EV Digest 4101
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Battery resting voltage...
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2) Re: AC Motors and Reverse
by "Joe Strubhar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Battery resting voltage...
by Nick Viera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Chico EAA meeting Sat. Feb. 19th
by "Chuck Alldrin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) EV1 vigil in Burbank, Calif.
by Sherry Boschert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Red Beastie Info
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Electravan Vs. Curtis 400 amp controller conversion.
Gearing musings.
by James D Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Electravan Vs. Curtis 400 amp controller conversion. Gearing musings.
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: More water dreams...
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: EV snow blowers?
by "Doug Hartley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: EV snow blowers?
by "Doug Hartley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: No bids on the Siemens inverter and motor on Ebay
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: AC Motors and Reverse
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: More water dreams...
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Battery resting voltage...
by Nick Viera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Political Action (OT)
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: Cluttered and complicated (was RE: Political Action)
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: EV1 vigil in Burbank, Calif.
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Vas: Re: Hydraulic eff.
by Seppo Lindborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: More water dreams...
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
21) transmission problems
by Brian Staffanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: More water dreams...
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Vas: Re: Hydraulic eff.
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: EV Owners (One hour south of San Fran, CA) Need Advice
by bruce parmenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: What are the upper voltage limits of DC motors?
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: EV1 vigil in Burbank, Calif.
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
27) Vas: Re: Vas: Re: Hydraulic eff.
by Seppo Lindborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Re: EV1 vigil in Burbank, Calif.
by Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29) RE: Hydraulic eff.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
30) Re: transmission problems
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
31) Re: 42-volt starting batteries
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
32) GM exec(?) comments about EV-1
by Derrick J Brashear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
33) RE: 42-volt starting batteries
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Got the pics, thanks Nick.
I was thinking that you could divide the pack in half, and that would let
you know which half had the problem, then you could divide the halves in
half again so that would let you know which quarter was bad, and then if you
wanted you could divide the quarters in half to know which eighth was the
problem.
Does that make sense?
I'm sure there is a better circuit with less LEDs...
Rush
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Viera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rush,
I have pictures of my build of Lee's battery bridge LED circuit here:
http://driveev.com/temp/battleds/
-Nick
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes, they will run backwards, but not too long and not efficiently.
3-phase motors are always tested when they are hooked up for proper
rotation. Single phase motors can be run backward if not hooked up properly.
For EV's, which would use a 3-phase motor, running for reverse should not be
a problem, assuming that the inverter didn't care! BIG assumption, I know!!
Joseph H. Strubhar
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.gremcoinc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ivo Jara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 1:10 PM
Subject: RE: AC Motors and Reverse
> I don't know how good they run, but they do, I worked fror Grundfos, a
water
> pump manufacturer, and when the electricians on location wired a pump
> incorrectly, it did run backwards.
>
> those were AC brushless submersible motors 380 Volts 5 to 400 hp.
>
>
http://net.grundfos.com/Appl/WebCAPS/CatalogueCtrl;jsessionid=00003bnN0WHKvv
> DuHPkcsDGkSAR:-1?cmd=prsr
>
> Ivo
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> nombre de Carl Clifford
> Enviado el: viernes, 11 de febrero de 2005 17:00
> Para: [email protected]
> Asunto: AC Motors and Reverse
>
>
> Easy question for those more knowledgeable than myself:
>
> Can you run an AC motor backwards? In other words, if I build an AC
> conversion w/out a transmission will I be able to back up?
>
> I know the arguments against doing this, just curious about this detail.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Carl Clifford
> Denver
> ;-| grinless
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 10/02/2005
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
> I was thinking that you could divide the pack in half, and that would
> let you know which half had the problem, then you could divide the
> halves in half again so that would let you know which quarter was bad
Yes... and that is exactly what the battery bridge I built does.
Basically the version I built divides my pack into quarters. I could
have divided the pack into smaller segments, but that would've required
running more wiring/fuses/etc.. and more cost/time building the circuit.
