EV Digest 4264
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Meter or Charge?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Craig Vetter aerodynamics expert shows how to get 500 mph in the
real world. This happened 20 years ago.
by Seth Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Aero drag and VW fenders.
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Most unusual EV experience
by "Mr23" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Aero drag and VW fenders.
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Meter or Charge?
by Mike Chancey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: 12volt 24 volt Help
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Perfect wood EV- Tryanne, More, cheaper power and Freedom EV
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Has Anybody Seen My Grin?
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: pusher to electric
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) Re: Super deal on Lion Cells $450/KWH
by Lightning Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: How many Wh does your vehicle average?
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Aero drag and VW fenders.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) AC volt meter
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: 12volt 24 volt Help
by Lightning Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Avcon and Manzanita Micro chargers
by "John O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Has Anybody Seen My Grin?
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: 1-wheel pusher
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Madelvic electric car
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: How many Wh does your vehicle average?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
21) Re: Avcon and Manzanita Micro chargers
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
22) Re: How many Wh does your vehicle average?
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Aero drag and VW fenders.
by Evan Tuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re:Better Meter, was Meter or Charge?
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Richard Marcus wrote:
> Thanks Joe. On further investigation the state of
> charge meter is a state of charge meter (or at least
> looks like one with % indicated).
I'll bet it is a plain old voltmeter with a "state of charge" scale
pasted on.
> There is some charging issue going on. Last night it charged
> until the batteries boiled
"Boiled", i.e. got very hot? I doubt it; more likely they gassed, like
an open bottle of Pepsi. A small amount of this is normal at the end of
a charge cycle.
> ... emitted a noxious odor, and an alarm sounded.
What did it smell like? Rotten eggs (sulfur dioxide) is bad; it means
battery trouble. A slight acidic metallic "tang" kind of like lemon or
grapefruit juice is normal -- that's just trace amounts of sulfuric acid
being "fizzed" out by the gassing.
What kind of alarm did it set off? Hydrogen gas from normal charging can
trigger a propane (or other hydrocarbon) detector, but it won't usually
set off a CO (carbon monoxide) detector.
> I unplugged it. The meter read 80%. This morning it read 40%.
This sounds a lot like old batteries and a voltmeter pretending to be a
state of charge meter. A true state of charge meter would have hardly
moved unless there were some load on the battery.
> state of charge meter decreases as the ampmeter rises.
> At 300a the state of charge is "0" %. When I let off
> the "gas" it pops up to 40%.
Again, this says it is just a voltmeter.
> Do I have a charger setting issue? The charger is
> American Monarch 15/20 amp, 72v. If it is a setting
> issue how do I correct that.
We can't tell. It would be helpful if your "state of charge" meter also
had an honest voltage scale.
Do you have a good voltmeter and ammeter? Measure the charging voltage
and current at several times during a charge cycle (like, once per
hour), and tell us what the numbers are. From them we can get an idea
what's going on.
--
"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 ---
Addendum:
http://www.greatchange.org/footnotes-1-liter-car.html
Descibes the mods for efficiency in detail, down to the bulbs, the CD,
the mass savings here and there. The doubly clutched flywheel for
restarting with an ISA might be construed as hybrid, but it doesn't
really seem to be more than an idle-stop device device.
Seth
On Apr 6, 2005, at 11:01 PM, Seth Allen wrote:
http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-vw-1-liter-car.htm
8.5hp 300CC diesel, not hybrid. fully fendered, with rears covered.
Wandering OT here, but a good place to look at if you want to get
ideas for a radical system level approach to efficiency.
Lowest peak power
Highest efficiency plant
Lightest mass
Low drag
Pains to reduce parasistics (other articles mention xenon lamps, etc)
About 500Wh/ mile from liquid fuel, or as a guess at efficiency,
170-250 Wh/ mile from the crank.
Seth
On Apr 6, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Charles Whalen wrote:
Hi Lawrence and all,
I think you mean mpg and not mph. Very interesting, but it's worth
noting
that those are all two-wheeled vehicles. The best mpg I've seen in a
4-wheeled vehicle is VW's 1-liter concept car. It is a 2-seat, tandem
seating (like the Tango), diesel-electric hybrid, not a plug-in
hybrid, just
a straight hybrid like the current crop of Hondas and Toyotas. It
consumes
less than 1 liter per 100 km in highway driving; the specific mileage
works
out to something like 260 mpg. Former VW Chairman Dr. Ferdinand Piech
achieved that mileage in driving the car around Germany on the
autobahns a
few years ago. The body is all-composite. I'm not sure whether the
frame
is also composite, or maybe aluminum; I assume it's likely not steel.
