EV Digest 4278
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Lithium Batteries US Military Surplus
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Dave Cloud vs "White Zombie"
by James D Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Dave Cloud vs "White Zombie"
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Watt to amp to volt conversions & why they aren't the same.
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Wire Gauge questions
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Wire Gauge questions
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Dave Cloud vs "White Zombie"
by James D Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Dave Cloud vs "White Zombie"
by James D Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: Dave Cloud vs 'White Zombie'
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Nick Viera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: adapters?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) test - ignore
by Sam Uzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: bus bars versus wire - was RE: Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Seth Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: bus bars versus wire - was RE: Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Coasting
by Tim Clevenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Nash Rambler as an EV candidate?
by Otmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: bus bars versus wire - was RE: Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: bus bars versus wire - was RE: Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Wire Gauge questions -wire colors
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Wire Gauge questions - current vs stranding
by "Joe Strubhar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Coasting
by "Tom Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Vas: Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Seppo Lindborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Coasting
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: Dave Cloud vs "White Zombie"
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) independant rear suspension
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: Watt to amp to volt conversions & why they aren't the same.
by "Joe Smalley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Re: Wire Gauge questions
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29) Diahartsu Charade Meltdown
by "djsharpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
yes BUT self discharge will hurt them too, it's a compromise...
NEVER short a Li-ion cell !!!
You will find all data you need here and understand why date code is vital
in Li-ion batterie purchase :^)
http://www.buchmann.ca/Chap15-page2.asp
Philippe
Et si le pot d'�chappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
Forum de discussion sur les v�hicules �lectriques
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Humphrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: Lithium Batteries US Military Surplus
> If they're stored at a lower SOC does the degradation slow down even
further? If they are stored with terminals
> shorted, does it come close to stopping degradation? Or, does the
separator decompose no matter what?
> --
> Stay Charged!
> Hump
> "Ignorance is treatable, with a good prognosis. However, if left
untreated, it develops into Arrogance, which is often
> fatal. :-)" -- Lee Hart
>
>
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Philippe Borges
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 2:43 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Lithium Batteries US Military Surplus
> >
> > surplus Li-ion (more than 1 year old) is no way, try a capacity test on
> > surplus li-ion you will be disapointed.
> > add that they have to be stored 50% SOC at 0� C otherwise they will lose
> > faster capacity and even 1 years old may be near half dead.
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > Et si le pot d'�chappement sortait au centre du volant ?
> > quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
> > http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
> > Forum de discussion sur les v�hicules �lectriques
> > http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Evan Tuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:43 PM
> > Subject: Re: Lithium Batteries US Military Surplus
> >
> >
> >> On Apr 12, 2005 1:02 AM, Ken Trough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > An EV enthusiast was mentioning that large Lithium batteries can
be
> >> > > obtained from US Military Surplus. He says these batteries were
from
> >> > > dismantled missiles.
> >> >
> >> > If they were in missles, I doubt they were rechargable lithiums. 8^)
> >> >
> >> > Probably primary cells.
> >>
> >> Probably correct. But it's worth knowing that the military (UK
> >> military I'm talking about) are large users of Li-Ion rechargeable
> >> cells, typically the most expensive and energy dense kind, that they
> >> use for portable equipment, of what purpose I don't know and don't
> >> want to know :)
> >> They basically buy an "energy pack" and return it for recharging or
> >> recyling as appropriate when empty.
> >>
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Megawatt? I'm just looking for about 600 kW of peak battery
power. That's what would get the 600 rwh with an efficient
direct drive setup.
Let's see. 600whp is about 450kw, ADC/Warp motor efficiency is maybe 50%
when you're throwing 2000 amps at it, so 800kw input, and 90% eff. for the
Zillas yields 900kw, plus some more losses through the cables and batteries
puts you right around a megawatt of peak potential.
David Thompson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey John,
John Wayland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > David intends to prove once and for all that voltage
> > doesn't matter by putting the batteries in series at the
> > track at 192 to prove it goes no better. ....
>
> Yeah, right...it's really that simple...not!
You're a bit quick to jump on Dave here, aren't you?
Your comments may be generally true, however, you assume that the motors
can take advantage of the higher voltage (i.e. can run higher RPM), etc.
