EV Digest 4243
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Troubled Batteries (was: Flooded batteries max current)
by Nick Viera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: News Flash! GM To Build Hydrogen Cars!
by CopperLion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Electric Tractor in the works.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Subject: Top 10 Tech Cars by John Voelcker :: IEEE
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Good article on clutches
by "M.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Electric Tractor in the works.
by Gordon Niessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: News Flash! GM To Build Hydrogen Cars!
by CopperLion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: "Convincing" others that EV's are better
by "David (Battery Boy) Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Troubled Batteries (was: Flooded batteries max current)
by "David (Battery Boy) Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) BAY AREA EV SPECIALIST
by "J Mac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Clutchless
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Insulating rusty battery rack?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Clutchless
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Good article on clutches
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Charger Shock - ground the car body??
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: "Convincing" others that EV's are better
by Tim Clevenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Charger Shock - ground the car body??
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Adapter ideas, heat disapation,lucite
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: "Convincing" others that EV's are better
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) PCB adapter plate, was Re: Adapter Idea (Lucite)?
by "David Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Charger Shock - ground the car body??
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Batteries
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I again charged my batteries (supposedly fully) last night as usual.
They then sat for 24 hours with NO loads on them, at which point I took
SG measurements of the cells. I measured all but four batteries, which
are harder to access than the rest. The numbers look pretty bad:
Batt#: Cell1 Cell2 Cell3 Cell4
1 1.250 1.225 1.270 1.250
2 1.250 1.225 1.238 1.225
3 1.250 1.238 1.260 1.260
4 1.225 1.238 1.250 1.250
-- -- -- -- --
9 1.250 1.225 1.225 1.238
10 1.270 1.225 1.225 1.238
11 1.250 1.250 1.225 1.238
12 1.250 1.250 1.250 1.250
13 1.225 1.250 1.238 1.238
14 1.238 1.250 1.225 1.225
15 1.250 1.220 1.250 1.238
16 1.225 1.250 1.250 1.250
17 1.225 1.250 1.225 1.250
18 1.250 1.238 1.225 1.238
19 1.238 1.225 1.238 1.270
20 1.250 1.238 1.225 1.250
I was reading Trojan's website regarding equilization and saw this: "It
[equaliziation] reverses the buildup of negative chemical effects like
stratification, a condition where acid concentration is greater at the
bottom of the battery than at the top. Equalizing also helps to remove
sulfate crystals that might have built up on the plates. If left
unchecked, this condition, called sulfation, will reduce the overall
capacity of the battery."
I guess I'll put them on an eq. charge tonight to try and rescue them.
What I need to know is if one eq. charge is supposed to make things
right, or will they need to be cycled and charged and equalized several
times? I'm needing to drive my Jeep to our Texas EV show this Friday and
Saturday, so am trying to figure out how to get my batteries in better
shape in the next couple of days (because my range has decreased
lately). I am hopeful that an eq. charge will help...
P.S. What is a good current for the equalization charge? I'm guessing
around 5 amps or so... something lower?
Thanks,
--
-Nick
http://Go.DriveEV.com/
1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
---------------------------
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The biggest problem with FCVs is that they use more oil producing the
hydrogen fuel than they do producing gasoline! I saw an article about
how the latest FCVs derive their hydrogen from methanol, which is itself
derived from petroleum (because it's cheaper and easier to produce from
petroleum than from wood). Pure-hydrogen FCVs require refrigeration of
the fuel tank to store enough for a usable range. That hydrogen fuel
requires a considerable amount of electricity to produce (by G.W.Bush's
plan the extra electricity is provided by oil and coal-fired
powerplants), and more for the refrigeration to store it. So far, it's a
bad idea all the way around!
FCVs are basically EVs with a hydrogen battery, and it's a very
inefficient process. The only gain over an EV is the refueling speed.
There are a lot more drawbacks and downfalls to the technology when
compared to a pure EV or even a hybrid. Why does GM insist on throwing
taxpayer dollars at this money-sink? How is it that G.W.Bush and the
major auto manufacturers' marketing teams have managed to bamboozle the
public, and hide the fact that this will never pan out?
Another note:
When people talk about EVs shifting the pollution from the car to the
powerplant and supposedly causing more pollution, why don't they ever
take into consideration the pollution and electricity necessary to
refine oil into gasoline? EVs /directly/ reduce pollution in the system
when this is considered. There is no cleaner system on the planet-
especially when the power for the EV is being produced by wind or solar
generators.
