EV Digest 4340
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Anderson vs. "Anderson style" connectors
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: GFCI with PFC?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: GFCI with PFC?
by "Charles Whalen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Flexible instrumentation
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Lithium chopper?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6) Re: Flexible instrumentation
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Flexible instrumentation
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) CAN controlled charger (Re: GFCI with PFC?)
by "Charles Whalen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: EVLN(hybrid tax break left out of the energy bill)
by "Alan Shedd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Flexible instrumentation
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Kewet kwery
by "Mark Thomasson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: EVLN(hybrid tax break left out of the energy bill)
by Reverend Gadget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: Anderson vs. "Anderson style" connectors
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) Re: CAN controlled charger (Re: GFCI with PFC?)
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Anderson vs. "Anderson style" connectors
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) EV racing history question
by "ProEV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: Lithium chopper?
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Lithium chopper?
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Lithium chopper?
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Lithium chopper?
by Reverend Gadget <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm a complete idiot then - or the one who came up with this
> idea. How am I suppose to know that color denotes
> functionality when usually it is not?
Two points: first, the mechanical key is the functionality; they colour
is just a convenient way to identify at a glance if two halves of a
connector are likely to bleong plugged together. You don't have to know
that colour means anything in particular, but if Anderson has done their
job properly you will discover that you can only connect connectors of
like colours and so may come to understand that like colours mate even
if you don't carefully inspect various connectors to figure out what the
mechanical keying scheme is that enforces this.
Second, these connectors are designed for/widely used in industrial
applications and the people specifying them and designing them into
their systems will be aware of the color-coded and mechanical key
features
> Are beige $3 120VAC residential outlets in home depots
> different from white ones?
No, but orange (hospital grade) 120VAC outlets are ;^>
Just because household outlets are not colour coded to differentiate
them from 208VAC or 240VAC outlets does not mean colour coding is an
invalid approach for other connectors. Household outlets are
mechanically keyed such that it is not possible to plug a 120VAC plug
into a 240VAC socket, and the pins and hole configurations are readily
visible so that it is easy to determine at a glance if the socket and
plug are compatible.
In contrast, the mechanical key of an Anderson connector is not readily
identifiable at a glance, and the different voltage connectors are
otherwise the same physically so it makes sense to colour code them as a
means of providing an obvious way to distinguish between different
'flavours'.
Think of it like colour-coded wiring: other than insulation colour there
is no way to tell which of two identically sized wires connects to +ve
and which to -ve, so it makes perfect sense to colour code them and most
people understand this (black connects to black, red to red, etc.)
without needing it to be explained to them.
> I see. It is only their suggestion then. Sort of
> use black pen to do math homework and blue one
> for spelling tests. You don't have to, but you know
> which pen for what work. Any connector handles 600V,
> just like any pen is OK for any homework. So it is
> only reminder to pay attention to potential trouble.
Right; you don't have to follow their recommended colour code (however,
I think you will find that it is largely followed by industry).
The colour isn't a reminder of anything; the mechanical key prevents the
trouble so there is (supposed to be) no need to pay attention. The
colour provides an easy way to identify if two connectors are supposed
to mate. E.g. you have a bunch of forklifts some are 24V, some are 36V,
etc., and when you need to connect the battery to a charger, you can
tell at a glance that the charger with the red Anderson connects to the
battery with the red Anderson, so that you don't waste time trying the
other chargers. The mechanical key ensures that even if you do try the
other combinations you will not succeed in connecting the wrong charger
to the battery.
> I would understand if different colors still alowing to mate
> would at least be for their suggested adjacent voltage
> ranges, like 120V purple could be plugged into 144V white -
> result will not be so drastic as allowing plugging 36V gray
> into 80V black. Any logic here I don't get?