The
car is relatively small, maybe around the size and shape of a Porsche
Spyder, but a bit narrower and with a bubble canopy rather than
open-air.
And yes, you're right in the main point you're making, namely that
aerodynamics are very important; I'd also add weight as a very
important
factor.
Has anyone seen any better mileage than this (260 mpg) in a 4-wheeled
vehicle (with at least 2 seats)?
Also, while on this subject, I'd like to add that I find the current
very
prominent national discourse about, and advocacy of, PiHEVs by the
some of
the most politically influential people to be analytically fallacious
and
fraudulent, where they are claiming 250-500 mpg PiHEVs are possible
using
today's technology. They arrive at those figures by counting only the
gasoline or diesel but not taking into account the electricity put
into the
vehicle from charging. To be analytically consistent, one has to
account
for all of the energy put into the vehicle from all sources,
including both
petroleum and electricity, in order to do an apples-to-apples
comparison
with either ICEVs (including HEVs, which can be considered ICEVs from
a
fuel-source standpoint, since they are entirely dependent on
petroleum) or
with BEVs. As I recall, I think the equivalency/conversion factor is
around
33.75 kWh per gallon of gasoline (i.e. a gallon of gasoline contains
33.75
kWh worth of energy). So for a PiHEV, either convert the gasoline to
kWh
(by multiplying the number of gallons times 33.75) and then add that
to the
electricity put in from charging to get a total kWh figure, and then
divide
that by the number of miles to arrive at a composite Wh/mile figure;
or go
the other way around, i.e. convert the electricity put in from
charging to
an equivalent number of gallons of gasoline by dividing by 33.75, and
then
add that to the actual gallons of gasoline put in the vehicle to
arrive at
total gallons, and then divide that into miles to get a composite mpg
figure. I would guess that the true, honest, analytically-consistent
figure
will likely fall somewhere in the 60-120 mpg range for a 4-wheeled
PiHEV the
size of the Prius. This doesn't mean that I am panning PiHEVs.
Quite to
the contrary, I think PiHEVs are a big improvement (over the status
quo), a
step in the right direction, and will serve as a critically important
transitional bridging technology for the masses to slowly wean them
off of
the 4-minute gas pump and get them to gradually accept the 4-8 hour
electrical outlet (while they are sleeping, since everyone's got to
sleep
sometime, right?), by letting them dip their toes in the water and
have the
reassurance and redundancy of having both the old and the new
technology at
the same time, so that they have that security blanket of always
being able
to fall back on the old gas pump whenever they want to or need to,
because
we all know that old habits die hard and human beings (especially
adult
human beings) are creatures of habit plagued by enormous inertia.
The only
thing I don't like is all of this analytical dishonesty and
fraudulent hype
about 250-500 mpg PiHEVs. But I *do* think it is enormously helpful
to have
all of these prominent, politically-influential people on all ends of
the
political spectrum coming together in a national consensus to push for
PiHEVs. Once the public begins to toy with accepting the idea of the
4-8
hour electrical outlet and even just tries it out in baby steps and
gets a
taste of real independence, the handwriting will be on the wall that
the
days of the gas pump are numbered.
Charles Whalen
http://www.craigvetter.com/pages/470MPG/470MPG%20Main.html
Aerodynamics are very important regardless of the motive power. The
designs shown above will increase efficiency thus allowing a vehicle
to go
further using less energy. The results speak for themselves.
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John G. Lussmyer wrote:
> So, is it likely that full fender side covers would help?
> Probably need a wind tunnel with rollers to find out. sigh.
Actually, an EV is a rolling wind tunnel tester. Just drive, and look at
how much power you're using. Anything that improves aerodynamics will
reduce power consumption.
So, I'd just try it. May try taping plastic over the wheel wells, and
see what happens!
--
"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 have pictures of my son or daughter riding around on my lap, slumped
against my arm, which is holding them up.... snoozing.... worked like a
charm until they were too big to hold...
After a few rides, my daughter would get upset if I didn't let her ride
along *every* time.
And she was oh-so-worried that I would mow without her....
And the neighbor kids wanted rides too...
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 7:38 PM
Subject: Most unusual EV experience
It's that time in the South. Yep, mowing season. Any nice day is full of
the
sounds of infernal combustion engines.
My daughter (who will be two on the 19th) hates the things. She'll yell
and run
to mom or dad when one goes down the road(local kids run alawn service.)
