EV Digest 4229
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: EV Efficiency
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: EV Efficiency
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) From the Wayland EV Laboratory...the Siamese 8!
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: BB600 delivery
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Dead link 10
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Intellectual property
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Optima flavor question.
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: From the Wayland EV Laboratory...the Siamese 8!
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: From the Wayland EV Laboratory...the Siamese 8!
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) VW bug orginal cd.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Superbeetle weight help or hindrance?......
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Should I have gone AGM over flooded?
by "Maki, Garret" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Charging dock idea
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Desirable amp hours
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Desirable amp hours
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Battery controllers, was gliders
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: EV Efficiency - chargers - efficiency vs power factor
by "Philip Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Optima flavor question.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: EV Efficiency - chargers - efficiency vs power factor
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: EV Efficiency
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: From the Wayland EV Laboratory...the Siamese 8!
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Adapter Ideas
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Adapter plate measurement website
by Mark Farver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Battery controllers, was gliders
by Robert MacDowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: EV Efficiency
by Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) RE: Texas to New York using just 12 batteries!
by "Jamie Marshall \(GAMES\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Flooded batteries max current?
by Nick Viera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Re: Texas to New York using just 12 batteries!
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29) Re: Should I have gone AGM over flooded?
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hey, that's exactly what I need: a replacement fuse for a K&W BC-20. Any
idea where I can get one? Thanks.
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter VanDerWal
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 8:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV Efficiency
>> > Battery chargers average about 80% efficient.
>>
>> Many are better than that and any EV production
>> would be. About 90% or better.
>
> Where are you seeing anything like 90%? Maybe Rich can tell us what his
> PFC
> series averages, because all the ones I've dealt with (and probably the
> scrounged-up one's you use) can't average themselves out of the 70's!
I was trying to be generous, obviously some folks are more generous than
others.
I was also assuming that high quality chargers, like the ones from
Solectria, Metric Mind, and Rich, were much better than my K&W.
Please don't think I'm dissing the K&W, it gets the job done and, other
than problems finding replacement fuses, it's been reliable. I just don't
consider it a very 'high tech' or efficient charger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi All,
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Battery chargers average about 80% efficient.
> >
> > Many are better than that and any EV
> production
> > would be. About 90% or better.
>
> Where are you seeing anything like 90%? Maybe Rich
> can tell us what his PFC
> series averages, because all the ones I've dealt
His is design for a broad voltage range but the
same circuits can be optimized for any pack voltage at
higher eff. Even as is it hits 89%+ depending on
voltage of the pack.
And if you don't charge lead/acids all the way up
each time, only to about 90% instead, but only
equalized every 4 or 6 charges if used a lot, the lead
batt eff can be 95%.
> with (and probably the
> scrounged-up one's you use) can't average themselves
> out of the 70's!
I use ferro's that do about 80%+ because they only
cost me $10 or so and more eff than most other
chargers!!
I undercharge to keep eff up, watering down.
What's your excuse? How much do you pay?
Watering is a good way to tell your charging eff,
at least the batt, cycle portion.
I'm getting under 100watt-hrs/ mile from the plug
so I'm eff overall.
Lee has been telling us for yrs how to tune them
up for better eff. Caps, inductors to do it just don't
costs that much. Laziness does though ;-)
Any factory EV would have a PFC charger made just
for it's voltage thus being able to get very high eff
and good charging profile for eff. Thus 90% eff in it.
But even old ferro chargers can beat 80% and with
a few caps for better PFC and good charging profile
matched to the battery pack, thus eff of 85%+.
HTH's,
jerry dycus
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
This year's EV drag racing season is going to be a very active one for me. I've
got two
racing projects on boil at the same time, the new fortified 288V White Zombie,
and the
Purple Phaze minitruck 156V high current drag truck. Bother are moving ahead
nicely, I'm
happy to report, but this post will concentrate on the new 'single motor' for
White
Zombie, the Siamese 8.