It seems to me that Dave's point is that voltage by itself is no magic
bullet: take the *same* car and change the system voltage and see if
there is some quantum change in performance. I think Dave has a good
shot at proving his point. This is not the same as observing that if
the car were radically modified in *addition* to changing the system
voltage, it might well outperform the original, which is what you are
suggesting.
I think it is worth remembering that the Lynch/Etek motors Dave is said
to be using are *not* your standard series-wound machine and have rather
lower peak RPM limits, which they can achieve on just 72V or so.
Without the ability to spin the motors much faster, he can't change the
gearing to take advantage of the higher voltage. Similarly, these light
motors can't take huge current for very long, which is another strike
against the up the voltage/change the gearing argument. More voltage is
unlikely to be of as great benefit as if more typical series wound
motors were being used.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> When it comes to the weight and size of the motor and controller,
> voltage matters very much. This is the point he is missing.
While this may be true, it seems hardly relevant in practice (except
perhaps in the case of the lightest possible vehicles, such as
motorbikes).
A Z1K or Z2K is the same weight for either the 72-156 or 72-300V
version. A Z2K is 29.5lb vs a Z1K's 15.5lbs, so one could argue that if
one were running a Z2K at 72V they could save 14lbs by running a Z1K at
144V for the same power... true only if one can find adequate batteries
that permit doubling the pack voltage (number of interconnects, etc.)
without adding more than 14lbs to the vehicle.
Our motor choices are similarly limited, and a Warp/ADC 8" (for
instance) weighs exactly the same regardless of the voltage/current you
run through it.
> The lightest motor that will work at both ends of the track will
> run high RPM and will need a lot of voltage at the end of the
> track to make it suck in HP. There is no getting around this.
Sure there is; you stated it yourself: a transmission.
As for the rotational inertia, Dave is said to be using 8 Lynch/Etek
type motors. These are very light machines, especially the rotating
mass, when compared to a series wound motor such as an ADC 8" or 9". I
expect a direct comparison on paper is requires information we don't
have handy, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me greatly if Dave's 8
motors have similar (or less) rotational inertia as a single ADC 8" or
9", and weigh only a bit more in total (about 200lbs vs about 140 for a
9"?). Seems to me that if Dave's vehicle can outperform what we
typically see from a single 9"-ish motor then your criticism is
unfounded.
While I find the discussion interesting, I for one will wait until
Woodburn to comment on Dave's endeavour. The proof is in the timeslip
folks. ;^>
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Phil, aren't you just calling resistance the "power factor"?
>
Nope. Power factor means that the waveforms for voltage and current are
not in synch.
Take for example the simplest AC input battery charger (called a "Bad Boy"
on this list).
This is nothing more than a bridge rectifier (and perhaps a few extra
extension cords to limit charge current).
You have a nice sinewave voltage waveform going into the bridge and DC
coming out. Unloaded the DC voltage will track the AC voltage and will go
from zero to maximum to zero...etc.
The current (Amps) however, doesn't not flow in a nice sinewave. The
current won't flow at all until the DC voltage climbs above the battery
voltage. At that point the current will start small and get HUGE quickly.
It sort of looks like a pregenant sqarewave. The waveform gets mangled
and is descibed as having a poor power factor.
At a powerfactor of 1, voltage and current wave forms are identical. This
basically only happens when the load appears to be purely resistive.
As you can see from the above description, the AVERAGE current might be
the same, but the peak current is much higher in the poor power factor
circuit. Because losses in your wiring (called I2R losses, or I^2*R) go
up as the square of the current the higher peak current causes MUCH higher
losses and it averages out to higher overall losses even when the power
transfered to the load is the same.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes but doesn't the heating (which is what we are concerned with) follw
the RMS value rather than the peak value? After all isn't that what RMS
is intended to show?
> actually no.
>
> Current flows through two or three at once, depending if it is two
> phase on, one off (unlikely) or some sort of sinusoidal wave (or
> other). And that would be all the current at once, which is 1.414x the
> RMS value at peak, I think. So a 200A RMS drive could have as much as
> 282A (peak) flowing through any one phase.
>
> How does 6 gauge look now?
