dream?"
-Real Genius
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:34:24 -0700, "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>With some of us working on as high power chargers as we can, the refill
>issue is changing Even for Lion and PbLa.
>It's possible to move a LOT of Kwhrs in a short time off the Grid....The
>size of the single stinger Can really change the math.
> And just how fast CAN a H2 tap move a full charge into the Tank???
While I was stranded in Ohio with a blown tranny in my motorhome I
observed the CNG filling station next door. The "pumps" looked just like
the other BP pumps on the island except for the small twin hoses. They
had 3000 and 3600 psi hoses, each with a different quick-couple.
It took less than 5 minutes to fill up the mid-size government vehicles
that were the main users. I think they were Ford Tauruses but I'm not
sure since they all look alike. I'm sure the filling rate was limited by
the small hose diameter (still very stiff) and probably by the amount of
heat of compression the storage tank could absorb in a short time. There
were tanks out back that I'd estimate to be at least 1000 gallons that
stored the CNG.
I'd expect CH2 to behave the same. Hydride storage would take a bit
longer to charge but nowhere near what it takes a battery, even with your
super neato charger.
The major advantage for hydrogen over electric is that it is practical
(notice I said "practical" and not "possible") to exchange tanks on an
economical basis so that off-line refilling is practical.
>It's pretty fast but I don't think it's as fast as a fill of Regular. I
>don't know... But at 12 Kw I am Banging into the voltage limits on my Yts in
>about 5 minutes.
>The grid stays filled also... the H2 supply tank needs to be filled from
>somewheres.
Actually, this advantage goes to H2 precisely because the grid has to
supply power in real time instead of being able to store it like tanked
hydrogen. Neither the grid capacity nor the generating capacity is there
to replace gasoline in any meaningful percentage.
> I would like to do a race.... a single PFC50 and the new H2 feed station
>in Sacramento... that Arnold, blessed Sunday on CNN(I saw this in the
>Orlando Fla airport at about 4:30 am).
If you do it on an equivalent energy basis instead of just timing one
fillup vs the other, I bet H2 would win hands-down. I'm not interested
enough to do the math to see if my gut is correct so sue me if I'm wrong
:-)
I'm not defending hydrogen; I just think a gut check is necessary before
EV advocates come off sounding silly.
John
---
John De Armond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/johngd/
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe, fuel cells proponents position is not the
> cost of it per mile
> or efficiency
> of making it. Yes, you can go twice as far if you
> use electricity
> directly, but the
> problem is you cannot store that much electricity on
> board at one time to go
> that far. Like regular gas - the most ineficient use
> of that energy (25%
> ICE efficiency),
> but the energy density is so much higher than
> offsetts battery advantage for
> average Joe distance wise - it is trivial to make
> 1000 mile on one large
> enough tank,
> and refueling time is negligible. Same for hydrogen
> - you can have many more
> kWh *on board* than today's battery can hold with
> large enough tank.
That's not true. I don't have the numbers in front of
me but if memory serves the energy density (per liter
or kilogram) for the H2 Fuel cell stacks in the FCX
and FC Highlander is actually slightly less than
current NiMH batteries when you compare apples to
apples by including everything (H2 tank, humidifier,
piping, fans, air filters, fuel cell stack ... etc)
you need to get amps out of your fuel cell stack. The
second generation H2 stacks in the 2005 models are
supposed to be improved a little, but I'll bet my EV
they're still far short of Li-ion range. Maybe with
10 years and a few billion more tax dollars they'll
get close but by that time we'll be looking at
Li-Sulfer anyway.
The only way fuel cell stacks can compete on an energy
density basis with batteries is when you start looking
at liquid fuels. Their one and only advantage for
gaseous fuels is refill time and even that is
questionable. The best way to store H2 gas now is in a
metal hydride tank ... which takes 30 minutes to fill
to 100% and heats up if you fill to fast. Sound
familiar? It's because you basically are working with
just half of a Ni-*metal hydride* battery.
-Sam
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I can't seem to find the info on the charging station in downtown San Jose.
Can anyone help with an address. Thanks Lawrence Rhodes.............
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sam Thurber wrote:
--- Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I believe, fuel cells proponents position is not the
cost of it per mile
or efficiency
of making it. Yes, you can go twice as far if you
use electricity
directly, but the
problem is you cannot store that much electricity on
board at one time to go
that far. Like regular gas - the most ineficient use
of that energy (25%
ICE efficiency),
but the energy density is so much higher than
offsetts battery advantage for
average Joe distance wise - it is trivial to make
1000 mile on one large
enough tank,
and refueling time is negligible. Same for hydrogen
- you can have many more
kWh *on board* than today's battery can hold with
large enough tank.