Having pulled the twin 8 motor drive from the car, my electric motor rebuilder,
Jim Husted
of Hi Torque Electric and I have been hard at work. To get rid of vibration and
losses, I
needed to somehow, shorten the long twin 8 drive about 3 inches in order to
make the
rearmost section (the front motor's brush end bell) clear the car's front frame
rail...this, so the twin motor drive unit could drop down and be positioned
parallel to
the road surface instead of at the angle it's been at. Having the drive unit
shorter will
not be enough to affect this result, as the car's cross member also needs to be
redesigned
with a reinforced C shaped cut-out to allow the twin motor drive to sit lower.
Finally,
the steering tie rod is also in the way and would need to be modified.
Currently, both motors are identical, with the standard 1.125 inch keyed output
shafts and
with smaller 3/4 inch rear shafts on their brush end bells. The front motor's
rear shaft
does nothing, other than get in the way, while its main output shaft that
points towards
the rear of the car is coupled to the rear motor's rear brush end bell shaft.
The floating
coupler makes noise and vibration, and the keyway of the front motor's output
shaft shaft
is hogged out and was ready to break. The rear motor's output shaft was mated
to a
Dutchman flange coupler which had come loose and was wobbling...time for are a
rethink of
things.
Enter the solution....we've come up with a new, one piece motor that is
essentially, the
two motors joined at their heads, the Siamese 8. It will have one common shaft,
four
bearings, brush end bells at each end of the motor, and dual cooling fans in
the mid
section. The splined output shaft exits out one of the brush end bells,
modified with an
aluminum 'cap plate' that will house the output bearing sandwiched to the brush
end bell
bearing. The armatures will be carefully positioned so that combar segments
line up
exactly with one another.
Building it is very interesting. A custom long shaft is being machined with a
larger
diameter center 'bump' and a long splined final shaft end. Assembly goes like
this....the
center mid-shaft bearing will be pressed on first. Next, the re-machined output
end bell
of one motor will go on and mate to the center bearing. On the other side of
the bump, the
second custom center section bell goes on, also mating to the center bearing.
Next, each
fan gets pressed on behind the bells, followed by each armature. The motor
bodies with
their fields then slide over and fit into the center bell section, where custom
brackets
then pull them together and make up the new long motor body. The modified brush
end bells
have thick, arced copper busses hand warped and copper-welded to interconnect
the brush
riggings, replacing the wimpy 6 gauge factory brush interconnect leads...a
trick I used on
my race modified Kostov years ago for higher current transfer between brushes.
Both end
bells will be painted inside with dielectric coating, too. One of the brush end
bells will
then have the cap plate and output bearing, where the long splined output shaft
will exit.
The result, will be a new super long Siamese 8 motor that doesn't require the
bulky
aluminum dual motor mount anymore, and that will be about 6 inches shorter than
the
previous twin motor setup. Without the mount under and around the motor case,
the new
motor will sit lower, too, and just clear the steering tie rod. The cross
member, however,
still needs to be modified.
I'm working with Exide on a fresh set of batteries for both White Zombie and
Purple Phaze,
and right now, it looks to be a good thing that this will happen. With the
higher power the
288V pack can deliver, with the new motor, and with the new aluminum driveline
and zero
vibration at high revs, White Zombie should be running consistant mid to low
12's this year.
As things progress, I'll give updates.
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Steve Gaarder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: BB600 delivery
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 09:59:02 -0500 (EST)
As I recall, someone said that they have to be prevented from
expanding/bulging while they charge, or there will be stress on the
seals. Does anyone know how sturdy the containment needs to be, and
whether this is on both the wide and the narrow sides, or on the wide
sides only?
Until you have your battery box figured out you can just take the caps off
while you charge.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
James Massey wrote:
> OK, I'll have a look for the spec' on the CPU chip, if it has no
> programmability (there is another plug-in IC) I may take a 'punt' and
> replace the CPU and see what happens (as long as the device is not too
> expensive).
It's an 8051-series part; an SGS Thompson variant if I recall. Most of
them have internal ROMs, but I don't think they used it in the E-Meter,
and used an external one-time-programmable EPROM instead.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
>> Because patent examiners are underpaid overworked bureaucrats
>> who don't have the time or training to recognize obvious ideas.