I didn't need that much detail so I didn't bother using more bridges.
:-)
-Nick
1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
http://Go.DriveEV.com/
---------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 19:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Got the pics, thanks Nick.
>
> I was thinking that you could divide the pack in half, and that would let
> you know which half had the problem, then you could divide the halves in
> half again so that would let you know which quarter was bad, and then if you
> wanted you could divide the quarters in half to know which eighth was the
> problem.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> I'm sure there is a better circuit with less LEDs...
>
> Rush
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nick Viera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Rush,
> >
> > I have pictures of my build of Lee's battery bridge LED circuit here:
> >
> > http://driveev.com/temp/battleds/
> > -Nick
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
You are invited to attend the Chico chapter of the Electric Auto Association
or "EAA".
Learn more about:
� Electric automobiles
� How to convert a car to electric
� Hybrid automobiles
� Fuel cell powered automobiles
� Compressed natural gas automobiles
Date: Saturday, Feb. 19th from 11 am. The meeting is FREE, and all are
welcome.
Join us at Chuck Alldrin's home located at:
930 West 11th Ave
Chico, CA 95926
530-899-1835
Directions:
Go West on 11th Ave.. 1/4 mile past Holly on the North side. Look for the
black mailbox and Birch trees.
We need you at the meeting to help our new EAA chapter in Chico. If you are
not now affiliated with a local chapter, we would welcome you to transfer to
our chapter.
EV's of all types (i.e.: autos, scooters, skateboards) and Hybrids are
welcome.
For more information call:
Chuck Alldrin
530-899-1835
www.energy-alternatives.com
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***************************************************************
Chuck Alldrin Chico, CA. KN6JS Ham call
"If my people...will humble themselves and pray...I will heal their land."
II Chronicles 7:14
***************************************************************
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
SAVE THE EV1s! ZERO EMISSIONS NOW!
Join Earth Communications Office, Earth Resource
Foundation, Environmental Media Association,
Environment Now, Global Exchange, Global
Green,Rainforest Action Network, and former EV1 owners
and other concerned citizens at a press conference and
rally against GM!
SAVE THE EV1s RALLY & PRESS CONFERENCE
WEDNESDAY, FEB. 16TH, KYOTO DAY
11 AM TO 1 PM
GM TRAINING SITE, BURBANK
1105 West RIVERSIDE DRIVE
BURBANK, CA 91506
The event will focus on GM's decision to prohibit the
leasers of EV1s to purchase their cars.
Currently, the company is crushing the cars upon their
return. The testing site where the rally and press
conference will take place is home to about 70 EV1s
that have been collected from owners. The cars are
left partially charged so GM can remove them and crush
them at a moment's notice.
A press conference will be held on February 16th to
support the campaign and rally with celebrities,
Alexandra Paul, Ed Begley Jr., Hart Bochner,
Peter Horton, Ted Danson and many others, scheduled to
appear. A 24/7 vigil will be held to ask that the
EV1s not be harmed.
For more information on the press conference, rally or
the campaign, please email us at
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or visit
http://www.earthresource.org.
Thao Nguyen
Campaign Coordinator
Earth Resource Foundation
230 E. 17th Street, suite 208
Costa Mesa, CA 92627
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.earthresource.org
-------------------------------------------------------
>From the 101:
Take CA-134 E toward BURBANK/GLENDALE.
Take the BOB HOPE DR exit toward BUENA VISTA ST. 0.1
miles
Turn RIGHT onto BOB HOPE DR. <0.1 miles
Turn LEFT onto W RIVERSIDE DR. 1.1 miles
End at 1150 W Riverside Dr, Burbank, CA 91506 US
-------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>
> Hello to All,
>
> Mark Hanson wrote:
>
>Doesn't 40 batts at 2600 additional lbs overweight the vehicle? How did you
>beef up the suspension & brakes? Are they buddy pairs or two strings in
>parallel?