Not that I'm aware of. If John is correct that black and grey Andersons
(both made by Anderson Power Products) interconnect, then this seems
like a design flaw. It is in contradiction to Anderson's own literature
for the product line, so I would hope that the reality is that perhaps
John tried mating connectors from different manufacturers.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Christopher Zach wrote:
> Hm. Isn't a Magnecharger not technically an "outlet" per se, more of a
> device (and a UL listed one as well)? My MC is hard wired to the
> line/box with no access to a plug of sorts.
There are both permanently-wired and plug-connected Magnachargers. GM
wanted the 6.6kw EV1 chargers permanently wired, I believe, to get
around the GFCI requirement. But the smaller 120v one is cord-connected.
--
"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 ---
Christopher Zach wrote:
Hm. Isn't a Magnecharger not technically an "outlet" per se, more of a
device (and a UL listed one as well)? My MC is hard wired to the line/box
with no access to a plug of sorts.
Yes, you are right, strictly speaking, although that's not how it ends up in
practice for most folks, at least the more technically savvy ones. Toyota
would not give final approval for the sale or lease of a RAV4-EV to you
until they came to your house to inspect the Magne Charger installation, and
it *had* to have that hard-wired installation. But if you're on the RAV4
list for any length of time (in my case, only 3 weeks now), you will find
out that most of the more technically inclined people reconfigured their
Magne Charger installation, as soon as the Toyota guy left and drove around
the corner out of sight, by severing the hardwired connection, installing a
14-50 outlet, and putting a 14-50 plug on the end of the pig-tail (power
cable coming off the bottom of the charger). In fact, that is exactly what
I am having done to my Magne Charger this weekend by one of the gurus out in
California (who has his own Magne Charger configured that way and is a lot
more technically oriented than the seller of my "new" RAV4, who does not
currently have her charger configured that way and never did during her
3-year lease -- she just left it as it was installed by her electrician
according to Toyota's requirements, which is hard-wired, as you say.) Of
course, I don't have to deal with Toyota here. In fact, I think it's
probably more like the converse of that statement, namely, I think Toyota
will actually *refuse* to deal with me in any way, shape, or form (which is
another problem altogether that I am going to have to deal with starting 6
months from now). But for the present, the only thing I have to deal with
is my electrician and the NEC and local codes. But as I stated in my
previous post, I've already figured out how to get around that, which is
basically that as soon as the electrician has left and driven around the
corner and out of sight, I will be removing that GFCI from the circuit.
Charles
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> FWIW, Stylistics (as all other modern PCs) go hibernate after timeout
> of inactivity. No data in RAM is lost (it is mirror stored in special
> area of the hard disk) No reboot nesesary Stylistic comes alive
> with the screen info just as you left it as soon as HD spins up
> (3-4 sec). At least mine does.
I don't know what a "Stylistics" is. Is it the brand or model of your
PC?
My Compaq laptop does have a 'hibernate' mode when running on their
internal battery -- but it does not enter it automatically when running
on external power (either the AC adapter or a 12v car adapter). I can
manually tell it to go to 'hibernate', though.
At least on my PCs, they still draw substantial power even when
everything that you can switch off is off (display, hard drive, modem,
etc.) The only way to seriously reduce power is to also turn off the
CPU, in which case it isn't running any programs or data logging,
either.
--
"Never doubt that the work of a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has!" -- Margaret Mead
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Here is a link to a special event by Hybrid Technologies that shows a media
clip of the Leno Crossfire as well as a quick clip of Leno driving off on
the Lithium chopper.
http://www.hybridtechnologies.com/multimedia.php?typeID=V&vidID=15
Jeff
Michael Hurley wrote
At 9:27 AM -0700 on 5/5/05, David Dymaxion wrote:
>I saw that, too. I don't know these things by sight, are one of those
>a controller, or are they the relays and electronics for the
>motorcycle ignition and lights?
The big black box at the front looks like a Brusa charge
>I don't see room for a usable amount of batteries. If they hid an
>electric motor in the ice motor or tranny it'd have to be pretty
>small.
The motor is shown in Picture 12 of the project slides.