Robert MacDowell wrote:
> Maybe they don't have the *authority* to make the legal ruling
> that an idea is obvious.
They are judge, jury, and executioner all in one. I think each examiner
simply looks at the patent application, and decides all by himself,
"Yes, this is OK" or "No, that's not." You can't sue or threaten them;
all you can do is rewrite your application and try again.
As others have said, I think the US patent system is basically "broken".
It doesn't work as intended. The bureaucrats aren't doing their job,
leaving the courts to fight it out. And in the courts, he with the most
money wins.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One thing to consider in dual-terminal batteries is reliability. I have
worked in a service bay and I have seen these (other brands) come in with
"No-Battery" indications, only to find one of the connections inside,
usually a post, had broken. Just something to consider.
David C. Wilker Jr. USAF (RET)
Children need love, especially when they do not deserve it.
- Harold S.
Hulbert
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 3:21 AM
Subject: Optima flavor question.
Perhaps it's just "this site" but the specs for the Optima Group
31 Yellow and Blue Tops are identical. Although the Blue has two
sets of posts? Now from what I've read one should use the YT
as opposed to the BT. Even the prices are identical, what gives?
http://www.remybattery.com/350/graphics/00000001/bluetop31.jpg
It just strikes me that the double terminal BT would be more
versitile. You could double the pack interconnects? Use one
set of the end of string posts for the controller and the other
for a high power charger or something? right? Maybe I like blue.
L8r
Ryan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wayland"
Subject: From the Wayland EV Laboratory...the Siamese 8!
John,
The Siamese 8 sounds great!
> I'm working with Exide on a fresh set of batteries for both White Zombie
> and Purple Phaze,
> and right now, it looks to be a good thing that this will happen. With the
> higher power the
> 288V pack can deliver, with the new motor, and with the new aluminum
> driveline and zero
> vibration at high revs, White Zombie should be running consistant mid to
> low 12's this year.
Does that mean that exide is making a 'special' set of batteries? or are you
just buying a set of production batteries? Why do you like the Exides better
than Trojans, I guess you're using 12V's?
Thanks
Rush
Tucson AZ
converting a '86 Mitsubishi truck
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's the same batteries you and I can buy off the shelf, it's just that he
has such a coooool car that he gets his for free :-)
Does that mean that exide is making a 'special' set of batteries? or are
you
just buying a set of production batteries? Why do you like the Exides
better
than Trojans, I guess you're using 12V's?
Thanks
Rush
Tucson AZ
converting a '86 Mitsubishi truck
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Cx of the Beetle, measured in the wind tunnel of the Polytechnic of
Stoccarda onf the final prototype, measured just 0.385. theis data increased
to 0.41 in mass production but in any case it remained an exceptionally low
value for the epoch (1938). The tatum was also confirmed by the particularly
low value of the absorbed power to travel to 100 km/h: only 15CV. To make a
comparison you hve to think that a modern VW Pole first series absorbs 17.2
to the same speed. You have to notice that the aesthetic modifications
introduced inthe 67model (squared bumpers and vertical headlights. Made the
Cd of the Beetle meningfully worse and in the last models it appeared to be
equal to 0.48. That being said would bolting on slant back headlight fenders
and different bumpers and maybe a dam help VW cd? LR......
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I saw that the weight of the Superbeetle is a couple of hundred more pounds
than previous models. Is some of this in the motor or lost ICE parts.
There is a different configuration for the gas tank. Higher and larger.
Better place for batteries in the front compartment I think. . Stronger
doors. Any thoughts.......
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
On a recent post was this Peukert calculator
http://www.johngsbbq.com/Neon_John_site/EV/EV_home.htm
<http://www.johngsbbq.com/Neon_John_site/EV/EV_home.htm>
I installed Trojan SCS150 105 Ah c/20 batteries in my motorcycle, well
because I am new to this and 105 seemed like a really big number. I have
heard people write that because of the Peukert exponent you will more likely
get 60% of the c20 rate. I thought 60 Ah is fine. But from the calculator
it looks like a similar battery (SCS225) has a Perkerts exponent of 1.27 and
running the calculator at a 100 amp draw and 80% DoD it looks like I only
get measly 34.3 usable amphours.