Just my 2-cents on the subject.
-Kevin Seeber
P.S.- I've been lurking for a while and finally decided to join the
conversation on the lists. :)
John Westlund wrote:
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
Wow! Only $2.2M each, I wonder...how do you get on
/that/ waiting list?
I'd like to know as well. What I do know is that $2.2
million could have made about 50 EV1s in low volume, or for
$88 million, practically hand made 2000 EV1s. Wonder how
that figure would look with mass production.
I'm also curious as to how these vehicles will perform.
Econocrap? Yuck...
Fuel cells are a leap backwards from batteries due to the
expense and innefficiency of the fuel needed, the
maintenance of the fuel cell stack, the longevity(or lack
thereof) of the platinum membrane, the cost, and
power(again, lack thereof). Maybe if they built 600
horsepower 230 MPH capable FCVs for $2.2 million each, I
might be impressed. But a Honda FCX wannabe that performs
even worse won't cut it. Especially for $2.2 million.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
One thing about a tractor is they don't go very far or fast. It should have
very low gearing. The GE can take 120v easily That is what the Electravan
was stock. Can you get the EV-1 controller too? LR....
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Jarrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:39 AM
Subject: Electric Tractor in the works.
Greetings all,
With the help of Steve Clunn an Mitch Oats, I'm in the process of
converting my 1956 Alis Chalmers (sp?) to electric. Pictures of the
beast Pre-conversion can be seen at:
http://blue.celticmoonfarms.com/~ozzyman/Camerea/Farm/Tractor/
It is a WD-45 (gasoline) and according to the online literature, it has
a dry weight of about 4400lbs!!
I want it as a tilling / mowing / scraping machine. So here is what I
am looking at in terms of what I can do.
Motor: 9" GE (150lb 23 hp) from Mitch (if it still works) that came out
of his old Jet Industries Courrier.
Batteries: Two packs, each containing 6 US-145's charged in parallel
via 2 automatic golf cart chargers. Discharged in series for a 72 volt
system.
Controller: Not sure yet. With a strong 4 speed transmission, a
contacter controller with 4 settings 18v/resister 18v, 36v, 72v might
work well enough, but I'd rather put in a "modern" controller if I can
find one in the right price range (as in as cheap as possible).
I guess my real question is what kind of performance can I expect? I
know things like how wet the grass is, how hilly the yard is, etc will
make a difference, but I'm not sure I have enough batteries for a
reasonable run time, but I'm also not sure I can afford more.
I'm on a very tight budget, hence the 2 36v packs charged either
separately or in parallel. I already have 3 golf cart chargers that
could be used for the job, so I don't have to purchase a charger. I'd
love to have a nice pfc-30 or something like, but It's just not in the
budget.
Suggestions?
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/publicfeature/mar05/0305car.html
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There is also a problem of torsional wind up. Porsche tried to eliminate
the springs in the clutch disc in the 924 they ended up replacing them
all because the car would surge at cruising speed.
Mike G.
Ryan Stotts wrote:
Says a spring less hub in the clutch disc reduces weight by 2 lbs and
virtually no chatter. In an EV with the clutch already engaged on
take offs, I don't think there would be any clutch chatter.
http://maximummotorsports.com/clutchtech.asp
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 3/30/2005 11:39 AM, you wrote:
Greetings all,
With the help of Steve Clunn an Mitch Oats, I'm in the process of
converting my 1956 Alis Chalmers (sp?) to electric. Pictures of the
beast Pre-conversion can be seen at:
<snip>
Suggestions?
James
Wow, I think that is the same tractor my dad had. My brothers and I have
inherited it and I would love to convert it also. I look forward to
hearing about your progress. If you have to get an adapter plate made I
might be interested in going in with you to reduce costs. I'll have to
check to insure the exact pedigree of our tractor of course. But it looks
almost identical.
Gordon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I suppose I shouldn't be so down on the President like that. I know he's
just the public face for a lobbying force much larger than that.
Automakers, oil companies, power companies (like Enron), and more are
helping the President draft his recommendations for Congress. Congress
is being supported and lobbied by these same self-indulgent groups. Just
because the idiocy of the process becomes clear when you look past the
surface, that doesn't mean you're going to see the larger picture of
what jobs will be lost or who's going to be run out of business. GM
wants to save it's botom line, which includes the kickbacks from the oil
companies, federal oil and automotive subsidies, etc.