>I'm excited about the notion of lithium chopper -- just not clear to
>me there's enough evidence to say this one is it.
http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/CHP_sled300.html
The above is the writeup of the project. "Click on Read More..." to
see the details. It is a "lithium powered motor" inside the v-twin.
--
Auf wiedersehen!
______________________________________________________
"..Um..Something strange happened to me this morning."
"Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
sort of Sun God robes on a pyramid with a thousand
naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
at you?"
"..No."
"Why am I the only person that has that dream?"
- Real Genius
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
FWIW, Stylistics (as all other modern PCs) go hibernate after timeout
of inactivity. No data in RAM is lost (it is mirror stored in special
area of the hard disk) No reboot nesesary Stylistic comes alive
with the screen info just as you left it as soon as HD spins up
(3-4 sec). At least mine does.
I don't know what a "Stylistics" is. Is it the brand or model of your
PC?
The same as "Contura" or "Pressario" models for Compaq brand, Stylistic
is particular model of pen based PC for Fujitsu brand. It is essentially
a regular PC compatible laptop computer without built in keyboard.
My Compaq laptop does have a 'hibernate' mode when running on their
internal battery -- but it does not enter it automatically when running
on external power (either the AC adapter or a 12v car adapter). I can
manually tell it to go to 'hibernate', though.
Mine hibernates either way - this is setting in the BIOS you can change.
At least on my PCs, they still draw substantial power even when
everything that you can switch off is off (display, hard drive, modem,
etc.) The only way to seriously reduce power is to also turn off the
CPU, in which case it isn't running any programs or data logging,
either.
Oh, yes, if you want to keep datalogging, you cannot hiberhate.
Datalogging while parked for days is not the primary concern,
is it?
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
This looks good but one has to get the e-meter sofeware in to it ect. Maybe
as a group we could buy one together , let who ever feels they can do it ,
try it , if it works , they get it free and the rest of us can just plug and
play . we may be a small group , people with e meters with data ports
steve clunn .
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Weathers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 1:47 AM
Subject: Re: Flexible instrumentation
On May 4, 2005, at 6:36 PM, Peter VanDerWal wrote:
The Fujitu stylistic LT with daylight readable screen.
It's a bit bigger than a palmtop with an 8" screen, but then it's
actually
pen based PC.
Thanks for the tip. I did some Googling and found this site:
http://www.surplussales.com/ComputerAccess/fujitsu.html
They have Stylistic 1000 tablets with monochrome transflective displays
for $59. I can't tell if they come with a hard drive from my quick
perusal of the site, and of course it's not color. But is color
necessary, or even doable for less than $100?
Note this machine also has a serial port on it already.
--
Doug Weathers
Bend, OR, USA
http://learn-something.blogsite.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Rich, Victor, and Lee for your responses.
OK great, I'll have the electrician put a hot-tub rated GFCI on the 50A
circuit that I will use in the future with a PFC-50 and/or Brusa.
Lee Hart wrote:
PS: You may run into building code problems with your electrician if he
is a stickler for doing thing by the book. NEC says all outside outlets
must have GFCIs. But GM's charger won't work with a standard GFCI, so
they tell you not to use one. Good luck!
Yes, I've already been thinking about how to handle this problem. I will
ask the electrician to show me, or at least explain to me, how to remove the
CFCI (from the 50A circuit for use with the TCG2000) so that I can do that
myself after he leaves. If he refuses to tell me how to do that, then I'll
ask someone more knowledgable and experienced than myself, such as my main
go-to guy, Steve, to come over and remove it from the circuit.
With regard to providing/designing a control interface to Rich's PFC
chargers, first I should say that I am using a different vendor's li-ion
BMS, not Victor's. But if Rich is supporting Victor's efforts to design and
enable a communications and control interface from Victor's li-ion BMS to
Rich's PFC, whether that be over CAN, USB, or something else, then I'm quite
confident that my system integrator will able to use that same interface to
get their li-ion BMS to talk to the PFC (as long as Victor shares his work
and doesn't try to make the interface proprietary). (Victor, I *am*
planning to purchase my motor and controller from you, so I'm hoping that
you can cooperate with us in other areas.) Like Victor, my vendor also uses
CAN, but if Victor and Rich end up going with USB or something else, then
I'm sure my vendor can follow suit and use whatever you guys have created.