>
>
> Midsized pickup, 9 inch series wound motor, 5 speed tranny, 40, T-105 6V
> golf car batteries @120V
The T-105s of the period weighed 62 lbs. each, so that's 2480 lbs....call it a
2500 lb.
pack. The Toyota trucks are very heavy duty items, and are built with the
expectation that
one will use it to haul its rated loads. They come with BIG brakes and a tough
boxed
frame. All I had to do to this truck, was add air bag springs in back and a
nifty air
compressor to keep them inflated...this also helped when attaching a trailer,
as I could
lower the rear of the truck, then raise it back again! Other than the air bags,
the rest
was stock Toyota.
The 120V pack was configured as buddy pairs. The speedo wasn't working for a
while, but
a conservative estimate of the miles that pack delivered was 30,000+ miles over
a three year
period. The secret was in using a lower powered controller with 500 max battery
amps of
pull from the pack, or just 250 amps max...ever...per battery. Cruising at 55
mph was
only 60-70 amps per battery.
At 45 mph, range was close to 150 miles per charge...at 55-60, range was 120
miles per
charge. The truck was the first EV driven on the I-5 freeway system, from
Portland, Oregon
to Seattle Washington and back, including being part of a parade and a day of
city
driving, it was a 440 mile run. It took a charge halfway there, a charge before
leaving
on the return leg, and another charge at the halfway mark. Notable EV List
personalities
involved on this famous road trip, includes none other than the Madman Rich
Rudman,
Father Time, and Pat Sweeney. It should come as no surprise, that the Madman
was in charge of,
well, charging! The scene at Pat Sweeney's halfway house (love that), was really
something, as we tried to jam the 2500 lb. pack up as fast as we could.
Remember, this
was pre PFC days (probably the genesis of the Madman's obsession with fast
charging). We
have pictures, somewhere, of Rudman's gencart from hell, my generator, and
various 240 vac
chargers, all ganged together, somehow, with 190 amps of constant charge juice!
See Ya.....John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>I couldn't imagine using a VX for a conversion now that I know how high it
>is geared. Maybe the CX or SI or another model might have shorter gears.
That's one of the things they don't teach you in EV school. Taller
"economy" gearing in a gas car becomes "sport" gearing in an EV because
of the negative slope of the electric motor's torque curve, and vice versa.
Use the VX for a tire-smoker, and use the Si for a mileage champ.
David Thompson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>From: "James D Thompson"
>That's one of the things they don't teach you in EV school.
>Taller
>"economy" gearing in a gas car becomes "sport" gearing in
>an EV because
>of the negative slope of the electric motor's torque curve,
>and vice versa.
Hmmm... My transmission first gear ratio is currently 2.95
to 1. The gears in my differential are currently 4.10's..
Stock, they were 2.73's. Other options could be 3.08, 3.27,
3.31, or 3.55..
So when I swap in the electric motor, any guesses on which
might be the "ideal" gear to have in the differential if
using say 26" tires?
2nd gear: 1.94:1
3rd: 1.34:1
4th: 1:1
5th 0.63:1 (overdrive)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well technically the water would only "short" between adjacent cells
(1.2 volt difference), coupled with the limit of 48 to 60 volts max per
water string. And the water is water, not H2SO4 more like dilute KaOH.
Still, the airgap is a good idea. Wonder if it's possible to work with
some small-lot plastic vendor to run off a thousand little caps with
plumbing and the siphon type thingies. Or buy them from SAFT.
Chris
You mean, other than the water shorting out all the cells in your pack?
Saft's design prevents a conductive water path forming from cell to cell.
ANy design you come up with needs to create an "Airgap" between the water
flowing into the individual cells.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We would like to sell a licence to manufacture it, so availability done this
way and perfected suitable for average consumers, is a ways off. There is
nothing to stop someone from converting a gasoline one and using it in basic
form without the optimal microprocessor control (except for time, etc, like
an EV conversion).