-Kevin
CopperLion wrote:
The biggest problem with FCVs is that they use more oil producing the
hydrogen fuel than they do producing gasoline! I saw an article about
how the latest FCVs derive their hydrogen from methanol, which is
itself derived from petroleum (because it's cheaper and easier to
produce from petroleum than from wood). Pure-hydrogen FCVs require
refrigeration of the fuel tank to store enough for a usable range.
That hydrogen fuel requires a considerable amount of electricity to
produce (by G.W.Bush's plan the extra electricity is provided by oil
and coal-fired powerplants), and more for the refrigeration to store
it. So far, it's a bad idea all the way around!
FCVs are basically EVs with a hydrogen battery, and it's a very
inefficient process. The only gain over an EV is the refueling speed.
There are a lot more drawbacks and downfalls to the technology when
compared to a pure EV or even a hybrid. Why does GM insist on throwing
taxpayer dollars at this money-sink? How is it that G.W.Bush and the
major auto manufacturers' marketing teams have managed to bamboozle
the public, and hide the fact that this will never pan out?
Another note:
When people talk about EVs shifting the pollution from the car to the
powerplant and supposedly causing more pollution, why don't they ever
take into consideration the pollution and electricity necessary to
refine oil into gasoline? EVs /directly/ reduce pollution in the
system when this is considered. There is no cleaner system on the
planet- especially when the power for the EV is being produced by wind
or solar generators.
Just my 2-cents on the subject.
-Kevin Seeber
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John,
Stop calling me a zealot...
I can easily get 60 miles/charge with my not-a-small-car S10 pickup in the
summer, 40 miles in the winter, with a brand new pack of inexpensive
golf-cart batteries (without taking them down to 80% DOD). Obviously less
range as the pack ages (like 50/35 miles now). I have 15k miles on my
current pack, 25k on the truck as an EV, drive it every day, it is my main
vehicle, it works... Did I mention that at the plug, it has only cost me
$0.04 per mile over that 15k miles? If you can't stop bashing on-road EV's
and people on this list, maybe you should take your scooters and your
cheese wedge and remove yourself from the EVDL.
Thanks,
BB
>From: Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:50:25 -0500
>
<snippage>
>
>To get 60 miles/charge from those small batteries, one would have to
>be talking about a small car. That doesn't compare very nicely with a
>full size car or SUV.
>
>Bottom line is, for about the same money I can drive a full size gas
>car or small SUV or I can cram myself into a micro car and be tethered
>close to home in the electric. I can't imagine anyone outside the
>zealot community going for the electric option.
>
>Now if you promote the electric car as the second, around-town car,
>then you might get come converts as long as the car itself doesn't
>cost too much.
>
>>Anyone on this list doesn't need any convincing electric is the best
>>solution for multiple reasons. But for these people who apparently
>>don't much mind paying ~$2/gal and polluting the air, etc; is there
>>just no way to win them over short of having a real fuel shortage?
>>
>
>Except for those who have long commutes, the increase in gas prices is
>little more than an annoyance. If someone lived on the extreme
>opposite side of my town from his workplace then he might have a 7 or
>8 mile commute. More typical commutes would be less than 5 miles.
>The marginal cost of gas is so low as to not matter to most people.
>Certainly not enough to trade their comfortable gas vehicles for tiny
>little electrics.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Nick,
Off the top of my head, Trojan says to equalize if the variation is more
than 30 points between cells of an individual battery. The hydrometer is
your friend (Wish I could stick one in my YT's!), hump some juice in (low
current) while monitoring SG and stop charging when the SG stops rising in
"every cell". Are you using a good hydrometer like the temperature
compensating EZ Red brand? You are learning from this pack my newbie son,
so feel the force!
BB
>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:32:56 -0800
>From: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
<snippage>
>
>No; that's more variation than normal. I'd expect no more than +/-0.010
>(for example, average = 1.220, maximum 1.230, minimum 1.210).
>1.210-1.238 indicates trouble in the low cells, or you aren't fully
>charging, or the batteries need equalization.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Looking for credible & reputable person and/or company in the Bay Area who
specializes in electric vehicles & components, especially motors &
batteries.
Please send contact info.
Thanks!
_________________________________________________________________
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 ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 7:28 PM
Subject: RE: Clutchless
ev-america.com will sell you an adapter for this purpose. Also, I think
grassrootsev.com will also manufacture a Lovejoy coupling for customers
who
request it. In both cases, you send them the clutch disk with the splined
shaft on it and they integrate it into the adapter/coupling.