But it sounds like the two of you first have to agree on the type of
interface you want to use (since it seems Victor prefers CAN whereas Rich
prefers USB). Victor, it sounds like you are taking the lead on this and
Rich is in a supporting role; so Victor, do you have a timetable for this?
Victor wrote:
Frankly, I don't see a need for CAN control of a charger unless one
also has BMS or other CAN enabled hardware which wants to talk to
the charger.
I agree and would go even further than this to say that even *with* a
CAN-enabled BMS (such as I am going to have), I could probably get away
without having any CAN (or indeed any other type of) control of the charger
as long as the charger is sufficiently programmable whereby we could maybe
modify our charging algorithm to add a few additional setpoints/steps
towards the latter part of the charge. In this way, the BMS could operate
completely independent of the charger (with no communication at all between
the two) by leaving enough headroom or margin for the greatest expected
variation in cell voltages such that the charging current will be low enough
for the BMS to resist or bypass the current at individual cells by the time
they could be expected to reach their upper voltage limit. This would
obviously add to the charging time, which somewhat negates the advantage of
using a high-powered 50A charger in the first place, but at least it
provides a fairly simple solution that obviates the need for communication
with, and control of, the charger by the BMS and allows the two to operate
independently. Of course, all of that assumes that the PFC is programmable,
i.e. that we can program it with our own charging algorithm (using a
few/several setpoints), which I assume is the case, right?
The reason I ask all of this is that there is a very big cost advantage for
me to go with a PFC-50 over a Brusa, as the PFC-50 will cost me $11,000 less
than a comparable Brusa. That $11,000 will go a long way towards purchasing
programming and engineering time from my system integrator/BMS vendor. Then
of course there is Rich's excellent service and support here in the US as an
additional advantage.
Victor wrote:
Perhaps this topic is rather for EVBMS list?
Perhaps David Roden can shed some light on this. I hope it isn't OT for
this list because I surely don't want to have to join yet another list. I
can't even keep up with the lists I'm already on. I've never heard of the
EVBMS list, and I'm not a professional gearhead who understands all of this
stuff. My understanding and knowledge is at a very superficial level, but
at least now I have finally gotten to the point where I have some idea who
the major players are on this list to look to for advice.
Thanks,
Charles Whalen
Rich Rudman wrote:
PLEASE install a "Hot tub" rated GFCI breaker on any feed to a PFC
charger.
I WANT you to have a GFI!!!
The Hot Tub breakers have a 20 Ma trip point that is 4 times less
sensitive
than the normal GFCI. There will be leaks, most are not noticable, But are
measureable.
PFC50s have a 50 amp line breaker double pole on the front, NO GFI, and
there won't be one there.... Ever.
With a NON isolated charger, that my current PFC series is, Assume you
have
NO isllation what so ever. And then plan on protecting your self from
there.
Assume the worst, get pleasantly surprised by the reality of it all.
I find the TCG2000 inductive charger as having a real isolation issue in
the real world as hilarious!!! They bragged how "Safe" they were, it
clearly isn't so.
I have no current plans on a CAN buss interface for the PFC series of
chargers, But... Victor and some others are trying to make this happen. I
will do all I can to support and enhance thier
efforts. I have my plate full with real Isolated chargers and liquid
cooled
higher power chargers. At the last count I have 4 distinct new products in
process. I am keeping a few dozzen square inches available in side all my
chargers just to support, what ever "micro brains" comes my way. There is
a
new DSP card here just for this concept. Thanks to a heavy hitter on this
list for getting it into my hands.
Any body wanna write a CAN buss interface for a TI 320F2812???
The RegBuss is NOT a charger control interface it's a Reg data path way to
suck real time data fromn every Reg. That's it's target, until It does
that
and well I am not asking the design team for anything else.