If I put in the 12 pound lighter Exide Orbital 34XCD rated at 50Ah c20 (so I
was thinking half the juice of my SCS150) with a 1.10 Peukert exponent I get
31.4 usable amphours. Maybe only a 2 mile difference, but my whole bike
would be 72 lbs, maybe 10% lighter so it seems like a wash and I wouldn't
have to water.
I am starting to think I made a big mistake going with the floodeds.
Could someone check my math? Is what I wrote above correct? In this case
does going from a 105Ah flooded really equal using a 50Ah AGM?
If so I am really kicking myself, and may be buying some orbitals.
Thanks,
Garret
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seth Allen wrote:
> Anyone have a 20kHz inductive charger/ power coupling/ split
> transformer? I need a bunch of 2kW ones for work.
For 2kw it's not hard. I'd use a flyback topology, because they
intrinsically need an air gap in the core, and you can't help but have
at least some air gap when the transformer is split between floor and
vehicle.
The challenges are that flyback transformers radiate noise like a small
sun, and they produce huge voltage spikes due to leakage inductance. So,
you will also need a very good shield around the two transformer halves
that mate together (like two halves of a clamshell) to keep the noise
down. And, you'd need an active "lossless" snubber circuit to recover
the inductive energy -- otherwise your snubber will burn up 10% of the
total energy (200w for a 2000w charger).
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mark Ward wrote:
> The batteries I have readily available are 12v 105ah 182 reserve
> minute rated marine batteries. I am trying to find out what
> experience anyone has with them. I looked a the Trojans and didn't
> see a lot of capacity difference in their 12v flooded offerings.
Generally, 12v "marine" batteries are a compromise between a plain old
ICE starting battery, and a true deep-cycle battery. They are trying to
make an old-style flooded battery that can deliver high peak currents
for very short times (for starting an engine), but that can also supply
low currents for long periods of time (for running lights and other
low-current loads for many hours with the engine off). This usage is
reflected in their ratings -- you generally see "CA" (cranking amps) or
"CCA" (cold cranking amps) which is the maximum current available for
engine starting; and "reserve minutes", which means how many minutes the
battery can supply 25 amps.
Becuase of the design compromises, marine batteries have fairly short
cycle life. Typical life to 80% discharged is only 200-300 cycles. So,
if you drove your EV every day and discharged the batteries 80%, they
would last perhaps 1 year.
An EV requires HIGH currents for LONG periods of time. A typical rating
for a 6v golf cart battery is 105-145 minutes at 75 amps (3 times the
test current for 12v batteries). Even this 75 amps is low for
on-the-road high-speed EVs, which can completely discharge their
batteries less than 1 hour. So, the most useful way to compare EV
batteries is to look at their 1-hour ratings; how much current can they
suppy for 1 hour.
Batteries built for EVs also need to be true deep-cycle batteries, which
can be discharged many more times before wearing out. A typical 6v golf
cart battery is rated for 600-1000 cycles to 80% discharged, so they
will last 3-5 years in daily use.
The Trojan SCS-225 is not a good EV battery. I've driven EVs with them,
and they just don't last long enough to bother with. Trojan only rates
their life as 300 cycles (compared to 750 for a T-105).
When people are forced to use 12v batteries in their EVs (because enough
6v won't fit, for instance), they usually go to a much more expensive
AGM 12v like the Optima or Hawker. They still have shorter life than
true EV batteries, but not as short as the marine batteries.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mark Ward wrote:
> I guess the question comes down to which batteries deliver the
> best power & longevity cost wise?
Yes, it does.
> If you buy a $50 battery and it last a year vs $100 battery
> lasts 2 years, what is the difference?
Correct; they are the same cost per mile (assuming free installation
etc.)
Of course it's not that simple, or we'd all be using the same battery.