I've had both good luck and bad with the Lovjoy coupler , My old Ford ranger
has a Lov joy which has worked well for years , . Here is how it works ,
First you get your Lov joy coupler which is 3 pieces , 2 hubs with "ears"
and one middle rubber/plastic 6 pointed star that fits between the two hubs
( 3 ears per hub ) . One hub has the 1 1/8 inch hole for the motor shaft ,
the other you take the inside spline for the clutch disk and weld it to the
back of the other hub. Now when you get the clutch disk hub off the disk by
grinding off the rivets ect , it will have a lip , you will have to turn on
a lath ( or use your motor with hub on backwards) the lov joy hub so that
the disk hub will fit inside just right ,this is what centers it , then you
weld it to the lov joy hub ( big bolt clamping it together). Some small
problems are , your coupler made of 2 hubs end up being very long so you
could need a lot more spacer as your tranny may have to be further away for
the motor , I didn't have this problem with the ranger. The other problem is
that you have to have some way to keep the two hubs together , the one on
the motor is boiled , so no problem but the one on the tranny shaft is on a
spline shaft and if there is room could slide back on the shaft which would
let the rubber fall out and tear the ears off the lov joy hubs . On the
ranger ( clunn car 3) I put some washers on the tranny shaft so the tranny
hub could only go on so far . Later I did one and used a big ring clip , and
put a grove in the two hubs for the ring to sit in , this looked good but
somehow the ring came off and the one hub slid up the tranny shaft , which
was not good . I fixed this one by welding a small stub axel in the end of
the hub , so the lov joy on the tranny shaft could only slide on so far.
This is still working ( clunn car 4 ) . So if a motor fell from the sky ,
you have some contactors / bucket of salt water, old car somebody gave you ,
and a pile of batteries. 7 or 8 hundred dollars for a adaptor plate ? Then
maybe this is a solution , I would do this for the right person under the
right conductions , for $25 , , This is really only for the people who
really have no money and want a ev and are willing to trade many hours of
there time instead of spending the money to get a REALLY GOOD adaptor plate
made by you know who :-) . I want to see more EV's on the road , not 1/2
done EV's that don't get finished because of problems making the adaptor .
Steve Clunn
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ryan Stotts
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 6:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Clutchless
I like this idea. No clutches and flywheels to wear out, less expensive,
and less rotating mass. I still want to use all the gears though. I
think
that won't be a problem right? Or will the weight of the spinning motor
coupled to the transmission accelerate wear on the syncros compared to if
it
only had the clutch disc spinning when shifting? How fast does an
electric
motor spin down?
Any off the shelf ways to couple the output shaft of the motor to the
transmission input shaft? What method is used to couple to the motor
shaft?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
W Bryan Andrews wrote:
> It seems that I'm having to clean my battery tops more than most
> people on my standard ElectroAutomotive rabbit conversion. I'm
> betting it has something to do with the corroded battery racks
> providing a path to ground.
>
> Is wrapping the racks in heatshrink tubing going to get the job
> done? Any other ideas?
Excessive gassing and corrosion is usually caused by:
- too high a charging current at the end of a charge cycle
- leaky vent caps
- old batteries whose voltage has fallen so much that they reach
"full" while the charger is still at high current
Even when none of these conditions are present, you will still get
corrosion of bare metal parts near the battery terminals. Acid mist from
the cells is what starts the process. The water will evaporate, but the
acid stays behind; thus is keeps accumulating, getting stronger and
stronger over time, and ever more able to attack whatever paint or
protective coatings you have on your metal. The best way to prevent this
is to clean the battery tops regularly (whenever you add water, for
instance).
The corrosion started by the battery acid will get FAR worse if there is
any DC leakage current. Acid (and water and dirt) make the tops of the
batteries become slightly conductive. So, for example, current can leak
from a positive battery post across the top of the battery to the metal
battery box closest to that post, thru the metal to the nearest point to
some negative post, and across the top to that negative post. The higher
the voltage between these two posts, the higher the leakage current, and
the faster the corrosion.
You can block this path by insulating the metal battery rack with
something. But it's hard! Even the tiniest pinhole or scratch lets
current flow. Once current starts flowing, the corrosion it causes will
enlarge the hole. And the acid mist that gets concentrated as the water
evaporates from it can attack almost anything over time.