And I am not really impressed with CAN, I would rather do a USB level 2
port, with GUI user interfaces for lap and Palm tops. Yea Invent my own
interface, then publish the hooks and source code to let the more
Digitally
enhanced clients of mine, take it from there.
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
Rich Rudman wrote:
And I am not really impressed with CAN, I would rather do a USB level 2
port, with GUI user interfaces for lap and Palm tops. Yea Invent my own
interface, then publish the hooks and source code to let the more
Digitally
enhanced clients of mine, take it from there.
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
I would not use anything but CAN (or at least any other differential
bus type) in automotive environment.
I am *very* impressed with CAN protocol reliability and error handling
abilities. All that USB, I2C and other implementations for
computers and embedded things are pathetic jokes compared to CAN.
My hat's off to Robert Bosch - what he did was genious invention.
I'll post a few saved waveforms of the test bus traffic saved by my
tusty Croy scope - a S/N ratio far less than 1 and looks like total
mess vs. ground, but ideal pulses after CAN transceiver on the uP side.
If you're not impressed Rich, you probably haven't been exposed to
it enough.
Anyway, thanks for supporting your all with your chargers. CAN
controlled PFC charger (add on CAN option) is quite straight
forward task if you formalise control requirements.
Frankly, I don't see a need for CAN control of a charger unless one
also has BMS or other CAN enabled hardware which wants to talk to
the charger.
Perhaps this topic is rather for EVBMS list?
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
While tax incentives will certainly help promote the sale of more efficient
vehicles, the US auto industry seems to continue to be out of touch and
looking for more handouts to solve their problems.
Ford's VP's comments that the sale of hybrids has been limited to a narrow
segment of the market due to price does not seem to match reality. The true
limit to date seems to be availability. Over a year ago, I waited 5 months
for my Pruis. Others have had similar or longer waits. Manufacturers
cannot keep up with demand. Even in Ford's case. Production of the Escape
hybrid is very limited. I have been lucky enough to see one but I
understand that waiting lists for those vehicles are forming. GM touts the
Silverado pickup hybrid (to apply the term very loosely) introduced last
year but the vehicles don't seem to be available, local dealers don't know
about them or even how to order one.
Sounds a little like what was said about their EVs. Hey, no one is buying
these things they must be too expensive. Then when you ask, they admit that
they don't actually have any for sale.
-Alan
Alan C. Shedd, P.E., CEM
EV Education Program, Inc.
(a non-profit, tax-exempt organization committed to helping students of all
interests and ages pursue knowledge)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
Lee Hart wrote:
My Compaq laptop does have a 'hibernate' mode when running on their
internal battery -- but it does not enter it automatically when running
on external power (either the AC adapter or a 12v car adapter). I can
manually tell it to go to 'hibernate', though.
Mine hibernates either way - this is setting in the BIOS you can change.
Sorry, corection - 12V power to my stylistic was taken from KL30 net,
so external power to is is lost when ignition is off. This makes
PC to switch to internal battery which in turn forces to
hibernate after timeout.
I think (unverified though) you can force it in BIOS to hibernate
while on external power too.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Russell, I suspect the series coil provides most of the field strength
and the shunt coil just gives a torque boost at startup. If that is the
case, then the small shunt field will not give the SepEx controller much to
work with when it comes to speed control. Do you get a big speed boost when
the shunt field drops out at 15 mph? If not, then the series field is
probably doing most of the work. Dropping the series field would then leave
the motor short on torque at higher armature current, maybe arcing at the
brushes, and overload the controller because too much inductance was removed
from the motor circuit. But, the SepEx controller may still work just fine,
just don't take out the series coil. Most people bypass the series coil to
get more speed once armature voltage is at its max. But, you are doubling
the available armature voltage, so your top speed will be much higher
already. The SepEx controller will still try to reduce shunt field voltage
to get more speed if the throttle calls for it, and that should be ok.