This past weekend I'm mowing with my I-5. She stood at the door, or on
the
other side of the yard with mom and watched.
So yesterday I'm mowing the small yard with the E-12, and she starts
calling me
from the door of the house. So I turn off the blades and pick her up for
a
couple of laps around the yard. She loved it. So I decide on a little
test, I
turn on the blades. She jumped slightly, but did not seemto mind.
We made a couple of passes and parked it to charge for the night.
Today, she kept telling my wife, all day, "Mow! Mow! Mow!" So my wife
mowed
the front yard with the little one on her lap. When the bats got too weak
(these are very old and only good forabout 3/4 acre) they parked it to
charge.
When I got home her first words were "Mow daddy, mow!" So we finished the
yard.
The really strange part is,she fell asleep 1/2way through the yard.
How many mowers can lull a toddler to sleep? I'm going toput a double
seat on
both tractors so she can ride.
James
--------------------------------------------
My mailbox is spam-free with ChoiceMail, the leader in personal and corporate
anti-spam solutions. Download your free copy of ChoiceMail from
www.choicemailfree.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My brother, who owns an Insight, told me when I asked him about the fenders on
his car, that a study
he read cited a 5% reduction in drag with the fenders on. I'll try and get him
to send me a link to
the study.
Rush
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: Aero drag and VW fenders.
> Lawrence Rhodes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked:
>> Could a gain (lower) in CD be achieved by using separated or no
>> fenders on the front wheels of a VW?
>
> Seth Allen wrote:
>>> No. Leave the fenders on. A spinning wheel induces
>>> a lot of drag.
>
> jerry dycus replied:
>> Not as much drag as those fenders! What it will do
>> is create a smaller wind shadow behind it so larger
>> vortexes, thus drag, don't come from the rear of the
>> fenders.
>
> My understanding is that this is not a simple question, nor is there a
> simple "right" answer. Here's some information I got from the
> Experimental Aircraft Association. They are *really* interested in drag
> reduction!
>
> When you have a tire just hung out in the air (airplane with
> non-retractible landing gear), it has the least wind resistance when it
> is NOT turning. If it starts to spin (for instance, because one side is
> closer to the fuselage and so the airspeed over it is a bit different
> than the bottom of the tire), then its drag increases. The faster it
> spins, the greater the drag. So, pilots will set the brakes to keep the
> wheel from spinning.
>
> But, most planes put their tires in "skirts"; the lower half open, and
> the upper half inside a streamlined fender. This reduces drag. The tire
> can still spin (from the air blowing over the bottom). Interestingly
> enough, the drag still increases if the wheel spins. Why? You might
> think that the motion of the bottom side of the tire reduces the
> airspeed over it, and so would reduce drag. That's true; but the top
> side of the tire is then moving *into* the wind and adding drag. So any
> time the tire is turning, drag is increased, skirt or no skirt.
>
> If you test a stationary car in a wind tunnel with the tires not
> turning, you get the same result as an airplane -- a tire in a fender
> has less drag. But, when spin the tire (test in a wind tunnel with a
> moving road, or driving on a real road) the aerodynamic drag will always
> increase, fender or no fender.
>
> With no fender, the top of the tire is moving forward thru the air at
> *double* the speed. The bottom of the tire is motionless relative to the
> air. Since aerodynamic drag goes up as the square of the speed, the drag
> added by the top is much more than the drag removed from the bottom. I
> don't have numbers, and they would of course be affected by the tread
> pattern, but I wouldn't be surprised if a spinning tire has double the
> drag of the same tire when stationary.
>
> When you add a fender, things get even more complicated. You've
> eliminated the air moving over the top half at double the airspeed. But
> the fender also increases the frontal area of the wheel. You'll also
> trap air between the tire and fender, and will have turbulent flow at
> the speed the car is moving. In effect, you've built a fan, sucking air
> in behind the tire, pumping it across the top, and out the front.
> Depending on how closely spaced the fender and tire are, the tread
> pattern, etc. this fan might produce enough pressure to blow air
> forward; or the air pressure in front of the tire may be strong enough
> to blow air back across the tire backwards.
>
> Engineers keep changing their minds about the best way to build fenders.
> My understanding is that the current thinking is that the inside of the
> fender well should be smooth and round, conforming to the tire. It
> should have a "moderate" spacing; not so large that air flows from front
> to rear, yet not so small that it gets pumped from rear to front.