I didn't measure running time and it will vary with depth and type of snow,
but it cleared my double wide 40 foot long driveway of about 6 inches deep
snow with capacity to spare.
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Coate" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: EV snow blowers?
Doug Hartley wrote:
> The mayor of St-Jerome is very pro-EV,
cool place to live!
The electric snowblower was built by Jean-Marie Dubois, now living near
St-Jerome. It is battery operated, and currently powered by 2 Orbital
12V batteries. ... It has a small traction
motor and a larger blower motor, which can be separately controlled. I
am working with him to develop a controller which implements the
improvements and way of operation covered by his his patent (pending), to
make it very easy for anyone to use, and more efficient.
Sounds nice... so when can we buy one? ;-)
More to the point, how long does it last on those two batteries?
_________
Jim Coate
1970's Elec-Trak
1992 Chevy S-10 BEV
1997 Chevy S-10 NGV
http://www.eeevee.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A patent on battery powered snow blowing?
Oh I think I could claim "prior art" on this one :-)
No, a patent on the way to control and co-ordinate the 2 motors
automatically according to the (varying) snow conditions so as to make it
easy and efficient in operation.
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Zach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: EV snow blowers?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 08:54:39 -0800, Joe Strubhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Isn't using a sniping service illegal on eBay?
>
> No, I don't think it's illegal.
>
>> If it isn't, it should be illegal, IMHO.
>
> Why? :)
> I get lots of bargain electrical bits for EVs this way. I wouldn't
> think of placing a bid earlier than the last 10 seconds, so that
> someone else can chip away at it.
> I can't see how it's unfair to anyone, buyer or seller.
>
>
Realistically speaking, bid sniping at the last minute won't win you the
bid unless you are willing to outbid the current high bidder.
If you want it, bid early for the maximum amount you are willing to bid.
If someone tries to bid snipe at the last second with exactly the same
high bid, guess what...YOU win, because the first bid placed for a given
amount wins.
If the sniper wins, then it means he was willing to spend more money than
you were and he would have won anyway.
There is zero advantage to sniping, at least not against someone smart
enough to bid their max from the beggining.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> This brings anothe question which [use to :-) ] bugging me for
> a long time: why they don't use something like ball bearings pressed
> against commutator instead of brushes, so it rolls instead of
> slids and so does minimum wear? Of course contact area is smaller,
> but hard pressing metal to metal amdy be all you need. Conductivity
> is provided through the bearing itself.
I'm guessing that having current flow through the ball bearing would
cause microsopic pitting and wear of the surface. Soon they aren't
smooth any more, and start to skid and wear faster.
Actually, what goes on at the brush-commutator interface is pretty
weird. They don't actually touch, but are held apart by a thin plasma
film.
--
If you would not be forgotten
When your body's dead and rotten
Then write of great deeds worth the reading
Or do the great deeds worth repeating
-- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why do you think it won't short from one end of the string to the other?
There is definitely a higher potential, and the higher the potential the
more likely it is for current to flow.
And it's water *directly* in contact with KaOH which means it *will* get
contaminated, which means that it will conduct electricity.
> Well technically the water would only "short" between adjacent cells
> (1.2 volt difference), coupled with the limit of 48 to 60 volts max per
> water string. And the water is water, not H2SO4 more like dilute KaOH.
>
> Still, the airgap is a good idea. Wonder if it's possible to work with
> some small-lot plastic vendor to run off a thousand little caps with
> plumbing and the siphon type thingies. Or buy them from SAFT.
>
> Chris
>
>> You mean, other than the water shorting out all the cells in your pack?
>>
>> Saft's design prevents a conductive water path forming from cell to
>> cell.
>> ANy design you come up with needs to create an "Airgap" between the
>> water
>> flowing into the individual cells.
>>
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
> and cold batteries due to the winter weather).
The weather has been warm here lately -- about 80 degrees F from Sunday
through today. The previous week the temp. was 60s to 70s.