Your best bet to fight this problem is to use NON metallic battery racks
if you can. Or, put a plastic box in the metal rack, with the batteries
inside that. Or if there's no room, line the rack with a plastic bag and
put the batteries in that.
--
"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 ---
Hello Steve,
In making a Lovejoy adapter, how do you support the end of the transmission
pilot shaft that is normally inserted into a pilot bushing so it does not flop
around.
Does the pilot shaft extended all the way thru the Lovejoy to a pilot bushing
that is on the motor shaft?
When my transmission is remove from a motor or engine, my pilot shaft has a lot
of movement when it is not supported.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: STEVE CLUNN<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:34 PM
Subject: Re: Clutchless
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
To: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 7:28 PM
Subject: RE: Clutchless
> ev-america.com will sell you an adapter for this purpose. Also, I think
> grassrootsev.com will also manufacture a Lovejoy coupling for customers
> who
> request it. In both cases, you send them the clutch disk with the splined
> shaft on it and they integrate it into the adapter/coupling.
>
I've had both good luck and bad with the Lovjoy coupler , My old Ford ranger
has a Lov joy which has worked well for years , . Here is how it works ,
First you get your Lov joy coupler which is 3 pieces , 2 hubs with "ears"
and one middle rubber/plastic 6 pointed star that fits between the two hubs
( 3 ears per hub ) . One hub has the 1 1/8 inch hole for the motor shaft ,
the other you take the inside spline for the clutch disk and weld it to the
back of the other hub. Now when you get the clutch disk hub off the disk by
grinding off the rivets ect , it will have a lip , you will have to turn on
a lath ( or use your motor with hub on backwards) the lov joy hub so that
the disk hub will fit inside just right ,this is what centers it , then you
weld it to the lov joy hub ( big bolt clamping it together). Some small
problems are , your coupler made of 2 hubs end up being very long so you
could need a lot more spacer as your tranny may have to be further away for
the motor , I didn't have this problem with the ranger. The other problem is
that you have to have some way to keep the two hubs together , the one on
the motor is boiled , so no problem but the one on the tranny shaft is on a
spline shaft and if there is room could slide back on the shaft which would
let the rubber fall out and tear the ears off the lov joy hubs . On the
ranger ( clunn car 3) I put some washers on the tranny shaft so the tranny
hub could only go on so far . Later I did one and used a big ring clip , and
put a grove in the two hubs for the ring to sit in , this looked good but
somehow the ring came off and the one hub slid up the tranny shaft , which
was not good . I fixed this one by welding a small stub axel in the end of
the hub , so the lov joy on the tranny shaft could only slide on so far.
This is still working ( clunn car 4 ) . So if a motor fell from the sky ,
you have some contactors / bucket of salt water, old car somebody gave you ,
and a pile of batteries. 7 or 8 hundred dollars for a adaptor plate ? Then
maybe this is a solution , I would do this for the right person under the
right conductions , for $25 , , This is really only for the people who
really have no money and want a ev and are willing to trade many hours of
there time instead of spending the money to get a REALLY GOOD adaptor plate
made by you know who :-) . I want to see more EV's on the road , not 1/2
done EV's that don't get finished because of problems making the adaptor .
Steve Clunn
> Bill Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Ryan Stotts
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 6:05 PM
> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: Clutchless
>
> I like this idea. No clutches and flywheels to wear out, less expensive,
> and less rotating mass. I still want to use all the gears though. I
> think
> that won't be a problem right? Or will the weight of the spinning motor
> coupled to the transmission accelerate wear on the syncros compared to if
> it
> only had the clutch disc spinning when shifting? How fast does an
> electric
> motor spin down?
>
> Any off the shelf ways to couple the output shaft of the motor to the
> transmission input shaft? What method is used to couple to the motor
> shaft?
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Porsche apparently didn't learn its lesson from earlier! Some early
911's used a rubber centered clutch, but the rubber tended to
disintegrate. Everyone replaces them with spring clutches.
--- "M.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is also a problem of torsional wind up. Porsche tried to
> eliminate
> the springs in the clutch disc in the 924 they ended up replacing
> them
> all because the car would surge at cruising speed.
> Mike G.
>
> Ryan Stotts wrote:
>
> >Says a spring less hub in the clutch disc reduces weight by 2 lbs
> and
> >virtually no chatter. In an EV with the clutch already engaged on
> >take offs, I don't think there would be any clutch chatter.