> At the left and right edges, the fender should come as close to the tire
> as possible, to minimize air leakage. The tire itself will then have a
> smooth flat hubcap, so the profile from the side is as flat and smooth
> as possible. The extreme version of this is a full fender skirt like the
> Honda Insight.
>
> There's an interesting aspect that I don't think has been studied. A
> spinning tire intrinsically works as a fan. Perhaps there is a way to
> use it for cooling purposes. It already incidentaly helps cool the brake
> drum/disk, shock absorber, and tire. Perhaps the rear tires could also
> pump air in behind the car to "fill in" the partial vacuum behind it.
> --
> "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 ---
Have you checked to see if the state of charge meter is the correct one for
the pack voltage? For example, if it is speced for 120 Volts and installed
in a 96 Volt EV, it will never read 100%. It is just an expanded scale
voltmeter, it doesn't "know" better.
Thanks,
Mike Chancey,
'88 Civic EV
'95 Solectria Force
Kansas City, Missouri
EV List Photo Album at: http://evalbum.com
My Electric Car at: http://www.geocities.com/electric_honda
Mid-America EAA chapter at: http://maeaa.org
Join the EV List at: http://www.madkatz.com/ev/evlist.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There is two ways to do this. Change out the contactors coils to 48 volts.
Use a two control relays with 12 volt coils which is control by the on dash
switch. The reason to used two small relays, is that the neg. and pos.
battery power should not be switch in the same relay. Otherwise, you would
have to use a large two pole contactor that has more spacing between the poles.
Also, this isolates the circuit from the battery charger circuits when used.
You could also tap off 24 volts off the battery. It is best to tap of the neg.
24 volts off the battery pack 48 volts neg. and the pos. 24 off the center of
the pack.
In any case, both leads off the battery should be fuse and and then control by
two small 12 coil relays.
In my EV, my battery pack is 180 volts. I used 180 volts coils on all my
contactors which are control by small glass plug in relays with 12 VDC coils
and the contacts are rated for 250 VAC or DC.
If you use the battery pack as a source of power for the contactors, the
contactor coils should have a operating range of 30 to 60 volts, because your
battery pack could vary that much.
With the higher voltage contactors, there is about 1 amp load on the 48 volts
coil or 2 amps on a 24 volt coil on the contactors and only .01 amp load on the
12 volt relays.
You should also install a Bidirectional Zener Overvoltage Transient Suppressor
across the coil leads of the contactor. This will suppress the arc on the
control relays. Choose a working voltage rating higher than the coil voltage
that you are going to used.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: Catherine C. Burgard<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: EV List<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 6:51 PM
Subject: 12volt 24 volt Help
OK all you EV wizards, I need alittle help. My commuta car runs on 48 volts
( 8 six volt batteries). I have a DC DC converter that runs all the dash,
lights, etc. Here's the problem. My forward /reverse contactor works with 24
volts. The switch from the dash to the contactor is 12 volts. Does any one
know how I could wire it so I could get 24 volts to it? I have an idea but not
sure it would work.
Thanks
Catherine
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jerry Dycus wrote:
>Lowering wouldn't help much as other interference
>aero drags come into play some, maybe 5% with a
>smoother bottom.. But that is almost 5 miles more
>range at speed!!
I meant like building it to 80% length, 80% width, and 80%
height and lowering the frontal area to like 14 feet square
while keeping the same body shape.
>Probably fewer than that number of Orbitals. As
>it's so light as my 3wheelers are you could get by
>with less expensive and longer range batts
>like
>12vdc-140 amp hr and only need 8 of them or
>about
>600lbs of batt to get 100 mile range in it or so.
1200 pounds of battery may increase that 100 miles by more
than 50% then. Really wouldn't even need to tow a gas
generator for long trips in that case. Just plug and go with
your 150+ miles range!
>You would be limited in the torque you could put on
>the ground by the single rear wheel drive or the
>front
>drive which would not transfer the power well like
>it
>has either, assuming you used a better tramsmission
>or
>better, just a diff.
>So a controller as big as a Zilla would be a
>waste,
>instead get an SRE TSE 600-96vdc one would give
>you
>great power and cost much less.
Ever see the fat tires on a Boss Hoss? My idea would be to
use a rear tire like that. Thick enough to put the torque of
a V8 to the ground.
It would eat into efficiency some, but would allow some
spectacular acceleration. Plus there's the issue of watering
the floodies.
>If he had a more eff engine than a 50 yr old
>aircooled 2cyl, like the 3cyl Metro or a diesel
>like
>the Rabbit it would get close to 100 mpg.