Anyways, I think I just might have found my problem and the solution...
and its not temperature related. The pack just came off the charger. I
unplugged the Anderson connector, so the pack now has no loads on it. I
want to wait and see what the pack voltage settles to this time before I
come to any conclusions... I'll report back tomorrow.
-Nick
1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
http://Go.DriveEV.com/
---------------------------------------------
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 11:36, Lee Hart wrote:
> Nick Viera wrote:
> > 20 Trojan T-875 batteries... Before watering, battery pack 168 volts
> > (no load on the batteries). According to specs, 100% state of charge
> > open circuit voltage should be 8.49 volts/battery or 169.9 volts for
> > the pack.
>
> Ok. That all sounds right.
>
> > Well, now when the charge cycle ends, I see the battery voltage rest at
> > 163 to 164 volts.
>
> That's only 2.04v/cell. Either the pack is not fully charged, you have a
> bad battery somewhere, or there is some load left connected.
>
> I don't think it could be consequence of watering. You would need to
> have FAR too much water to lower the voltage this much. I don't think
> it's possible to add this much water without it overflowing out the top.
>
> > I've also just noticed that the pack voltage seems to sag a lot more
> > than it used to under load, and my range has decreased.
>
> These symptoms also point to either under-charged batteries, or a bad
> one somewhere in the pack. (Or, less likely, a broken voltmeter that's
> lying to you, and cold batteries due to the winter weather).
>
> > P.S. I do still have a Lee Hart battery bridge LED circuit connected to
> > the pack while driving. I've yet to see any of the red LEDs light up...
>
> Good. That tells me there are no dead cells.
>
> But, I think I would check all your individual battery voltages. It
> still may reveal a "stinker". Then I'd try a long low-current equalizing
> charge, to see if perhaps your charger isn't charging enough.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 15 Feb 2005 at 13:50, Ken Trough wrote:
> Posting a link where you can voice your opinion is appropriate, but
> including your letter with your political opinions goes against forum
> moderation policy, in my opinion.
Healthy, respectful, on-topic debate is always welcome here. Alas a few
recent posts have missed on every one of the above points - and although
they may vociferously deny it, that appears to be deliberate on the part of
the writers. Some get their kicks raising others' ire; others enjoy smugly
displaying their "superior" views before us, the great unwashed public who
are posessed of "inferior" opinions.
The best response to either type is to ignore him.
The good news is that these types are scarce on this list, which by and
large is peopled with good, thoughtful, considerate folks. But when these
critters do raise their heads above their sewers to shout at us, it's
tempting to post a heated reply. Don't! That's exactly what they want.
Email filters are your friends! As these people manifest themselves, just
enter their email addresses into your mail filter. That way, they'll never
annoy you again, nor will they ever tempt you to an angry response.
As the saying goes, "Don't feed the trolls."
David Roden
Assistant EV List Administrator & Topic Cop
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This picture also does not include the new SCR that John installed for his
afterburner bypass mode. It is fairly large and looks like something
straight out of Dr. Frankenstein's lab.
You can compare it to John's Zombie on page 4 though that might be unfair.
The Zombie is neat but designed for quick access as a drag car.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Umm... What's the point?
--
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 ---
>
> L�hett�j�: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Frank Schmitt wrote:
> > I've always thought it would be neat to build an induction motor with
> > two rotors and one stator. The one with more slip (in the motor, less
> > slip at the tire) would get all the torque. I guess you'd optimize the
> > vector control for whichever one is turning more slowly.
>
> This has been done. As I recall, it didn't really make much difference
> in the size or weight of the motor. The only real problem is that it
> turned an ordinary mass-produced motor into an exotic special motor
> (more cost for no particular advantage).
There is _some_ (conditional) advantage. You would need no differential, and
you would get a differential lock action. - Well, in basic implementation this
advantage is partly lost because you would need two reduction gearboxes, one
for each wheel. - But if you would make the motor so that it is directly
connected to wheels and rotates with the wheel velocity you would get a very
simple system indeed. One motor, having two drive shafts coming out from
opposite ends, going to wheels. Could be placed in place of the differential, a
lot of space saved. No oil needed anywhere in the power train.