Battery life is also strongly influenced by discharge current. For
example, 6v golf cart batteries have the lowest cost-per-mile *IF* you
discharge them at modest currents (not over about 250 amps). But if you
routinely draw over 500 amps, this shortens their life to the point that
the much more expensive AGM batteries will have a lower cost-per-mile.
Another factor is how much money you can afford to put in up-front.
Nicads have a lower cost-per-mile than lead-acids; but you pay many
times more money up-front. Would you rather pay $1000 for a pack that
lasts 10,000 miles, or $5000 for a pack that lasts 100,000 miles? Most
people don't have the $5000 to spend.
Another factor is that batteries with a low cost-pre-mile may require
extra maintenance or special charging equipment. The old Edison
nickel-iron batteries last forever, but require huge amounts of
watering, periodic replacement of the electrolyte and separators, etc.
Lithium-ions require expensive per-battery monitoring and charging
equipment.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Roden wrote:
> The owner drives the car for a while, boasting that it costs him
> almost nothing. With overcharging and overdischarging, the battery
> is soon kaput. The owner discovers that a replacement costs, say,
> $1800! He's never spent that kind of money on a 2-year-old gas
> car, but he swallows his annoyance and buys the new battery.
> [but won't do it twice.]
Robert MacDowell wrote:
> Sure. And that's the ultimate reputation wrecker for EVs.
>
> The Oldsmobile 350 diesel was ruined in the marketplace
> because its fuel injector demanded a $1000 repair every
> 80,000 miles.
Our friends in the auto companies are building *all* cars so they become
unfixable due to astronomical repair costs. An apparently minor accident
totals a new car because it's can't be economically repaired. Or, if
some major part fails (transmission, engine etc.) due to bad design or
just the luck of the draw, it costs more than the car is worth to fix if
it is outside of warranty. Too many of my friends have found this out
the hard way! So, an EV that needs an expensive battery at fairly low
mileage is not that much different from some ICE cars.
There is ample evidence that companies that *do* sell lots of EVs are
already coping with the battery replacement issue. In the case of the
Honda and Toyota hybrids, their warranties cover the batteries for
80,000 miles. There have been failures, and it's no doubt costing the
companies money -- but they factored it into the cost of the car (part
of the reason why the purchase price is higher).
Fork lifts and golf carts still use plain old flooded batteries. Their
manufacturers typically provide 3-10 year warranties (whatever they can
get from the battery manufacturer). They have also worked out creative
"leasing" plans to shield their customers from being hit with a large
battery replacement bill.
Just as for leasing regular ICE cars, leasing an EV battery will always
cost more in the long run. But for people who won't/can't save their
money to buy a new pack themselves, a lease is a logical option.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think there is some confusion between a charger's power factor and its
efficiency.
A real light dimmer ( the one in the wall in your living room) is very
efficient. If it were even as low as 90% efficient, it would produce much
more heat that it could disipate inside a wall electrical box. It can have
a very low power factor, but that doesn't necessarily mean low efficiency.,
I've never seen a K&W charger ( basically a smart light dimmer) in
operation, but, unless they dissipate a LOT of heat, it's hard to imagine
them having efficiency as low as 70%. If that were true, and the charger
were delivering 1000 watts into the batteries, it would have to dissipate
more than 400 watts in heat. Do these things really give off that much heat?
I'm just talking about the effiiency of the charger itself; that is, how
much power it pushes into the batteries as a percentage of power it takes
out of the wall socket. The batteries themselves are probably much less
efficient than the charger. That's a whole different question.
If you want to know the efficiency of your charger, plug it into a Kill-a
Watt ( and measure real watts, not volt-amps) and divide that power by the
DC power out of the charger ( example : 120V at 8 amps).
Tell us what you come up with.
Phil Marino
From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV Efficiency
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 08:25:39 -0700 (MST)
>> > Battery chargers average about 80% efficient.
>>
>> Many are better than that and any EV production
>> would be. About 90% or better.
>
> Where are you seeing anything like 90%? Maybe Rich can tell us what his
> PFC
> series averages, because all the ones I've dealt with (and probably the
> scrounged-up one's you use) can't average themselves out of the 70's!