Does this SepEx controller take care of reverse by changing shunt field
polarity? If so, That could be a problem, because then the series and
shunt fields will be fighting each other and strange things can result.
Perhaps others on the list can fill in the gaps in my logic and correct my
errors? Thanks, Mark T.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EV Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 6:07 AM
Subject: Kewet kwery
I didn't get any response from the Kewet Yahoo group, so I'll pose my
question
here:
The original setup for a Eljet 3 in the US was 48v, with a Curtis series
controller, and a compound motor. The car starts off with both fields in
use,
then at 15mph, a relay drops out the shunt field. The relay (not a
contactor)
is in the circuit with the shunt field, and actually sits under the dash,
so
it's not very high current.
I want to run this car with a 96V SepEx controller (and 96V of NiCds), but
even
with a new dc-dc converter, I wonder if any of the electronics expect 48V,
and
if it will help acceleration, I'd also like to use both fields from
takeoff
then drop the *series field* out at 15mph. I have the appropriately-hefty
2-circuit contactor, and the motor can handle it (~3000rpm at 48V, rated
to
9000rpm), but I really don't want to fry another motor -- being a poor
mechanic, I sold my other Kewet rather than attempt an amateur dismantling
after a trial with a sepex controller burnt the com (lost only a little on
the
sale, which is rare in selling used EVs!)
You can contact me directly if you think you'll have too much to post
here:
cowtown at spamcop dot net
Russell
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If anyone is looking for an Escape in Los Angeles, I
know a Fleet dealer who has a lot full of them. I was
able to walk in and buy exactly the one I wanted (4wd,
leather seats, premium sound, with unpainted trim) and
drive it home. The guy is very forward looking and
could see the need. I think part of the problem is the
dealers scepticism. If the dealers don't think they
can sell them they don't put them on the lot and play
stupid when asked about them.
Gadget
--- Alan Shedd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While tax incentives will certainly help promote the
> sale of more efficient
> vehicles, the US auto industry seems to continue to
> be out of touch and
> looking for more handouts to solve their problems.
>
> Ford's VP's comments that the sale of hybrids has
> been limited to a narrow
> segment of the market due to price does not seem to
> match reality. The true
> limit to date seems to be availability. Over a year
> ago, I waited 5 months
> for my Pruis. Others have had similar or longer
> waits. Manufacturers
> cannot keep up with demand. Even in Ford's case.
> Production of the Escape
> hybrid is very limited. I have been lucky enough to
> see one but I
> understand that waiting lists for those vehicles are
> forming. GM touts the
> Silverado pickup hybrid (to apply the term very
> loosely) introduced last
> year but the vehicles don't seem to be available,
> local dealers don't know
> about them or even how to order one.
>
> Sounds a little like what was said about their EVs.
> Hey, no one is buying
> these things they must be too expensive. Then when
> you ask, they admit that
> they don't actually have any for sale.
>
> -Alan
>
> Alan C. Shedd, P.E., CEM
> EV Education Program, Inc.
> (a non-profit, tax-exempt organization committed to
> helping students of all
> interests and ages pursue knowledge)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
visit my website at www.reverendgadget.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Humm, this bugged me so I dug further.
Check out
http://www.andersonpower.com/products/pdf/111923s1.pdf
It says 'Housings are keyed to only allow mating with the same color housing,
except for the black housing'
Maybe this means the BLACK is a universal fit?
Darin Gilbert
Bad Fish Racing
-------------- Original message from "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
--------------
> OK it's a minor annoyance, but this is where we all learn from each others'
> mistakes, right?
>
> I got a gray SB50 connector set from EV Parts for the pack-side connector on
> my PFC-20. I forgot there are three wires to connect there, so I used the
> SB50 for the +HV and -HV leads and fudged the chassis ground connection
> temporarily. Recently I had an order going in to McMaster-Carr and saw they
> have the same connectors, and at a pretty good price. I ordered a black
> set. The plan is to bolt the gray and black together back-to-back. Since
> Andersons will only mate to like colors, the black and gray sets should
> prevent me from accidentally connecting them wrong (and putting HV on the
> chassis).