I was thinking more along the lines of a 150 horsepower, 170
lb-ft torque turbodiesel from a new VW Jetta. In a 3-wheeler
like this weighing onlt 1200 pounds or so, 80+ MPGs, 0-60
MPH ~ 4 seconds, and > 160 top end at 5,800 rpm redline.
That would be one hell of a road racer!
>But even better would be as an EV where at
>$.10/kwhr cost for electrcity it would only
>cost
>$.006/mile for fuel!!!
And < $.03/mile battery cost using AGMs, and using floodies
about $.01/mile. It would put any new car to shame on cost,
being extremely cheap to operate. Would that be combined
with high acceleration performance and a meticulously
detailed Wayland-like finish, it would be the perfect match.
Got to throw off that kitcar or homebuilt look in favor of
the "it looks like it just came from the factory where can I
get one?" look.
Great basis to build an EV on though. This certainly is some
inspiration for future projects.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Good for you. LR............
----- Original Message -----
From: "michael bearden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 3:45 PM
Subject: Has Anybody Seen My Grin?
About the subject line...it's sung to the tune of "Has anybody seen my
gal?"
I am probably jumping the gun here... but I am SO close to regaining that
EV Grin.....that I had to send this off.
Brian Hall and I have been re-configuring and "re-packing"(with my
Optimas from WATTABMR) his oh-so-fine customized Porsche (see EV Album) in
my shop, and we are within hours of completing it. I am going to be EV
Grinning again in a big way! The Gogomobil is fun, but not quick or
sporty...The Porsche is BOTH! I have really missed the smooth quick
responsiveness and comfortable ride I had in the BMW.
Michael B.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<< Dave,
It's called "bulk" charging! You can hump a lot of current into the
batteries up to the gassing voltage of 2.4 volts per cell. As others have
said, use a smaller pack, but then you could do a bulk charge instead of
swapping batteries if you couldn't finish the mowing job. I drove my truck
60 miles today with a bulk charge in between one of the trips, using both
the on-board Zivan (13 amps) charger and off-board FrankenLester (30 amps)
charger. Think big amps from a cheap dumb Lester type charger, and a finish
charge with a smart charger(s)! >>
Wonder if that's all this guy is selling - really high current up to the gassing
voltage, but no higher:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=5570288521
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've confirmed that the battery I recieved did not have a tab on
the top like other prismatic cells I've seen. This makes it even
more difficult than normal to connect these batteries together.
Also, I'm only getting about 200mA out of it at 2Amps (2C), so
these appear just as soft as the other $0.50 cells that EG sold.
(Although I've overheated this cell trying to solder a wire to it)
L8r
Ryan
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
Ok folks, I thought some of you might be interested in these cells:
http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G14948
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Otmar wrote:
>But I find that 33 Ahr is more reasonable,
>and Orbitals are lower.
396 wh/Optima. For me, this would mean 25 Optimas gives ~ 60
miles to 100% DoD, while the same weight in Orbitals, at 300
wh/each, would give about 50 miles.
This would assume 160 wh/mile battery to wheels, not
factoring in peukert's losses, or a 32 amp draw @ 60 MPH. Of
course, we know how assuming turns out. Your Porsche
consumed way more than expected. Thus twin motor setups
scare me as far as making an efficient design is concerned,
although Uve's calculator neglects some things such as wheel
bearing loss. So it's easy to see how it calculated 170
wh/mile for you.
I'm making another calculator that accounts for more forces
and losses, and is MUCH more harsh on the losses it
calculates. Not finished yet. It's an Open Office Calc
program(similar to excel), and I have yet to finish the
equation to allow gradients to be calculated, inertial
losses vs. gear selection, a top speed calculator, and an
acceleration calculator that calculates your acceleration
based on max motor amps, max motor volts, and input shift
points. Currently, it can calculate range per charge at
speeds from 30 MPH to 160 MPH, ignoring those losses I
haven't added yet. In this calculator, range for my car @ 60
MPH turns out to be about 80 miles, instead of 100 in Uve's
calculator.
This calculator does not accept motor selection, and assumes
you are running a single ADC 9'' or WarP 9'' motor. Having
input parameters for Blue Meanie with 13 Optima batteries,
it got 32 miles at 60 MPH to 100% discharge with this
simulator. Seems accurate enough.
Can't wait to get the acceleration and top speed calculators
built so I can begin sharing it. The other simulators I
built were only specific to my proposed conversion, and were
unsuitable for sharing since you couldn't input gear ratios,
weight, drag coefficient, ect.