>
> Seth
>
> On Apr 11, 2005, at 11:22 PM, Christopher Zach wrote:
>
>> You know what, now that I think about it that was the connector going
>> to the motor, not the battery. That's a 3 phase connection, so
>> technically each wire carries 1/3 the load. And it's AC
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Seth Allen wrote:
>>
>>> That seems small to me, but I am on the other end of the spectrum
>>> already.
>>> I assume 3 leads, not a multiple thereof?
>>> Seth
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't know about that. I mean if they picked orange purely as a safety
thing, then it makes sense not to differentiate between pos and neg.
This way went someone (rescue worker etc.) sees orange they thing DANGEROUS.
If you used, for example, orange for positive and purple for negative,
some rescue worker might think "Purple, that's negative and negative is
ground so it's safe to touch"
With it being just orange they are going to think "Hands OFF!" regardless
of polarity.
> Rush wrote:
>> Is the orange for both neg and pos?
>
> Yes. They weren't thinking this thing through very well.
> --
> If you would not be forgotten
> When your body's dead and rotten
> Then write of great deeds worth the reading
> Or do the great deeds worth repeating
> -- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac
> --
> Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It is funny, with money no object assumption no one considered
AC drive(s).
Mine was AC, but I didn't go into any detail about it. I'd set up the
Skyline with four MES-DEA 200-250 motors (or 200-275s if they exist), two
each front and rear on custom 5:1 reduction gearboxes with centered
clutch-type LSDs, and 29 Hawker group 16s if they can handle the 1300 amp draw.
David Thompson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey, you were doing great, one of the only posts in this series that
demonstrated innovative thinking, until the last line. A diesel with
a "cost is no object" car? Nyet! A microturbine, preferably small
enough to be onboard the car, would fit this cost and performance
model much better :-) I'd probably also want a flywheel battery or
two for regen absorption and acceleration power dumps.
Microturbines are nice, except for that catastrophic failure mode.
Although, if I could afford to federalize a Japanese supercar I could
probably afford a custom-built Chobhamite shatter shield for the turbine.
I'd still want the genset offboard, since there's no point in hauling it
down the track. If money were REALLY no object then I could get into all
sorts of custom-designed equipment, but that sort of thing would chew
through "windfall from a rich uncle" money very quickly.
David Thompson
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually Victor, I think that YOU'VE missed the point.
The point, in drag racing, is not to see how fast you can go with a given
motor. It's to see how fast you can go, period.
If, by changing out the motor/controller/whatever you can go faster at a
higher voltage, then that kind of proves the point that you can go faster
at a higher voltage.
It doesn't matter how much you have to change, if switching to a higher
voltage means that you end upgoing faster, then that indicates that
voltage is perhaps a valid way to classify vehicles.
The big thing, of course, is how easy your chosen method is to implement
at the track. I've seen how hectic it can get at the races and the
inspectors don't want to spend any more time than is absolutely neccesary
to do their job safely. Voltage is quick and easy, trying to look up
batteries on a chart to figure out what their maximum current capability
and then multiply that by the voltage anyway, to come up with a
theoretical maximum power, is NOT quick and easy.
Voltage isn't perfect, but it's good enough and it's quick and easy. AND
it's uniform across the board.
> Hey John,
>
> John Wayland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> > David intends to prove once and for all that voltage
>> > doesn't matter by putting the batteries in series at the
>> > track at 192 to prove it goes no better. ....
>>
>> Yeah, right...it's really that simple...not!
>
> You're a bit quick to jump on Dave here, aren't you?
>
> Your comments may be generally true, however, you assume that the motors
> can take advantage of the higher voltage (i.e. can run higher RPM), etc.
> It seems to me that Dave's point is that voltage by itself is no magic
> bullet: take the *same* car and change the system voltage and see if
> there is some quantum change in performance. I think Dave has a good
> shot at proving his point. This is not the same as observing that if
> the car were radically modified in *addition* to changing the system
> voltage, it might well outperform the original, which is what you are
> suggesting.
>
> I think it is worth remembering that the Lynch/Etek motors Dave is said
> to be using are *not* your standard series-wound machine and have rather
> lower peak RPM limits, which they can achieve on just 72V or so.