But here we have the drawback of the low rotation velocity of the motor. Is
this a show-stopper or just a challenge?
Seppo Lindborg
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just found this site about battery watering system. I have a PV system on my
5th wheel(http://www.ironandwood.org/graphics/RV_PV.pdf ) with hydrocaps on
my T-105's which really save water.
http://www.aquapro.net/aquapro_how.html
Very simple and direct
Rush
Tucson AZ
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 2/14/2005
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, I was able to put the motor my little 1974 Beetle without doing anything
drastic. After taking the transmission out, and finding that it won't be put
back in with the motor attached, I put the transmission back in, and then put
the motor in, with help. After connecting things up again, I tried the gears.
I could get the transmission to go in every gear except reverse. At least it
seemed like every gear. Then I decided to apply 12V and check every gear. As
I did so, I noticed that the wheels turn in every gear, and neutral, at the
same speed. And I still can't get it into reverse. I did some playing while
the transmission was out, by pushing the rod in some of the gears, as I was
testing the adapter plate and connection. I also noticed that some of the
fluid was leaking out a breather hole. Would the suspected idea behind why
things aren't working right, be because I played with it while it was out? Or
could it be that too much fluid came out? What should be!
my next step? Thanks,
Brian
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> Why do you think it won't short from one end of the string to the
> other? There is definitely a higher potential, and the higher the
> potential the more likely it is for current to flow. And it's
> water *directly* in contact with KaOH which means it *will* get
> contaminated, which means that it will conduct electricity.
Yes, it will conduct. However, it is a resistor; not a short circuit. It
causes a leakage path that will discharge the batteries over time. So,
it is tolerable on a short-term basis, but has to be blocked long-term.
--
Ring the bells that you can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in
-- Leonard Cohen, from "Anthem"
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seppo Lindborg wrote:
> But here we have the drawback of the low rotation velocity of the
> motor. Is this a show-stopper or just a challenge?
The low speed, and consequently high torque needed complicates motor
design. A low-speed high-torque motor is generally larger in diameter,
heavier, and costs more than an equivalent high-speed low-torque motor
of the same horsepower.
--
Ring the bells that you can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in
-- Leonard Cohen, from "Anthem"
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am in Redwood City 10 miles North of Palo Alto.
I will take ownership of this one.
Please send me directly her contact info.
-Bruce
=====
Bruce {EVangel} Parmenter
' ____
~/__|o\__
'@----- @'---(=
. http://geocities.com/brucedp/
. EV List Editor, RE & AFV newswires
. (originator of the above ASCII art)
===== Undo Petroleum Everywhere
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>>> Are these DC motors as advanced as they are ever going to get?
>
>> Pretty much.
>
> (and I would add) ...because people have assumed there is no room for
> improvement, and so have stopped trying.
>
>>> About what year did these motors peak out at?
>
>> Hmmm, 92 maybe 93? That of course would be 1892.
>
> No; it's not that bad!
>
-snip-
> Most recent improvements have come from better materials. Much better
> magnets and magnetic alloys, much better insulation, etc. This allows
> modern motors to be much smaller for a given horsepower, because they
> can run hotter without damage.
I was under the impression we were discussing series wound motors. I
doubt you will see anything new in series wound motors in the near future,
except (very unlikely) possibly using super conductors. They aren't going
to get much more efficient and they won't get much smaller (power to
weight) that the current ADC type motors.
I agree that they have made a lot of progress lately with PM motors and
probably will make more progress, but I doubt it will be anything earth
shaking except /possibly/ in reduced costs. Realistically speaking there
are some pretty darn good PM motors available now for fairly reasonable
costs.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lets see...
Option A: 70 additional revolutionary electric cars, the likes of
which we might not see again for a long time (and certainly not from
GM), crushed in the Arizona desert, or...