That's not true. I don't have the numbers in front of
me but if memory serves the energy density (per liter
or kilogram) for the H2 Fuel cell stacks in the FCX
and FC Highlander is actually slightly less than
current NiMH batteries when you compare apples to
apples by including everything (H2 tank, humidifier,
piping, fans, air filters, fuel cell stack ... etc)
Hate to drag this topic, but
that's not true either. If you tripple the size of the tank itself you
can go 3 times
as far, but the weight does not increase 3 times since the pumps, hoses,
blowers
and all supporting stuff are still the same. Si you can always get the
tank large
enough to outdo NiMH batteries, the largerthe tank compare to everything
else - the bigger FC advantage weight/energy wise.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:19:06 -0700, "Roger Stockton"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>36kW into a 156V nominal pack implies about a 200A charge rate, or 3.6C
>for YTs. There are some indications that LiIon may not fare well (cycle
>life) if charged at highish rates like this, so I don't think it is
>assured yet that we can arbitrarily decrease refill time by arbitrarily
>increasing the size of the hose. Last, but not least, as charge rates
>increase, so does the chance for rapid and serious battery failure; I
>suspect that if 30-50kW (or higher) 'pumps' became available they would
>only be 'full serve' with qualified attendants... same issue as Granny
>wanting to fill her FCEV at a self-serve.
Very true. As I stated in a previous message, one only need to look at
CNG stations to see what has already been done. The couplers are zero
insertion force units. The coupler is pushed down onto the receptacle in
the car and then a lever on the coupler is thrown that latches the coupler
in place and opens the gas passage. During my stranding in Ohio I watched
more than one petite woman fill up her government CNG car with no more
effort inserting a gas nozzle.
I forgot to mention another interesting aspect. The CNG "pump" registered
gasoline energy equivalent gallons, as did the price. The price back last
summer over the 4th of July was 56 cents/gallon equivalent.
I have yet to see a high power zero insertion force electrical connector.
The GM paddle came close but it wasn't really high power. I'm sure that
if EV demand ever builds sufficiently, someone will design a ZIF connector
but that hardly fills the need today.
John
---
John De Armond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/johngd/
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
BUT HOLD it Victor...
The point of this massive charger is not for personal use it's Fleet to
Service use. AKA LOTs of heavy reapeat traffic.
The more amps the better.
Yea most don't have 200 amp service.. But those of us who do, and will make
it available, Changes the math.
If the big stuff is never available, oh well I make 50 amp chargers...
and they are selling.
But the naysayers say you can't get big charge power, I say it's a LOT
easier than most of us think.
It's easy to say it can't be done and then Geld the whole concept as not
tenable.
I say it's going to happen, and I happen to be making it happen.
I really don't expect to sell 100s of these Beasts, but I have sold 100s of
the smaller ones. One to you as a matter of fact.
I am not saying we all need one parked in our driveway. It's jus that one
down on the corner... could feed most if not all the EVs currently in
service.
This is a safe bet right now... since 3 PFC50s could have feed everybody at
Woodburn. That's most of the Ev racers in the West.
Oh yea I am not using 480 3 phase... I am using 175 amps of 208 to 240
single phase. Since it's a lot cheaper to get a 200 amp temp Jobsite
construction feed from the Grid.
My charger simply looks like an entire house to the grid.
Anybody in the Poulsbo Silverdale, Kingston, Bainbridge Island area need a
Covered charge area??? All voltages 12 to 450volts up to 36Kw feed rate??
Hint have at least a #4 Gage charge port cables, better yet use 0/2....Then
I won't worry about how many chargers I have on line at a time.
Yea I hear ya Victor... if you could suck 200 amps and it cost you say 8
cent a Kw...and you got a mocha... Now that's service!!
Grid here is going for 6.2 cents a Kwhr.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Victor Tikhonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
> Rich Rudman wrote:
>
> >With some of us working on as high power chargers as we can, the refill
> >issue is changing Even for Lion and PbLa.
> >It's possible to move a LOT of Kwhrs in a short time off the Grid....The
> >size of the single stinger Can really change the math.