> >
> >http://maximummotorsports.com/clutchtech.asp
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I Hope that AC ground wire really does get back to earth!
I think there may be some misunderstanding among some folks reading the list
about the purpose and function of a grounding and earthing in an electrical
system, and what they're good for.
I don't know that I really have any business trying to write this - I'm a EE
dropout for crying out lout! But forgive me - I'm going to flail around a
bit here, in the hopes that some will make sense, and anything I write
that's patently absurd will be caught by those on the list who DID get their
EE degrees. ;-)
GROUNDING: As I understand it, the primary function of an equipment ground
(the green or bare wire) in your house's electrical system is to guard
against a dangerous situation which would arise if something metallic that
people can touch, such as the metal frame of an appliance, should
accidentally come in contact with a hot conductor.
The ground path of significance in this case is NOT to earth ground, but
from the metal object, through the ground system, to the neutral / ground
bus of the building's main disconnect. The grounding conductor must be
large enough, and the entire system of low enough resistance that, when a
ground fault occurs, enough current will flow to trip a breaker or open a
fuse in a reasonably short period of time. That could be hundreds or
thousands of amperes!
OTOH, it only takes a few tens of milliamps to kill a person. Such a low
current fault won't be cleared by a breaker or fuse. However, a household
GFI will normally trip immediately at 5ma of fault current.
EARTHING: Again, according to what I've read, the primary reason that the
power system is earthed (I use the UK / CA term in the hopes that it will
help reduce confusion) is to help protect the power grid and house from
lightning strikes and induced voltage therefrom.
The fact that the entire power grid is earthed makes it possible for leakage
current to pass through a person's body. Other than lightning, I don't
really understand why the decision was made early in the game to earth part
of the power grid. It seems to me that a system fully isolated from earth,
with a means of discharging lighting induced surges (as with an antenna
lightning arrestor) would have been better. But what do I know? In any
case, that wasn't done in the design of the US power grid. In fact I've
read that there are areas where not only is the system earthed, the earth is
actually used as a return conductor!
(I've also heard that even where this isn't true, when linemen repair damage
after a storm, the earthed side of the line is often the last to be
restored. So for some indefinite period the earth may be serving as the
return there, too, and some pretty significant currents are flowing in the
ground.)
Back to EVs. In theory, if the frame of your EV is grounded it is also
earthed, IF your electrical system is 100% up to code. You would think that
the EV should be at earth potential. Thus if you are touching the earth and
the EV at the same time, there should be NO difference of potential between
them, regardless of what your charger or dirty batteries are doing.
In practice, not every house's grounding system is properly installed and
maintained. Nor is the ground a real equipotential plane! Drive a ground
rod at one end of your front yard and another at the other, and connect a
sensitive voltmeter across them, and in many cases you will read an AC
voltage. In fact there have been cases where defective power company and
house grounding systems created fairly substantial and dangerous potential
differences across sections of the earth.
To illustrate this in a practical everyday application, dairy farmers often
have to go to great effort to ensure that their barns form an equipotential
plane. Potential differences from one part of the barn to another have been
shown to cause reduced milk production and other health effects in cattle.
So, grounding your EV is certainly better than nothing, but by itself it's
not enough, IMO. Add a GFI and you get one more level of protection.
Double-insulate the EV (meaning 100% isolation, including battery, motor,
and charger) and you have still one more level. And as Lee pointed out,
there's still DC from the battery itself to consider.
When we're talking about human lives, how many levels of protection do YOU
think is enough? One? Two? Three? Four?
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to the "from" address above may not reach me. To
send me a private message, please use evdl at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In that case, you may need to wait until the engine starts knocking
or no longer passes smog. Compared to replacing or rebuilding an
ICE, an EV conversion probably doesn't sound so bad.
Tim
-------
> > Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:54:59 -0600
> From: Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: "Convincing" others that EV's are better
>
> The other night, my parents fueled up their '98 Jeep Cherokee with an
> inline 6. Costs right about $40 to fill it up. It's very likely it
> gets filled up once a week. Some weeks, it's also very likely that it
> gets fueled up twice.
>
<snip>
>
> Anyone on this list doesn't need any convincing electric is the best
> solution for multiple reasons. But for these people who apparently
> don't much mind paying ~$2/gal and polluting the air, etc; is there
> just no way to win them over short of having a real fuel shortage?
> > Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:28:30 -0800
> From: Lightning Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Chain & Sprockets question.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Manzanita Micro website download page
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/download.htm
fifth Item from top is the installation instructions Rev B
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/installpfc20revB%20no%20photo.doc
written and posted on 8/26/2004.
The exact same text is in the first draft published on 9/22/2001 that is
still on the website.
Bottom line on page 1 says "Connect the green wire to safety ground from the
source".
Six lines above that it states "AC cable color code:GREEN is Safety Ground"
The middle of page 2 it says "Connect the green lead of the charge cable to
the chassis of the vehicle
Eight lines above that it states "DC cable color code:GREEN is Chassis
Ground"
In regards to the green wire being connected to the case: This has been true
since the machines make the leap from the plastic boxes
(http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc-20no1.jpg) to the metal boxes
(http://www.manzanitamicro.com/Dscn0009.jpg and
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc2011.jpg) in the summer of 2001. The
chassis inside the plastic box was connected to Green wire ground as
specified.
The AC side green wire is shown in photo from 2001 at
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc20ls.jpg. The wire is connected to a press
nut under the bundle of wires below the red capacitor.
The DC side green wire is shown in the 2001 photo at
http://www.manzanitamicro.com/pfc20rts.jpg. The crimp lug with screw is
shown to the right and below the fuse.
Be aware these are some very old photos and the case has been upgraded in
many ways since these first production boxes were built in 2001. The
grounding connection has not changed.
If you can find a GFCI that can be plugged into a
NEMA 1-15,
NEMA 5-15,
NEMA 6-15,
NEMA 11-15,
NEMA 14-15,
NEMA 15-15,
NEMA 18-15,
NEMA 5-20,
NEMA 6-20,
NEMA 10-20,
NEMA 11-20,
NEMA 14-20,
NEMA 15-20,
NEMA 18-20,
NEMA 5-30,
NEMA 6-30,
NEMA 10-30,
NEMA 11-30,
NEMA 14-30,
NEMA 15-30,
NEMA 18-30,
NEMA 5-50,
NEMA 6-50,
NEMA 10-50,
NEMA 11-50,
NEMA 14-50,
NEMA 15-50,
NEMA 18-50,
NEMA L5-15,
NEMA L6-15,
NEMA L7-15,
NEMA L5-20,
NEMA L6-20,
NEMA L5-30,
NEMA L6-30,
NEMA L14-20,
NEMA L14-30, and any of the foreign outlets, let me know.
It is easy to find a GFCI for the RUSSCO charger since the only power source
is 15 to 20 amps at 60 Hz 110-130 VAC. It becomes much harder when the
source voltage can vary from 100 VAC at 50 Hz in Japan to 240 VAC 60 Hz in
the USA.
Where did you find a 30 amp 120 VAC GFCI used on the SC 30-120
(http://www.electroauto.com/catalog/charger.shtml)?
The PFC chargers will also run from a DC source if the input circuit breaker
is changed to a DC rated part. I have not found a DC rated GFCI. Do you know
of one that would work?
Rich makes sure every customer is aware of the isolation issues before the
sale is made. Rich leaves it up to the customer to supply an "appropriate"
GFCI or Isolation Transformer upstream of the charger to meet the safety
requirements at the site where the charger is being used.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "russco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: Charger Shock - ground the car body??
> > David Roden wrote:
>
> > Isolated power supplies can be safe or unsafe, depending on design. So
> > can non-isolated systems.
>
> > The non-isolated chargers are going to be the best choice for most
> > EVers, but it is critical that they understand the dangers involved.
(I
> > think Rich really needs a manual for the charger that explains this)
>
>
>
> RUSSCO "Safety Electric Vehicle Battery Charger Models SC18-120 and
> SC18-120 SO, Operating Instructions":
>
> Page 3, section 5: Connect the (power cord) wires to terminal block as
> follows:...GREEN wire to TOP GREEN screw.
>
> Page 10, section 3: Conect the supplied GREEN grounding wire from the
> RUSSCO charger case to vehicle chassis.
>
> This connects the car chassis to utility power ground.
>
> Electrical apparatus either must be double insulated, such as a non
> metallic enclosure and NOT require a ground wire. Example: plastic
> cased electric drill has two wires, no ground. If the electric drill
> had a metal case, as older models do, it will have a third ground wire
> to ground the metal case.