> Without the ability to spin the motors much faster, he can't change the
> gearing to take advantage of the higher voltage. Similarly, these light
> motors can't take huge current for very long, which is another strike
> against the up the voltage/change the gearing argument. More voltage is
> unlikely to be of as great benefit as if more typical series wound
> motors were being used.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> When it comes to the weight and size of the motor and controller,
>> voltage matters very much. This is the point he is missing.
>
> While this may be true, it seems hardly relevant in practice (except
> perhaps in the case of the lightest possible vehicles, such as
> motorbikes).
>
> A Z1K or Z2K is the same weight for either the 72-156 or 72-300V
> version. A Z2K is 29.5lb vs a Z1K's 15.5lbs, so one could argue that if
> one were running a Z2K at 72V they could save 14lbs by running a Z1K at
> 144V for the same power... true only if one can find adequate batteries
> that permit doubling the pack voltage (number of interconnects, etc.)
> without adding more than 14lbs to the vehicle.
>
> Our motor choices are similarly limited, and a Warp/ADC 8" (for
> instance) weighs exactly the same regardless of the voltage/current you
> run through it.
>
>> The lightest motor that will work at both ends of the track will
>> run high RPM and will need a lot of voltage at the end of the
>> track to make it suck in HP. There is no getting around this.
>
> Sure there is; you stated it yourself: a transmission.
>
> As for the rotational inertia, Dave is said to be using 8 Lynch/Etek
> type motors. These are very light machines, especially the rotating
> mass, when compared to a series wound motor such as an ADC 8" or 9". I
> expect a direct comparison on paper is requires information we don't
> have handy, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me greatly if Dave's 8
> motors have similar (or less) rotational inertia as a single ADC 8" or
> 9", and weigh only a bit more in total (about 200lbs vs about 140 for a
> 9"?). Seems to me that if Dave's vehicle can outperform what we
> typically see from a single 9"-ish motor then your criticism is
> unfounded.
>
> While I find the discussion interesting, I for one will wait until
> Woodburn to comment on Dave's endeavour. The proof is in the timeslip
> folks. ;^>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
I don't know about that. I mean if they picked orange purely as a safety
thing, then it makes sense not to differentiate between pos and neg.
I agree. Plus, in an EV it seems that the bulk of the high voltage
wiring is the interconnects between all the batteries. Since they're
usually wired in series, how could you designate certain interconnects
as being positive and others as being negative?
I mean, I guess you could say that the interconnects for one half of the
pack are "more positive" than the interconnects on the other end of the
pack or vice-versa, but wouldn't you still want all the
wires/interconnects to be the same color to warn that they are ALL
connected in a system with a (relatively) high voltage potential?
--
-Nick
http://Go.DriveEV.com/
1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
---------------------------
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ryan Stotts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 300 volts x 2000 amps = 600,000 watts / 1000(thousand what?) = 600 kw
Watts; the divide-by-1000 is a rough conversion from kW to Hp, assuming
a typical motor efficiency of about 75%. Unfortunately, the motor
efficiency at 2000A is not going to be 75%.
> 600 hp... Nice! Very nice...
Sure would be... if only life were like that! ;^>
At 2000A, a stack of Orbitals would sag to about 7V each, so a 300V
(nominal) string of 25 is only going to be 175V @ 2000A = 350kW. This
is about 468Hp, but at 2000A your motor is likely about 50% efficient,
so you're down to 234Hp at the 'crank'.
If you really wanted to have 300V @ 2000A on tap, you'd need a string of
43 Orbitals, which is a nominal pack voltage of 516V. Sorry, the
Zilla's go to an absolute maximum of 400V, and I don't think Victor has
a 2000A @600V AC drive for you.
This is why we so badly need to see some real dyno numbers for
high-performance EVs; seat-of-the-pants estimates, no matter how
educated, simply aren't cutting it. I don't think any EV racer has yet
pulled anywhere near 2000A @ 300V, and it would take 1500A @ 300V (or
2000A @ 225V) to get 600Hp *into* the controller. We know the
efficiency of the motors is going to be low at 2000A, but we don't yet
know just how low. I suspect dyno results will show that EV racers are
achieving their results with much less HP than has been bandied about
here, I'd guess somewhere in the 250-300HP area max., and compensate
with gobs of off-the-line torque.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
testing - please ignore
18:48
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Vehicle mass has a relationship to range. But not the one you state,
Lee, which I think you use as an example, but expect us to know it is
an exaggeration.