I was trying to be generous, obviously some folks are more generous than
others.
I was also assuming that high quality chargers, like the ones from
Solectria, Metric Mind, and Rich, were much better than my K&W.
Please don't think I'm dissing the K&W, it gets the job done and, other
than problems finding replacement fuses, it's been reliable. I just don't
consider it a very 'high tech' or efficient charger.
_________________________________________________________________
Don�t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Perhaps it's just "this site" but the specs for the Optima
> Group 31 Yellow and Blue Tops are identical. Although the
> Blue has two sets of posts? Now from what I've read one
> should use the YT as opposed to the BT. Even the prices are
> identical, what gives?
> http://www.remybattery.com/350/graphics/00000001/bluetop31.jpg
>
> It just strikes me that the double terminal BT would be more
> versitile. You could double the pack interconnects? Use one
> set of the end of string posts for the controller and the
> other for a high power charger or something? right? Maybe I like blue.
The blue tops and yellow tops are identical, other than the BTs having
the additional stud terminals. Always ensure that the Optima you buy
for EV use has a light grey case; the dark grey case is used on their
SLI versions while the light grey is used on the deep cycle versions.
I have heard of better prices on the BTs, and the stud terminals would
be handy for attaching regs or BMS, etc. independantly of the high
current traction wiring.
FWIW, if I replace my YTs with more Optimas, I will be going for BTs.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I thought the lack of efficiency in K&W chargers had to do with Power Factor
Correction, or lack thereof.
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Philip Marino
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 11:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: EV Efficiency - chargers - efficiency vs power factor
I think there is some confusion between a charger's power factor and its
efficiency.
A real light dimmer ( the one in the wall in your living room) is very
efficient. If it were even as low as 90% efficient, it would produce much
more heat that it could disipate inside a wall electrical box. It can have
a very low power factor, but that doesn't necessarily mean low efficiency.,
I've never seen a K&W charger ( basically a smart light dimmer) in
operation, but, unless they dissipate a LOT of heat, it's hard to imagine
them having efficiency as low as 70%. If that were true, and the charger
were delivering 1000 watts into the batteries, it would have to dissipate
more than 400 watts in heat. Do these things really give off that much heat?
I'm just talking about the effiiency of the charger itself; that is, how
much power it pushes into the batteries as a percentage of power it takes
out of the wall socket. The batteries themselves are probably much less
efficient than the charger. That's a whole different question.
If you want to know the efficiency of your charger, plug it into a Kill-a
Watt ( and measure real watts, not volt-amps) and divide that power by the
DC power out of the charger ( example : 120V at 8 amps).
Tell us what you come up with.
Phil Marino
>From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: EV Efficiency
>Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 08:25:39 -0700 (MST)
>
> >> > Battery chargers average about 80% efficient.
> >>
> >> Many are better than that and any EV production
> >> would be. About 90% or better.
> >
> > Where are you seeing anything like 90%? Maybe Rich can tell us what his
> > PFC
> > series averages, because all the ones I've dealt with (and probably the
> > scrounged-up one's you use) can't average themselves out of the 70's!
>
>I was trying to be generous, obviously some folks are more generous than
>others.
>I was also assuming that high quality chargers, like the ones from
>Solectria, Metric Mind, and Rich, were much better than my K&W.
>
>Please don't think I'm dissing the K&W, it gets the job done and, other
>than problems finding replacement fuses, it's been reliable. I just don't
>consider it a very 'high tech' or efficient charger.
>
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> Battery chargers average about 80% efficient.
> Many are better... About 90% or better.
Each of you are right. I'd say the *peak* efficiency of the best
chargers tops 90%. But, their *average* efficiency over an entire charge
cycle is more like 80% because they spend a lot of time operating well
away from peak efficiency.
>> Lead-acid battery efficiency is 75%.
> if you don't charge all the way up each time... can be 95%.
Again, you are both right. 75% is probably the typical efficiency for
lead-acid batteries. You can do better by carefully limiting your
overcharging (though I doubt you could reach 95% except at very low
charge/discharge currents).