Option B: Those same vehicles back on the road in private hands,
reducing smog. Or in universities around the world, inspiring the
next wave of electrical engineers.
Anything would be better than Option A. That's the point,
Richard
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:28:18 -0600, Michael Hurley mephit-at-mac.com
|vehicle/1.0-Allow| <...> wrote:
> Umm... What's the point?
> --
>
> 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 ---
>
> L�hett�j�: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> P�iv�: 16.02.2005 19:37
> Vastaanottaja: [email protected]
> Otsikko: Re: Vas: Re: Hydraulic eff.
>
> Seppo Lindborg wrote:
> > But here we have the drawback of the low rotation velocity of the
> > motor. Is this a show-stopper or just a challenge?
>
> The low speed, and consequently high torque needed complicates motor
> design. A low-speed high-torque motor is generally larger in diameter,
> heavier, and costs more than an equivalent high-speed low-torque motor
> of the same horsepower.
Yes, so I have understood. But this as such is not yet a show-stopper. The
motor would have a 'right' to cost more and be heavier at least for the amount
of differential and gearbox it replaces.
Larger diameter could be a worse problem. The motor is between the wheels.
Increase in diameter would eat away the ground clearance of the car.
Seppo
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lets see...
Option A: 70 additional revolutionary electric cars, the likes of
which we might not see again for a long time (and certainly not from
GM), crushed in the Arizona desert, or...
Option B: Those same vehicles back on the road in private hands,
reducing smog. Or in universities around the world, inspiring the
next wave of electrical engineers.
Anything would be better than Option A. That's the point,
Richard
But for the EV1, it's already too late. They're gone. Why have a
vigil to save something that's already destroyed?
--
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 ---
Seppo Lindborg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Frank Schmitt wrote:
> > > I've always thought it would be neat to build an induction motor
> > > with two rotors and one stator. The one with more slip (in the
> > > motor, less slip at the tire) would get all the torque. I guess
> > > you'd optimize the vector control for whichever one is
> > > turning more slowly.
>
> There is _some_ (conditional) advantage. You would need no
> differential, and you would get a differential lock action. -
I suppose the real question is whether or not this is superior in any
way to simply using 2 ordinary induction motors with the stators wired
as one. The advantage of using a pair of ordinary motors is that you
avoid the cost/complexity of a custom-built 2-rotor machine that
requires some sort of central bearing support for the internal ends of
each rotor. The only disadvantage I see is that you have the extra
weight of a pair of endbells, however that is offset by the weight of
the central bearing support of the 2-rotor machine.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sounds like the clutch isn't disengaging?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Staffanson"
After connecting things up again, I tried the gears. I
could get the transmission to go in every gear except
reverse. At least it seemed like every gear. Then I
decided to apply 12V and check every gear. As I did so, I
noticed that the wheels turn in every gear, and neutral, at
the same speed. And I still can't get it into reverse. I
did some playing while the transmission was out, by pushing
the rod in some of the gears, as I was testing the adapter
plate and connection.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
So how are your experiments in battery building going? Oh, you're NOT
building anybatteries...why not?
You can't come up with an excuse why you aren't doing it that doesn't
prove my point.
Give one good reason why someone, anyone, isn't building their own
batteries at home even though they see an clear, overall, advantage to
doing so.
I don't think it's pessimistic to say the truth. People have been
building motors in their garages continously for over a hundred years,
ditto with controllers in one form or another. I don't know of anyone
that has tried building EV batteries in their garage in the past 1/4
century, there must be a reason. Seems to me that the most likely reason
is that it's just not worth it (no advantage).
The fact that nobody is willing to try it, pretty conclusively proves my
point that nobody is willing to try it. I'm not saying they can't do it,
and I'm not saying the shouldn't do it. What I'm saying is the fact that
they aren't doing it is pretty strong evidence that they don't want to do
it. If someone saw a real advantage to building them at home, then I'm
sure that someone would be building them at home.