>
> Not.
>
> I looked at the black connectors and couldn't see how they differed from the
> gray. Just for fun I slipped contacts into a black one and tried to mate it
> to a gray. "Snick." It fit like they were made for each other. What the
> #!&*?
>
> The gray ones from EV Parts say CMC on them. (EV Parts describes them as
> "Anderson style" - didn't notice that before.) The black ones from McM-C
> say SMH. My big SB350s that I use for pack service disconnects say Anderson
> Power Products. OK, there are apparently several companies copying the
> Anderson design, but wouldn't it make sense to really copy it? So it
> preserves the very useful can't-mate-it-wrong capability?
>
> What this means is that you can't assume your "Anderson" connector will mate
> to someone else's of the same color, or will be prevented from mating to
> someone else's of a different color. Beware.
>
> Chris
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Charles Whalen wrote:
Thanks Rich, Victor, and Lee for your responses.
With regard to providing/designing a control interface to Rich's PFC
chargers, first I should say that I am using a different vendor's li-ion
BMS, not Victor's. But if Rich is supporting Victor's efforts to design
and
enable a communications and control interface from Victor's li-ion BMS to
Rich's PFC, whether that be over CAN, USB, or something else, then I'm
quite
confident that my system integrator will able to use that same interface to
get their li-ion BMS to talk to the PFC (as long as Victor shares his work
and doesn't try to make the interface proprietary).
CAN interface is no more proprietary as RS232 - anyone can use it and
get documentation for it. I don't use anything non-standard. The point
is to cover as much CAN enebled hardware as possible. You won't find
any USB controlled inverters ever, they are all CAN.
If Rich likes inventing his own interface (like we don't have
enough of them...), while full documentation will be made available,
it certainly will still be proprietary in terms of special hardware has
to be built - you can't buy anything off-shelf from anyone other than
from Rich, pluggable into his chargers and controlling them.
It is up to him to decide.
In contrast, any CAN controller can be plugged into BRUSA
charger since CAN matrix is published:
http://www.brusa.biz/assets/downloads/datasheets/NLG5xx_CAN_201.pdf
this is all you need.
So your integrator can program his off-shelf controller to talk
to BRUSA chargers. Again, for PFC ones you must make a special
CAN-to-RICH_PROTOCOL converter, but for $11k differnce I'll be
happy to do it for you :-)
For these power levels it is hard to justify BRUSA chargers - they
only make sense to someone who cannot live without features they
offer.
(Victor, I *am*
planning to purchase my motor and controller from you, so I'm hoping that
you can cooperate with us in other areas.)
I don't recall any case of refusing to cooperate with people.
Anyone recall?
Like Victor, my vendor also uses CAN, but if Victor and Rich end up going
with USB or something else, then
I'm sure my vendor can follow suit and use whatever you guys have created.
But it sounds like the two of you first have to agree on the type of
interface you want to use (since it seems Victor prefers CAN whereas Rich
prefers USB). Victor, it sounds like you are taking the lead on this and
Rich is in a supporting role; so Victor, do you have a timetable for this?
For CAN to whatever convertrer? This is low priority for me
at the moment, but when people will start buing my BMS left and right
to monitor their lead acid batteries, next thing they'll want after
what they *see* (and log if they want) what is going on with each
battery, *do* something about it. That will bump up a priority for
suchg a converter. For now I want to finish current version meant
to work with standard charger and LiIon battery.
FEVT version (using my monitor modules) is already finished and as far
as I know can be ordered now. My version works except display routines.
It balances cells, but you can't visualize the data and see it.