Most chargers overcharge because it permits cheaper chargers, and the
consequences of overcharging are less severe than undercharging.
> Any factory EV would have a PFC charger made just
> for its voltage thus being able to get very high eff
> and good charging profile for eff. Thus 90% eff in it.
No; the vast evidence says that customers neither know nor care about
efficiency, so manufacturers supply whatever's cheapest -- which means
lower efficiency.
The bottom line is that EFFICIENCY DOESN'T MATTER because:
- Electricity is so cheap that its cost is insignificant compared
to gasoline.
- People won't pay more for high efficiency chargers.
- So manufacturers won't waste their time building them.
The main things people really care about (as evidenced by what they
actually spend money on) are "how fast can I charge?", "how far can I
drive on a charge?" and "how cheap can I get it?"
Sad, but true.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I see, he gets to put an exide logo on his car....
> It's the same batteries you and I can buy off the shelf, it's just that he
> has such a coooool car that he gets his for free :-)
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jeff Shanab wrote:
> I looked into some of the details of the generic mountings that james
> was talking about and i decided it looked ugly and actually added cost
> to have extra holes...
> I think there would be a huge benifit in open designs, we don't have
> to agree on one design, we can instead each specialize and share.
You neatly state the two sides to this coin. People are used to normal
car parts, which are custom designed for precisely one purpose; nice
flowing molded shapes, precision tolerances, exactly the right holes in
only the right places, etc.
A generic mass-produced adapter is cheaper, but looks ugly. So, people
would rather pay $500 for a precision machined custom adapter than $50
for an ugly homemade-looking collection of bolted-together parts. Even
though they both work the same. Human nature.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Here is my 1999 Ford Ranger 4cyl adapter plate design. There is no info
on the hub becuase it was built for a Siemens motor and I was not happy
with the hub design. The plate hole pattern is good however. (Don't
forget to move the center holes if it will be used with an ADC motor)
http://mindbent.org/adapters/
Any questions or other plates for submission please feel free to send me
a note.
Mark Farver
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
David Roden wrote:
The owner drives the car for a while, boasting that it costs him
almost nothing. With overcharging and overdischarging, the battery
is soon kaput. The owner discovers that a replacement costs, say,
$1800! He's never spent that kind of money on a 2-year-old gas
car, but he swallows his annoyance and buys the new battery.
[but won't do it twice.]
Robert MacDowell wrote:
Sure. And that's the ultimate reputation wrecker for EVs.
The Oldsmobile 350 diesel was ruined in the marketplace
because its fuel injector demanded a $1000 repair every
80,000 miles.
Our friends in the auto companies are building *all* cars so they become
unfixable due to astronomical repair costs. An apparently minor accident
totals a new car because it's can't be economically repaired. Or, if
some major part fails (transmission, engine etc.) due to bad design or
just the luck of the draw, it costs more than the car is worth to fix if
it is outside of warranty. Too many of my friends have found this out
the hard way!
I find modern engines are on the whole far, far better than
20 years ago, and far more fixable. I find the trouble is
old-school mechanics who refuse to understand modern
engines.
As for collision damage, that's a GOOD thing. I don't
think cars are totaled in minor accidents. I think they are
totaled in serious accidents, that their owners call "minor"
because they walked away.
So, an EV that needs an expensive battery at fairly low
mileage is not that much different from some ICE cars.
Sure. I guess there are going to be "lemons" in any car design.
But if a problem is foreseeable, it should be fixed, not shrugged at.
My *laptop* has a battery controller. Why shouldn't an EV?
I'm not talking about pie-in-the-sky fantasy automakers here.
I'm talking about real EVs, here and now, that we convert from
gas cars. How do *I* build an EV for my friend that will serve
them well? Given that they are not experts at battery management.
Robert
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Have you actually LOOKED at the figures from production EVs? The EV1
(supposedly the most efficient production vehicle ever) with PbA batteries
uses 248wh/mile, that's not a lot better than my converted pickup with a
light dimmer charger. I suspect the chargers (with inductive paddles)
were a mojor source of loss.