> >
> >
> Issue is the mains rich. Suppose you already have PFC500 for $100 and
> the pack absorbing
> 500A with no problem. How many can take advantage of it with only 50A
> 240V mains best case
> and 120V 16A worst case? Only people with 3 phase 480V industial feeds
> which makes
> 500A charger kinda pointless to have, even for free.
>
> I mean if some one offers me 100A and 500A (bigger and heavier but *cost
> the same*)
> charger, why would I take 500A one if I only have 50A mains ever? Can't
> take advantage
> of it.
>
> >The charger is going to happen.....And is in the process.....
> >I have 2 PFC50s on line ... the 3rd will go together this week some
> >time....... Goldie just can't take 36Kw for more than a couple of
> >minutes....Not even time enough for a 16tall Oz Mocha and Whipped
> >cream......
> >Charging should be As fast as your bariesta!!!
> >
> >
> >
> High ams amps are sure addictive, aren't they? Racing is special case
> and special
> market. The rest of people can refill as fast (or as slow) as they need
> to get it full
> by the next time they need to drive. And if they drive all day long
> (~200 miles EV)
> they have all night to do it, it's about 50 kWh in, say, 8 hrs, or
> 6.25kW of charging
> power you already have today. Is it like a sport who's gonna charge
> faster to
> set a record? Not saying you have bad plans, just curious to hear your
> justification
> for them.
>
> Victor
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm thinking about building an AC motor controller to control some of the Siemens
motors on the metric mind web site. I saw some current ratings for the motors, and
they give values of 282A rms. I believe that this rms current rating is the sum of
all the current in the phases at once - can anyone verify this for me? 94A per phase
would be a lot easier to deal with than 282A per phase. Thanks in advance.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 20:39:03 -0500, "Mark Thomasson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mark Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
><The government likes it because it can be easily
>> taxed and the oil companies since it can be metered through them.> Mark
>>
>
>I am no fan of the hydrogen economy either, but does this argument against
>it make any sense?
No sense at all. This is one of the dumber arguments I've heard recently.
If I were in charge of setting tax policy for alternative vehicles (and
I'm sure there are folks as smart as I am who are doing so), I'd tax on a
per-mile-driven basis.
A simple sealed box containing a GPS receiver plus a sensor input to
monitor charge-discharge cycles (to detect attempts to defeat the GPS
receiver) can be mass-produced for far less than $100. Simply require the
box on any alternative fuel vehicle, whether it be powered by electricity,
hydrogen or cow dung, and require it to be read every so often as part of
the registration renewal. Just like emissions checks are administered
now. In fact, the emissions inspection stations would be ideal for this
purpose, as the data infrastructure is already in place. Some small
software additions and a hardware interface to the emissions computer is
all that is needed.
An alternative that would ease the financial hit would be to allow the box
to be read periodically at home and taxes paid then. One could do it once
a month or so. If the postal service can securely sell postage online and
let people print their own stamps (click'n'ship), surely a secure
architecture can be developed for this application. Adding WiFi to the
box would be trivial and would make the interrogation completely
hands-off.
Notice that I'm NOT advocating on-the-fly interrogations. This, along
with suitable open standards on what information the GPS receiver records,
addresses the very serious privacy concerns related to government-operated
GPS systems.
This would most directly apply the road tax where it belongs - on miles
driven. It would solve some thorny taxing problems with pure EVs such as
how to deal with electricity that is wasted (as far as propulsion goes)
during equalization charges, electricity that is used for non-propulsion
purposes such as running portable power tools, hydrogen leaks on H2
powered vehicle and similar things.
This would essentially duplicate the existing tax structure for gasoline
and diesel. I CAN buy untaxed fuel for off-road use if I want to go to
the trouble. This scheme would let me use alternative fuels for off-road
use without the tax just like with gasoline.
If I wanted to drive some future EV to my cabin in the mountains and then
use its built-in inverter to run the lights in my cabin, I can do so
without any tax complications or over-charges.
>Isn't it just as easy to tax electricity? Electricity
>is certainly easier to meter than hydrogen. And, I don't see why the oil
>companies would be any more likely than the electric utilities to conspire
>against the American public. Mark T.
Sad that the EV world seems to attract more than its share of conspiracy
nuts.
John
---
John De Armond
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bellsouthpwp.net/j/o/johngd/
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Oh boy Flame on!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 6:19 PM
Subject: RE: other side of the coin - Re: Hydrogen fuel
> Rich Rudman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > With some of us working on as high power chargers as we can,
> > the refill issue is changing Even for Lion and PbLa. It's
> > possible to move a LOT of Kwhrs in a short time off the
> > Grid....