Just trying to be clear, so that everyone doesn't try to get lighter
wires. You might find that in fact the heavier wires make more sense
with the way the relationship works. The most efficient cars I know of
have very low amps/square area on the interconnects and motor leads.
(This means big wires, folks)
Finally, has everyone seen the 2/0 with the insulation melted off of
it? Supplied by Otmar. I saw it at the "Gone Postal" debut.
Seth
On Apr 13, 2005, at 5:57 PM, Lee Hart wrote:
Lee Hart wrote:
The extreme end of this is to connect your batteries with bare
buss bars. With their large surface area and no insulation to
melt or catch fire, they can be 1/4th the cross-section of an
insulated wire. That makes them 1/4th the weight. The battery
terminals will melt before you reach the melting point of copper.
Patrick Maston wrote:
How much power are you losing heating the bus bars up to the melting
point of lead? Seems like it would not be an optimum setup.
No; it *is* an optimal setup if you get it right.
Suppose you want to optimize range. You might think that you want the
voltage drop in all your high voltage wiring to be as low as possible,
for best efficiency. But, that leads to *huge* wire sizes which are
very
heavy. Suppose you have 30 feet of 4/0 wire; that will weigh about 20
pounds. If your EV weighs 2000 lbs, then 1% of its weight is wire.
Range
is proportional to weight; so the weight of the wire reduces your range
by 1%.
Let's say this EV has a 120v pack and draws 50 amps at cruise (6kw). 30
feet of 4/0 has a resistance of R = 30 x .049mohm/ft = 1.47mohm. At 50
amps, the wire burns up a total of P = I^2 x R = 50^2 x 1.47mohm = 3.68
watts. Our copper loss is 3.68w/6kw = 0.0006 or 0.06%.
Now the other extreme; we'll save weight and use #6 wire; that weighs
2.4 lbs. We've lightened our EV by 17.6 lbs; a 0.9% savings. So, we
have
about 0.9% more range.
But 30 feet of #6 has a resistance R = 30 x 0.395mohm/foot =
11.85mohms.
At 50 amps, the wire burns up a total of P = I^2 x R = 50^2 x 11.85mohm
= 29.6 watts. Our copper loss is now 29.6w/6kw = 0.0049 or 0.49%. That
subtracts 0.49% from our range.
Conclusion: we added 0.9% but took away 0.49% -- we're ahead by 0.41%.
Now, all this assumes you are mad for perfection, and are optimizing
everything you do on the vehicle this way. It's something a solar car
team would do. But for the average person, such details are "lost in
the
noise." You couldn't detect any difference in range either way.
So (thinking like a car manufacturer), why not be cheap? The smaller
wire saves a *lot* of money and labor! Well, the reason why becomes
apparent when you accellerate from a dead stop, and your carefully
optimized EV draws not 50a, but 500a. At 500a, your total copper loss P
= 500^2 x 0.01185 ohm = 2962 watts. That's almost 100 watts per foot!
So, what happens if you try to dissipate 100 watts in a 1-foot piece of
#6 wire? It will carry it for 10 seconds or so, and then the insulation
will melt. In another 10 seconds, the insulate catches fire. And in
another 10 seconds the wire itself will melt in half like a fuse!
So instead of wire, let's use a bussbar. #6 is 0.162" diameter = 0.04
sq. inches. So use a 1" wide piece of 0.040" thick copper. Now, there
is
no insulation to melt or catch fire. And the flat sheet has 4 times the
surface area, and so can dissipate 4 times the heat. Instead of 30
seconds, it can carry 500 amps for several minutes. If there is some
air
blowing across it, it can carry 400 amps indefinitely.
This is an admittedly extreme example; but it shows the principle at
work. You could apply the same principle if you wanted to maximize
accelleration instead of range. And it would lead to the same
conclusion
-- a smaller lighter bus bar will produce better performance than a big
solid insulated wire.