I'd seriously doubt that. My Magnecharger can put 18 amps into a 350
volt pack on a 30amp 240 circuit. Doing the math:
18*350=6,300 watts into battery (at shunt)
90 % Rating of a 240 volt 30 amp circuit: 6,480
Drop in MC unit: 180 watts
That's not too bad. Say evil things about the MC, but it's really not
that big of an induction pig load.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Fissionable? Don't think so "inside the box"! We're talking Total
Conversion here. Total!
-Jamie
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Shawn Rutledge
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:27 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Texas to New York using just 12 batteries!
> batteries. The real power is in the mass of the copper that your
> motor is
> made out of and not in the amount of amps you are pushing through
> it. It
> goes back to the formula E=MCsq, You will hear all kinds of smart
> people
> talk about it but very few actually comprehend what it means.. Here
Heh. So rather than charging batteries you convert the windings
directly to energy, and replace the motor more often as they are
ablated. Gee I didn't know copper was fissionable...
. _______ Shawn T. Rutledge / KB7PWD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(_ | |_) http://ecloud.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__) | | \______________________________________________
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I'm just curious what you all would say the maximum safe current you can
pull from typical 6 or 8-Volt golf cart batteries is?
I have my Zilla set to limit battery current to 400 amps max., because
I've been told that is a pretty safe number to use. However, I'm curious
if it is possible to get more current out of these batteries for short
amounts of time without damaging them? Say, maybe closer to 500 amps? Or
would going over 400 amps be risky?
Thanks,
--
-Nick
http://Go.DriveEV.com/
1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
---------------------------
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Instead of 'beam me up Scotty'.... it's beam me across...
Rush
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jamie Marshall
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 2:26 PM
Subject: RE: Texas to New York using just 12 batteries!
> Fissionable? Don't think so "inside the box"! We're talking Total
> Conversion here. Total!
>
> -Jamie
>
> Subject: RE: Texas to New York using just 12 batteries!
>
>> batteries. The real power is in the mass of the copper that your
>> motor is
>> made out of and not in the amount of amps you are pushing through
>> it. It
>> goes back to the formula E=MCsq, You will hear all kinds of smart
>> people
>> talk about it but very few actually comprehend what it means.. Here
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
alot will depend on your discharge rate, 100 amp draw will be alot but yours
may not be so hi, some little points I;ve noticed , the voltage will stay
higher with the orbitals maybe as much a 5% so you getting more power per ah
becuse the voltage don't sag as bad , and when charging the voltage dosn;t
go up quick so it takes less power the get the ah back in . peukert works
both ways , draw it out slow and you get so much more ,
steve clunn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maki, Garret" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 11:27 AM
Subject: Should I have gone AGM over flooded?
Hi,
On a recent post was this Peukert calculator
http://www.johngsbbq.com/Neon_John_site/EV/EV_home.htm
<http://www.johngsbbq.com/Neon_John_site/EV/EV_home.htm>
I installed Trojan SCS150 105 Ah c/20 batteries in my motorcycle, well
because I am new to this and 105 seemed like a really big number. I have
heard people write that because of the Peukert exponent you will more
likely
get 60% of the c20 rate. I thought 60 Ah is fine. But from the
calculator
it looks like a similar battery (SCS225) has a Perkerts exponent of 1.27
and
running the calculator at a 100 amp draw and 80% DoD it looks like I only
get measly 34.3 usable amphours.
If I put in the 12 pound lighter Exide Orbital 34XCD rated at 50Ah c20 (so
I
was thinking half the juice of my SCS150) with a 1.10 Peukert exponent I
get
31.4 usable amphours. Maybe only a 2 mile difference, but my whole bike
would be 72 lbs, maybe 10% lighter so it seems like a wash and I wouldn't
have to water.
I am starting to think I made a big mistake going with the floodeds.
Could someone check my math? Is what I wrote above correct? In this case
does going from a 105Ah flooded really equal using a 50Ah AGM?
If so I am really kicking myself, and may be buying some orbitals.
Thanks,
Garret
--- End Message ---