>
> > But at 12 Kw I am
> > Banging into the voltage limits on my Yts in about 5
> > minutes.
>
> Ah yes, but banging into the voltage limits doesn't mean they are full.
> You can't fill sealed PbA in just a few minutes no matter how big the
> hose; you can only get about 80-90% full before you have to throttle
> back and let the battery control the flow.
Like Duhh Roger!!!!
Why do you think I said the Vlim, not the complete end of charge
point.
The art of high power charging is getting so some limit safely. On PbLa
it's the Vlim, then you follow the Volt regulated current taper slope.
But you already know that.
>
> No offense Rich, but Goldie's YTs take her what, about 8-12mi when
> filled up? ;^> Let's be generous and say its capable of 20mi if driven
> modestly.
Yea when you only have a 3Kw pack... you do a LOT of really quick
cycles...
>
> The time to safely connect/disconnect for a 36kW drink is probably going
> to be similar to that required for an H2 hose,
Not so! It takes about 15 Seconds to make the conenction. Stop open
Hood slam the Anderson home, Flip breaker on the charger Crank up Amps knob.
Listen to the Iso Former Humm, and the lights dimm. I have been doing this
for years. You clearly have not seen the Madman show at the Woodburn races.
and the time required to
> pay for said fill-up is going to be similar, so if it takes 10min to
> fill the tank on a FCEV vs 1min to fill your YTs, the FCEV still comes
> out *way* ahead in refueling time since the single fillup allows it to
> go for about 300mi while you'll have to refill at least 14 more times to
> travel the same distance, which in this hypothetical example means you
> will spend a total of 15min filling your YTs vs 10min for the FCEV, plus
> you have the additional 14x the connect/disconnect and pay time overhead
> associated with the extra fill-ups.
As some one just posted Roger... the Anti static suit the special
fittings the time to transfer the H2... all not as clearly evident could be.
I have yet to see a 300 mile FCev..... in traffic, owned by a private
citizen.....Most on this list have a Bev that can do what I can, or much
better for most.
The longer argument is... how much H2 do they have... and how often does it
need a monster Refer Cryo truck to service it?
Clearly Goldie is NOT the Ev for this argument... She is NOT intended
for range running. Still I can get a LOT of miles under her in a Day.
>
> If you want to compete with the FCEV refill time, your EV needs to have
> a battery capable of storing enough energy to take it a similar
> distance, and such a battery is going to take significantly longer to
> fill or a significantly bigger hose...
>
No you don't have to compete stored watt to stored watt. You compete for
miles run in Days of service. And yea the bigger the hose the better. I am
betting the FCev has a lot of flash and smoke and mirrors, but... the steady
flow of Watts, and the repeat fills will streach the FC support beyond what
the fancy gear can support.
But... proper prep and support for the FC guys could really be hard to deal
with....
> > Goldie just can't take 36Kw for more
> > than a couple of minutes....Not even time enough for a 16tall
> > Oz Mocha and Whipped cream...... Charging should be As fast
> > as your bariesta!!!
>
> I agree with your charge time requirements ;^> but...
>
> 36kW into a 156V nominal pack implies about a 200A charge rate, or 3.6C
> for YTs. There are some indications that LiIon may not fare well (cycle
> life) if charged at highish rates like this, so I don't think it is
> assured yet that we can arbitrarily decrease refill time by arbitrarily
> increasing the size of the hose. Last, but not least, as charge rates
> increase, so does the chance for rapid and serious battery failure; I
> suspect that if 30-50kW (or higher) 'pumps' became available they would
> only be 'full serve' with qualified attendants... same issue as Granny
> wanting to fill her FCEV at a self-serve.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
Uhhhhh Roger just who do you think you are arguing with???? Maybe
the Guy doing the BMS???? Clearly I have thought of that and have product to
cover that fact.
The Regs crank back the charger. And the nastier the charge rate the faster
the safties better work. Expect me to have that rather well tested.
The whole concept is to charge what ever pack and cycle you wish at the
limit if the battery...as Fast as is safe!!!
By the way you only get 3 cycles on a Yt before you have race ready Yts....
aka 120 Deg F Lead!.
I am designing the qualified attendant!! So Granny can stay warm and dry!
The clear issue for me is that with a larger pack... Say 50 to 100Kwhr, 36
Kw charge rates are not going to be fast enough.
Expect larger units to follow on.
Wouldn't we all like to be charged as fast as possible???
I know I would.
>
--- End Message ---