--
"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 ---
So given the choice of using 4/0 cable or bus bars, which one will
have the least amount of resistance?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Rush wrote:
>>> Is the orange for both neg and pos?
>> Yes. They weren't thinking this thing through very well.
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> I don't know about that. I mean if they picked orange purely as
> a safety thing, then it makes sense not to differentiate between
> pos and neg.
But, nobody should pick wire colors *purely* for safety. The main reason
to use colored wires is to prevent assembly errors and aid
troubleshooting -- so you don't mix them up. By making both + and -
wires orange, they are *increasing* the chance of hooking them up
backwards!
--
"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 ---
Hi Mark.
In California, the law forbids coasting with the clutch in or the car in
neutral. I think the idea was that if your car was in neutral, the engine
could theoretically die without you knowing and leave you without
power steering or brakes at the bottom of the hill.
Tim
------
> From: "Mark Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Coasting
> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 14:08:47 -0400
>
> They passed a law in Virginia making it illegal to coast. I heard it was
> also on the books in CO when I lived there (someone I knew got a traffic
> ticket when admitting he was coasting). How do they inforce this? Why
> would such a silly thing be a no-no? I thought all auto tranny's are
> coasting anyway when you take your foot off the peddle.
> Mark
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It'd be cool, but way too much rust on that one. I would expect it to
fall apart if the driver sneezed.
James
On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 15:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=4543091981
They are a bit heavy. But of someone wants one, I know of two which
could be for sale near me. SF bay area, CA, USA, Earth.
--
-Otmar-
http://www.CafeElectric.com/ Home of the Zilla.
http://www.evcl.com/914 My electric 914
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Seth Allen wrote:
> Vehicle mass has a relationship to range. But not the one you state,
> Lee, which I think you use as an example, but expect us to know it is
> an exaggeration.
Correct; that's why I said, "This is an admittedly extreme example; but
it shows the principle at work."
Range is only directly related to weight when you are redesigning the
entire car accordingly -- scaling everything together.
> Just trying to be clear, so that everyone doesn't try to get lighter
> wires. You might find that in fact the heavier wires make more sense
> with the way the relationship works.
That's true, too. This could happen for a drag racer that draws
thousands of amps as its "normal" running current (for all of 15
seconds).
> The most efficient cars I know of have very low amps/square area
> on the interconnects and motor leads. (This means big wires, folks)
Yes, it's the most efficient. But that may not provide the greatest
range.
For things like solar cars, you really *can* get more range by carefully
optimizing wire sizes. That may well lead to wires that look undersized.
If you are truly trying to optimize something, you will often find that
your design takes some strange unexpected turns!
A good common example is to look at the wire sizes in high efficiency
motors. Here we are running 4/0 to a series DC motor; ever looked at the
field and armature wire sizes inside? They aren't even 1/4th the cross
sectional area! The wire sizes are so small that they will burn up if
you don't have a pretty substantial airflow through it for cooling.
Why don't they use a larger wire size to improve efficiency? Because the
wire is *already* sized for best efficiency! There is a fixed amount of
room for the windings. If they increased the wire size, they'd have to
reduce the number of turns. And this would reduce the magnetic field
strength, and reduce the voltage of the motor. In a well designed motor,
the size of everything has been carefully considered, and optimized.
--
"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 ---
Ryan Stotts wrote:
>
> So given the choice of using 4/0 cable or bus bars, which one will
> have the least amount of resistance?
For the same cross sectional area, they will both have the same
resistance.
But the buss bar has more surface area. Therefore it runs cooler.
Therefore, it can carry a lot more current before it overheats and
fails.
--
"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 ---
>From a safety standpoint, high voltage wires should be
one color so the fireman/safety people know they
should not mess with those wires. (My father-in-law
is a fire chief, and I know they don't care about
positive-negative, just what should be cut with
protection in emergency situations). More qualified
technicians in controlled environments can determine
which is + and - with a simple marking on the cable
end. (using something as simple as black and red
heatshrink on the cables).
Rod
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rush wrote:
> >>> Is the orange for both neg and pos?
>
> >> Yes. They weren't thinking this thing through
> very well.