>
> The NEC, section 625, treats electric vehicles as outdoor portable
> machines such as spas and swimming pools. A GFCI MUST be used to feed
> the EV charger, whether the charger is isolated or not. No exceptions.
> The designer and manufacturer of the Washington State charger should
> review the Wendy's story regarding the finger within the chili.
>
> Russ Kaufmann
>
> RUSSCO Engineering
>
> The other PFC charger with GFCI
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Real racing clutches avoid the excessive clamp force by going to
multiple plates. a 3 plate clutch has 6 friction surfaces. They usually
still have higher than stock pressure, but when the diameter is 7" or
5.5 (or even 4.5) the possibilty of flex is lower.
I wonder if thin adapter plates, like 1/4" alum, could flex under clutch
engage/disengage loads.
Did I mis-understand about sliding clutch?, what sliding? why design
cooling for slippage
On detecting Polycarb verses Acrylic I would shave off a bit with a
knife and burn it with a torch and take a whif. But if you don't know
what to compare it to that would be a problem, Polycarb usually has a
flame retartant nature where it chars and smokes black wheer as the
acrylic actually has a sweet smell. Polycarb is mostly 515 degrees
farenheight and acrylic is avail in grades from about 380 degrees far to
over 500. I am gonna guess polycarb because it is the only one approved
for bullet proof glass I think.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tim wrote:
> In that case, you may need to wait until the engine starts knocking
> or no longer passes smog. Compared to replacing or rebuilding an
> ICE, an EV conversion probably doesn't sound so bad.
A rebuilt motor and cylinder head is "only" $700 or $800 though and I
or my dad could install it easily(each have installed motors before).
Nearly every part of the electric conversion costs more then a rebuilt
ICE motor.. I don't even know if $10/gal fuel would persuade
people(isn't it currently like $8/gal in the UK?). It's going to take
an all out shortage. Or an environmental collapse.. then it's too
late / doesn't matter at that point.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
And when you are ready to try this, let me know. In the Junque yard I have a
piece of single sided PC board that is 4' x 4' with about a 6" sq out of one
corner. Could probably make a few adapters out of this one with careful
layout. Then you would just need the backer sheets of course.
TTYL David Chapman.
> But material wise your idea is very sound! Moreover, if you
> pur PCB traces on the most outer layer (toward tranny), you can
> easily surface mount on it, say, a shaft speed sensor...
>
> --
> Victor
> '91 ACRX - something different
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
According to Rich (who specified it from the vendor):
One of them is good for 22 Amps at 240 with no forced air cooling.
Two of them will make 50 Amps at 240 with 200 CFM of air cooling.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Charger Shock - ground the car body??
> Joe Smalley wrote:
> > The 50/60 Hz transformer Rich offers is both 120 and 240 capable
> > without any switches. Just plug it in exactly like the charger.
> > It is a 10 inch toroid, 4 inches tall and weighs 65 pounds. It
> > is about half the weight and volume of a square transformer of
> > the same rating.
>
> What's the power rating of that toroid, Joe? I have a bunch of 2kw 25
> lbs toroids that would also work. In fact they can probably deliver 3kw
> with fan cooling.
> --
> "The two most common elements in the universe
> are hydrogen and stupidity." -- Harlan Ellison
> --
> Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The Stowaway batteries we use on a UPS are deep cycle. They seem to be
holding up well.
RC stands for Reserve Capacity. It is the number of minutes the battery will
run at 25 Amp load.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Seeley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EVDL" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:43 PM
Subject: Batteries
> Hi list.
>
>
>
> I have got a newbie question...
>
>
>
> I was perusing the local Sam's Club today, and they have a rack of
> Batteries.
>
>
>
> Would any of these be acceptable for a starter EV or should I definitely
> look else ware. I am just getting started, and want to build a test bed
EV
> without breaking the pocketbook!.
>
>
>
> Here is what they had.
>
>
>
> StowAway Golf Cart Battery
>
> 6V Group Size GC2 $46.63 each
>
> 110 min @75 amps
>
>
>
> StowAway
>
> ST31DC /600 CCA
>
> 12V 115AmpHours $65.23 each
>
> 12 V 105 Amp hours $49.57 each
>
>
>
> They also had several Very Large bats
>
>
>
> Heavy Duty Size 4DLT
>
> 250 RC 79.77 each(? What is RC)
>
> These were als rated with CA and CCA but not amp hours.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for the comments
>
>
>
> Chris
>
>
--- End Message ---