I'd like 160 wh/mile, but in reality, I know to expect 240,
just to be on the safe side, despite that I'll have a few
hundred pounds less than Otmar's car and be more aero. Many
things could end up eating amps. Alignment, tires, ect. In
the case of 240 wh/mile and 25 Optimas @ 400 wh each, that's
~40 miles range to 100%. Should it turn out that way, it
will be major motivation for me to hunt down all possible
drag to get that elusive 25-30 amp 60 MPH current draw and
80-100 miles highway range.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave"
I wonder if you could fab some fenders that attach to the knuckle, and
"float" with the wheel assembly, like some T-buckets have. A full cover
inside and out...
Just what I was thinking. LR..........
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I got a bunch of AC volt meters at an auction, the scale is from 0-300 VAC, it
is A&M Inst model
366-124, fits in a 2.75" hole.
Can this be used as a DC volt meter?
tks
Rush
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've just finished doing something similar on my 24v scooter..
It's been modifies to use batteries other than the stock PbA's.
So I had to install a relay which is normally off and disconnects
the stock batteries. It's a standard 12v automotive relay. Previousely
I had centertapped the 24v pack, so the relay used one battery, which
would cause them to go out of ballance. So, here's what I did...
( From memory, so values are approximate )
The relay's coil is 60 ohms, so to make it a 24v relay it needed
another 60 ohms or so of resistance in series with the coil. It
also draws 120mA * 12v is 1.4 watts. So I found some 5 watt 50 ohm
resisters and used two of them in series for an extra 100 ohms.
So, here's whats happening: I've build a voltage divider...
The relay coil sees 60ohms/160ohms, or 6/16, or 37.5% of the total
voltage, the resistors burn up the rest, or 31.25% + 31.25%.
Relay Coil = 24v * 37.50% = 9.0 volts
Resistor 1 = 24v * 31.25% = 7.5 volts ( at 120mA = 0.9 watts )
Resistor 2 = 24v * 31.25% = 7.5 volts ( well withing the 5 watt rating )
The relay actually pulls in at just 6 volts, so it still works on 9v.
I suppose just one resistor would have worked. ( 60ohms / 110ohms)
Relay Coil = 24v * 55% = 13.2v
Resistor 1 = 24v * 45% = 10.8v ( at 120mA = 1.2 watts )
.oO( I think the relay must have used more than 120mA )
So, You'll need to know the resistance of the relays coil,
and the ammount of current that the coil consumes. Then
you can determin what size resistors you need to use.
I'd imagine that your relay is much larger than mine,
so you'll probably need much larger resistors.
I'm not actually a certified "EV Wizard" yet, so maybe you'll
get a better answer from someone who can better explain how
this type of voltage dividing works. And there may be other
better ways to accomplish the desired results.
Catherine C. Burgard wrote:
OK all you EV wizards, I need alittle help. My commuta car runs on 48 volts
> (8 six volt batteries). I have a DC DC converter that runs all the dash,
> lights, etc. Here's the problem. My forward /reverse contactor works
with 24 volts. The switch from the dash to the contactor is 12 volts.
> Does any one know how I could wire it so I could get 24 volts to it?
> I have an idea but not sure it would work.
Thanks
Catherine
So, You could build a voltage divider for the F/R relay,
dropping the pack voltage of 48v down to 24v.
Then use the existing 12v switch and a new 12v relay
to turn on the 24v relay+voltage divider...
L8r
Ryan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Listers,
Am I correct that Avcon and Manzanita Micro chargers can be made
compatible?
I am in the process of converting my truck an will using one of the
Manzanita micro chargers at home. However, Sacramento Ca, the city I
live and work in has a good number of public charging stations with
Avcon connectors.
What do I need to be able to utilize the public Avcon stations for
opportunity charging?
As an aside am I correct that it is not feasible to use either of the
small or large paddle inductive systems?
Thanks in advance.
John
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
michael bearden wrote:
>I am probably jumping the gun here... but I am SO close
>to regaining
>that EV Grin.....that I had to send this off.
>Brian Hall and I have been re-configuring and
>"re-packing"(with my
>Optimas from WATTABMR) his oh-so-fine customized Porsche
>(see EV Album)
>in my shop, and we are within hours of completing it.
>I
>am going to be
>EV Grinning again in a big way!
Out of curiousity, how fast is that Porsche? What is its
0-60 time approxamately? Top speed? Ever run it in the 1/4
mile, and if not any estimations?