>
> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> > I don't know about that. I mean if they picked
> orange purely as
> > a safety thing, then it makes sense not to
> differentiate between
> > pos and neg.
>
> But, nobody should pick wire colors *purely* for
> safety. The main reason
> to use colored wires is to prevent assembly errors
> and aid
> troubleshooting -- so you don't mix them up. By
> making both + and -
> wires orange, they are *increasing* the chance of
> hooking them up
> backwards!
> --
> "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 ---
Sorry, guys - I stand corrected!
Joseph H. Strubhar
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.gremcoinc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: Wire Gauge questions - current vs stranding
>
> From: "Joe Strubhar"
> Subject: Re: Wire Gauge questions - current vs stranding
>
>
> >
> > It is not based on cross-section, but on circular mils - I believe that
has
> > to do with the surface area, as stranded wire has a greater circular
mils
> > than solid. This does apply to A/C; I'm not sure about D/C.
> >
> > Joseph H. Strubhar
>
> Joseph,
>
> I understand what your are saying, that it is not the traditional 'cross-
sectional' area that we are used to deal with... but in any case it is a
cross-sectional area based on a 'round inch'.
>
> Here is a definition of circular mil
>
http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci778491,00.html
>
> Rush
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yes! That's the reason to not descend hills in neutral. Some modern
autos are almost impossible to handle without power
brakes and power steering. Compression
braking doesn't help much to slow a modern auto unless engine
rpm is high. At a moderate speed like, say 40 mph, with an automatic
transmission when you get off the accelerator pedal,
the transmission shifts into overdrive and the engine slows so much
it provides almost no braking. I've tested several vehicles by
descending a hill that requires little or no braking and noticing that
it makes almost no difference whether the transmission is in drive
or neutral.
An EV should be kept in gear going downhill even though the motor
provides negligible braking. Keeping the motor spinning while
going downhill helps cool the motor. Also if going downhill in
neutral it's too easy to forget and overrev the motor at the bottom
of the hill when you get back on the accelerator pedal.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Clevenger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: Coasting
Hi Mark.
In California, the law forbids coasting with the clutch in or the car in
neutral. I think the idea was that if your car was in neutral, the engine
could theoretically die without you knowing and leave you without
power steering or brakes at the bottom of the hill.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello
The thin signalling wiring comes in all colours of the rainbow and also
multi-coloured; just take a look inside an ethernet plug. It should be
perfectly possible to make on orange cable with a red or blue stripe. You would
get both the safety factor and the polarity indication.
Seppo
>
> L�hett�j�: Nick Viera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> P�iv�: 14.04.2005 02:15
> Vastaanottaja: [email protected]
> Otsikko: Re: Wire Gauge questions
>
> Hi,
>
> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> > I don't know about that. I mean if they picked orange purely as a safety
> > thing, then it makes sense not to differentiate between pos and neg.
>
> I agree. Plus, in an EV it seems that the bulk of the high voltage
> wiring is the interconnects between all the batteries. Since they're
> usually wired in series, how could you designate certain interconnects
> as being positive and others as being negative?
>
> I mean, I guess you could say that the interconnects for one half of the
> pack are "more positive" than the interconnects on the other end of the
> pack or vice-versa, but wouldn't you still want all the
> wires/interconnects to be the same color to warn that they are ALL
> connected in a system with a (relatively) high voltage potential?
>
> --
> -Nick
> http://Go.DriveEV.com/
> 1988 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 EV
> ---------------------------
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tom Shay wrote:
> Compression
> braking doesn't help much to slow a modern auto unless engine
> rpm is high. At a moderate speed like, say 40 mph, with an automatic
> transmission when you get off the accelerator pedal,
> the transmission shifts into overdrive and the engine slows so much
> it provides almost no braking. I've tested several vehicles by
> descending a hill that requires little or no braking and noticing that
> it makes almost no difference whether the transmission is in drive
> or neutral.
You have to shift it from Drive down to second or even first to make
the automatic put a load on the engine.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wayland"
Subject: Re: Dave Cloud vs "White Zombie"
>
> afterburner bypass
>
What is an afterburner bypass?