If you have another reason why they aren't doing it, I'd like to hear it.
Attacking my reasoning simply because you don't like it, isn't very
productive.
Basically it looks like to me that we have a few folks on this list trying
to convince someone else to do it. You can't be bothered to waste your
time/money/whatever, but you're sure that someone else should.
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:37:46 -0700 (MST), Peter VanDerWal
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Saying something is impractical for
>> >> a hobbyist simply because you can't do it the way major manufacturers
>> do
>> >> it is both overly pessimistic and misleading.
>> >
>>
>> I'm going to go with Victor on this. People build their own EVs because
>> they can't buy them. Even though motors and controllers are readily
>> available, people build their own motors and controllers. They do this
>> because they see some advantage in doing it themselves.
>>
>> If there was /any/ kind of advantage in building your own batteries
>> /someone/ would be doing it. Is anyone doing it?That's pretty coclusive
>> evidence that their is no advantage to doing it.
>
> Peter, that's a wee bit pessimistic. You could have said the same
> thing about DC motors, not so long ago, and there was a time when a
> 400A Curtis was state of the art, and no-one had got around to making
> Zillas and T-Rexes. Even chargers - people have wanted a light,
> powerful, universal voltage charger for years, and did people tell
> Rich Rudman that "if it hasn't been done already, that's a good enough
> reason not to bother trying."?
>
> Or are you saying that the lead-acid batteries available now meet
> everyone's criteria, and there's simply no advances to be made? I
> really don't agree with that!
>
>> If some of you folks think differnetly, well quit arguing about it and
>> go
>> out do it. If your excuse for NOT doing it is ______ (fill in the
>> blank)
>> then you've pretty much made Victor's point.
>
> Why, is there something different about making batteries that makes
> them special, and the exclusive domain of Exide or whoever? Just as
> we had EV enthusiast / electronic engineers design and build useful
> products on their own, why couldn't there be an electrochemist who is
> also into electric drag-racing? That's probably all it would take :)
>
> Regards
> Evan
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This is "Pittsburgh Auto Show" week. A friend of mine went to the show,
and he claimed the highlights were getting to talk to a GM exec. Note the
attributed comment about the EV-1.
http://mckeesport.dementia.org/blog/000239.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> Peter summarized it much better than I could - if your
>> "arguments" are valid, this would be done by now.
>
> Nonsense. The fact that none of the EV drag racers has yet been
> desperate enough for a high power battery to try building their own in
> no way proves that it is infeasible to build a lead acid battery in
> one's garage. There are any number of things that I *could* build in my
> garage but haven't; the fact that I haven't attempted to build something
> does not indicate/prove that I am incapable of doing so.
>
Neither Victor nor I have claimed that it's impossible for a hobbiest to
build a battery in his garage. Victor may have overstated the
requirements, but he was basically pointing out that the cost of building
your own outweighed any small advantage you'd gain from it. At most he
said it was Impractical, not impossible.
> By your (and Peter's) logic, before the first guy converted an EV in his
> garage, that was impossible/infeasible too.
While that doesn't follow our logic, it is a true statement. The first
vehicle to be converted into an EV was done (I suspect) in some hobbiest
shed shortly after the required components (motors, batteries) were
invented.
I'll ask you the same basic question I just asked Evan, how /specifically/
is my logic wrong?
Give me one reason why people aren't building batteries at home if they
see a clear advantage to doing so.
> impossible. Nor does the fact that no-one on this list has yet been
> motivated to try building their own battery make it impossible.
It doesn't prove that it's impossible, but it is a strong indication that
it's impractical.
> Another, also quite serious, suggestion is that rather than building a
> battery from the ground up, if the concern is primarily peak current
> capability and interconnect robustness, it might be more practical to
> take a mostly suitable battery, like the 13 or 16Ah Hawker, saw the lid
> off and beef up the cell interconnects to address their shortcomings,
> and then reseal the battery.
Let us know how that works out.
--- End Message ---