That's one very clean conversion, and I hope to see mine
have that same cleanliness, and not that rolling science
project look so many others have.
30-50 miles range?
What's it's 60 MPH cruising range to 100% DoD?
Looks like an awesome conversion to be tooling around in.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Apr 6, 2005 8:13 PM, Michael Shipway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Evan Tuer wrote:
>
> >I guess a pretty powerful, probably watercooled bike would be needed..
> >but apart from that, can anyone see any glaringly obvious problems?
> >
> A couple obvious problems:
> 1) Most Japanese bikes use the same oil for crank case, gears and
> clutch. So if the motor is not turning, nothing gets lubed.
> There where one wheel tow gizmos at one time, where it'd lift the
> front wheel up and trail the rear, but it sometimes burned out clutches
> or transmissions.
>
> 2) The front forks might not take the full power of the engine without
> bending.
> I've got a 3 wheeler which is a 2 wheel front end with big clamp in
> the rear that you clamp onto a motorcycle's frame, after removing the
> front wheel _and forks_ .
Good points, thank you. That might be a better approach and probably
no more difficult to arrange.
> It would be nice if you could keep the front wheel, or at least carry it
> with you. That way you would have a motorcycle when it wasn't being a
> pusher.
That was the idea!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Whilst searching on google for electric car charging points in
Edinburgh, my nearest big town, I found a reference to the "Madelvic
electric car factory".. further searching revealed this:
The Madelvic Motor Carriage Co. Ltd. of Granton (Scotland) produced an
electric brougham from 1898 to 1900. The vehicle was driven by a small
fifth wheel which sat below the body of the car, but which was
attached to the front axle unit, which also carried the motor and
batteries. This 3-wheel tractor unit could also be attached to
horse-drawn carriages, replacing the horses. The company also produced
some 2-seater electric cars, which drove the front wheels in a more
conventional manner, prior to be absorbed by the Kingsburgh Motor
Company in 1900.
Hopefully one survives and is in a museum somewhere, I'd like to see it!
Evan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<< I'm making another calculator that accounts for more forces
and losses, and is MUCH more harsh on the losses it
calculates. Not finished yet. It's an Open Office Calc
program(similar to excel), and I have yet to finish the
equation to allow gradients to be calculated, inertial
losses vs. gear selection, a top speed calculator, and an
acceleration calculator that calculates your acceleration
based on max motor amps, max motor volts, and input shift
points. Currently, it can calculate range per charge at
speeds from 30 MPH to 160 MPH, ignoring those losses I
haven't added yet. In this calculator, range for my car @ 60
MPH turns out to be about 80 miles, instead of 100 in Uve's
calculator.
This calculator does not accept motor selection, and assumes
you are running a single ADC 9'' or WarP 9'' motor. Having
input parameters for Blue Meanie with 13 Optima batteries,
it got 32 miles at 60 MPH to 100% discharge with this
simulator. Seems accurate enough.
Can't wait to get the acceleration and top speed calculators
built so I can begin sharing it. The other simulators I
built were only specific to my proposed conversion, and were
unsuitable for sharing since you couldn't input gear ratios,
weight, drag coefficient, ect. >>
I would **love** a version of an acceleration calculator in javascript to add to
my version of Uve's Calculator. I've got plenty of updated info, but that basic
result would be much needed! I don't think there is a way to include
acceleration use as part of the mileage results - just take into account they
are for continuous load and output. Stop-and-go is probably a minimum of 10%
loss of range, maybe half that with regen.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<< Am I correct that Avcon and Manzanita Micro chargers can be made
compatible?
I am in the process of converting my truck an will using one of the
Manzanita micro chargers at home. However, Sacramento Ca, the city I
live and work in has a good number of public charging stations with
Avcon connectors.
What do I need to be able to utilize the public Avcon stations for
opportunity charging? >>
First off, I apologize to Dennis Berube for false information: it's the inlet
that needs to emulate a Ford (you already have that!) - seems the connector
handle itself doesn't care, it's the wall unit does! You can't charge a Ranger
EV with just the connector and cable, since the truck's charger looks for a
signal from the wall unit to allow anything to flow in either direction. Otmar
sent me a signal generator to fool the on-board charger to accept charge, so
that's an alternative if you don't want an entire wall unit.
John, the Avcon inlet with the Ford emulator is all you need to use the public
conductive chargers - without that emulator, the public charger won't turn on.