Thanks
Rush
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
In my 86 Mitsubishi truck conversion I want to take out the rear axle and put
in an independant rear suspension with the motor directly connected to the
differential. I might need a transfer case between them to gear it down, I
think I'll need about a 6:1 final if I use a ADC 4001. I plan to put the motor
rear of the axle like the set up on the Soletric S-10 conversion. On the net I
have found an article that describes how to put an Corvette IRS in a F-150, and
it seems pretty easy...
Does anybody know of a IRS that will fit in the place of the Mitsu rear axle?
Or do I just go to the junk yard and start measuring... The frame rails are
41.5" apart, OD, by 2.5" wide by 3.5" high. I would also have to probably take
off the wheel hubs and rotate the differential hub and axles 180 deg so that
the brakes stay in the same position and the drive shaft comes out the back.
Thanks
Rush
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Watts = Volts x Amps is always true.
The problem is how you measure them.
In an AC circuit, you need to look at each moment in time, do the math at
each moment and then add them up and divide by the time period to get the
correct answer. This will produce a correct watt reading.
The problem with using AC meters and using the equation at the top of this
message is the meter does the integration (calculus) before the user does
the multiplication (arithmetic). The multiplication needs to be done before
the integration to get the correct result. The former case will need to be
multiplied by the power factor to get the same answer.
In college we used analog power meters that did the multiplication first,
then the integration producing the correct reading. The lab then had us use
separate ammeters and voltmeters to measure the volt-amperes. The lab never
got into the frequency domain issues but only dealt with the phase angle
aspects.
Joe Smalley
Rural Kitsap County WA
Fiesta 48 volts
NEDRA 48 volt street conversion record holder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 12:12 PM
Subject: RE: Watt to amp to volt conversions & why they aren't the same.
> For AC, in general, Power ( watts) = Volts x Amps x PowerFactor. You
can't
> just measure the current (in amps) and the voltage, and multiply the two
> together to get the power in watts.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Hart"
Subject: Re: Wire Gauge questions
> But, nobody should pick wire colors *purely* for safety. The main reason
> to use colored wires is to prevent assembly errors and aid
> troubleshooting -- so you don't mix them up. By making both + and -
> wires orange, they are *increasing* the chance of hooking them up
> backwards!
So I guess it would make sense to use the orange as either the HV neg or pos
and then take another orange wire and wrap it with white tape, leaving a lot of
orange to show between the wraps of white so that it is evident that it is a HV
cable but of a different charge. Or what ever color tape you have at hand.
Rush
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This may be a repeat. First hadn't gone thru.
I lent my EV to another member (AM) for promotional purposes & for
showing to other aspiring EV builders. It came back in worse condition
than it went.
The EV has batteries in the front, under the back seat & in the spare
wheel well. There are three parallel strings of Panasonic LC-LA1233P
(12V 33Ahr) 144V nominal, so 36 batteries with Zivan NG3 on board
controller & 9 inch motor.
The NG3 starts off at 15A current limit, followed by 176V constant and
3A for one hour. It is possible to reach 190V during the final stage
according to AM
What has happened is that in the approx centre of mass of the back seat
batteries there is evidence of heat & pressure as one bat has started
ballooning and others near it have started to melt. The area is not
sealed but has some ports for ventilation. There is supposed to be a fan
but it isn't working at present. Other batteries are basically OK. The
party balloon has now got a shorted cell.
AM did a 90k return trip involving suburban & freeway with approx 1.5
hr recharge at destination but on the way back he climbed one of the
steepest hills in Melbourne (Wheelers Hill) at about 35mph causing the
DCPS-1200 to squeal. He needed to drop down to a lower gear to finish.
This hill would take about 2 mins to climb.
MF claims the damage was in existence before I lent him the car. I have
not done any long trips myself only about 60ks max at modest
performance.
So what has caused this Chernobyl? Is pushing the batteries too far the
problem? Is it the charger?
Can the NG3 be modded to make it more suited to AGM batts?
Should the batts be reconfigured to 12 series groups of 3 paralleled
batts?
Should I fit bypass diodes & voltage limiting circuit to each 12V group?
Should I torture AM and get the truth out of him?
Your comments will be gratefully apprec'td.
David Sharpe
--- End Message ---