No longer have the email address of the person I dealt with, but visit
Meltric.com and look for email to someone in the sales department. You'll want
to also get a connector handle with a nice length of cord so you can charge
from 240v at home as well.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>I would **love** a version of an acceleration calculator
>in javascript to add to
>my version of Uve's Calculator. I've got plenty of
>updated info, but that basic
>result would be much needed! I don't think there is a
>way to include
>acceleration use as part of the mileage results - just
>take into account they
>are for continuous load and output. Stop-and-go is
>probably a minimum of 10%
>loss of range, maybe half that with regen.
This doesn't attempt to calculate range based on how hard
you accelerate, no. Range @ whatever speed is constant load.
What acceleration I am calculating is acceleration from
0-60, 0-100, 1/8 mile, 1/4 mile, and 60 foot time. Then top
speed. It will based these off the motor profile generated
from the max motor volts and max motor amps input, along
with your peak shift points and all the inputs for your
car's weight, drag, rolling resistance, tire size, gear
ratios, and environmental conditions. The calculator will
calculate acceleration for a maximum of 200 seconds, so it
will be able to accomodate slug EVs.
I may even make a virtual racer against IC cars made in
Java, where you will see two dots on the screen moving,
representing two cars and a drag strip, one a selected gas
car and another an EV with given parameters. That's if I
ever make this a Java program.
Anyway, this simulator calculates wh/mile from a battery to
wheels basis counting puekerts, so 55 AH means 55 AH total
in battery pack used, even though you only saw 33 out of it.
Thus its wh/mile figures are higher than Uve's calculator.
In this calculator I made, wh/mile of my car is about 240
with its 80 mile range. I like this wh/mile figure better
because it includes puekert's losses, and is more easier to
use in calculations of well to wheels efficiency. 65 AH @ 20
hours x 300V = 19500 wh put into the pack total. That
divided by range calculated would give the corrected wh/mile
figure, unlike those prettied up figures of 120 and 140
wh/mile manufacturer's claim, without counting in Puekert's
losses.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Apr 7, 2005 3:24 AM, John G. Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 04:08 PM 4/6/2005, Lee Hart wrote:
> >At the left and right edges, the fender should come as close to the tire
> >as possible, to minimize air leakage. The tire itself will then have a
> >smooth flat hubcap, so the profile from the side is as flat and smooth
> >as possible. The extreme version of this is a full fender skirt like the
> >Honda Insight.
>
> I've been trying to think of ways to reduce the power consumption on my
> Sparrow. One thing I had thought of is to build covers that fit over the
> openings in the front fenders. Of course they would be in the way when you
> turn sharply, but that is only done at low speed, and there could probably
> be a fairly simple mechanism to extend the covers out during sharp turns.
>
> So, is it likely that full fender side covers would help?
I think so. The ford Probe prototype had flexible front wheel arch
covers, which helped it achieve a very low Cd figure. The trend in
design suggests that as Lee says, a smaller gap between the wheel and
wheel arch is better for reducing losses. A practical limitation for
the big manufacturers is the (legal?) requirement to be able to fit
show chains for some markets!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Lee and All,
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Richard Marcus wrote:
> > Thanks Joe. On further investigation the state of
> > charge meter is a state of charge meter (or at
> least
> > looks like one with % indicated).
>
> I'll bet it is a plain old voltmeter with a "state
> of charge" scale
> pasted on.
While a meter like this isn't that good, there is
one that is.
It's called the Chargicator by Danforth available
through most boating supply shops.
What makes it go is it has 3 scales that are neded
to better tell a lead battery's condition.
These scales are 1 for when the battery is being
charged, the second is when it's resting with no load
and the third is for when the battery is loaded.
As the voltages vary, about 1.5vdc/ 12vdc batt, so
much depending on what use it's in, this greatly helps
and only requires a new scale on the meter. Use of
color helps for quickly looking at it while driving.
Expanded scale is needed as the difference is only
about 1vdc on a 12vdc battery between fully charged
and dead while no charge or load is on it.
While Chargicators are costly at about $55, one
could use it as a reference and make up their own
meter scale or figure out the voltages need under the
different use states and put them on a scale for their
own expanded scale meter.
I'm sure somewhere on the web there is a picture
of one.
I like a digital meter but for EV newbies who
don't know the different voltages under different uses
this type of scaled meter can teach them what's going
on and what to expect and easier to read while
driving.
To make it work on a higher voltage pack as it's
set up for a 12vdc batt, just make a voltage divider
from resistors to match them.
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