I agree and would go even further than this to say that even *with* a
CAN-enabled BMS (such as I am going to have), I could probably get away
without having any CAN (or indeed any other type of) control of the charger
as long as the charger is sufficiently programmable whereby we could maybe
modify our charging algorithm to add a few additional setpoints/steps
towards the latter part of the charge. In this way, the BMS could operate
completely independent of the charger (with no communication at all between
the two) by leaving enough headroom or margin for the greatest expected
variation in cell voltages such that the charging current will be low
enough
for the BMS to resist or bypass the current at individual cells by the time
they could be expected to reach their upper voltage limit.
This is one of the modes of operation coincidentally also called
BMS (Battery Monitoring System) rather than *management*.
BMS displays to you what is wrong with each battery but has no means
to do anything about it, just flag you.
It is up to you then to take a screwdriver and tweak your PFC
accordingly. However, individual cells (or batteries) which are
out of balance will not be treated. So it is just an information
system.
This would
obviously add to the charging time, which somewhat negates the advantage of
using a high-powered 50A charger in the first place, but at least it
provides a fairly simple solution that obviates the need for communication
with, and control of, the charger by the BMS and allows the two to operate
independently. Of course, all of that assumes that the PFC is
programmable,
i.e. that we can program it with our own charging algorithm (using a
few/several setpoints), which I assume is the case, right?
Not without adding brains to it, but this is relatively straight
forward task.
The reason I ask all of this is that there is a very big cost advantage for
me to go with a PFC-50 over a Brusa, as the PFC-50 will cost me $11,000
less
than a comparable Brusa. That $11,000 will go a long way towards
purchasing
programming and engineering time from my system integrator/BMS vendor.
Yes, if you only take watt/dollar ratio into account, nothing currently
beats PFC chargers.
Then
of course there is Rich's excellent service and support here in the US
as an
additional advantage.
Hat's off to Rich; as much as I know him, you can rely on his
support, no problem there. I have his charger, and had it serviced
twice. Always prompt service.
Victor wrote:
Perhaps this topic is rather for EVBMS list?
Perhaps David Roden can shed some light on this. I hope it isn't OT for
this list because I surely don't want to have to join yet another list.
If it's OK with David, I'll keep this topic on list and try to be
short.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Great. One, then, can plug 12V automotive appliance into 80V power
source. No problem Anderson, thanks for thoughtful design.
I wish this would be explained somewhere.
I don't believe this is just their oversight, but anything
is possible...
Victor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Humm, this bugged me so I dug further.
Check out
http://www.andersonpower.com/products/pdf/111923s1.pdf
It says 'Housings are keyed to only allow mating with the same color
housing, except for the black housing'
Maybe this means the BLACK is a universal fit?
Darin Gilbert
Bad Fish Racing
-------------- Original message from "Chris Tromley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: --------------
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
Does anybody know when was the last time that an EV beat an ICE in a formal
(i.e. sanctioned) race. Specifically when the cars are competing under the
same
set of rules.
I think Dennis Berube has done it in the Current Eliminator doing bracket
drag racing where he is allowed to compete directly with ICE's and we
(ProEV) have done it in SCCA autocross winning in D modified.
Any others?
Thanks
Cliff
www.ProEV.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It sounded like an electric chopper in that clip! OK, I guess I'm
finally convinced it is really an electric chopper. :)
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here is a link to a special event by Hybrid Technologies that shows
> a media
> clip of the Leno Crossfire as well as a quick clip of Leno driving
> off on
> the Lithium chopper.
>
> http://www.hybridtechnologies.com/multimedia.php?typeID=V&vidID=15
>
> Jeff
>
>
> Michael Hurley wrote
>
> At 9:27 AM -0700 on 5/5/05, David Dymaxion wrote:
>
> >I saw that, too. I don't know these things by sight, are one of
> those
> >a controller, or are they the relays and electronics for the
> >motorcycle ignition and lights?
>
> The big black box at the front looks like a Brusa charge
>
> >I don't see room for a usable amount of batteries. If they hid an
> >electric motor in the ice motor or tranny it'd have to be pretty
> >small.
>
> The motor is shown in Picture 12 of the project slides.
>
> >I'm excited about the notion of lithium chopper -- just not clear
> to
> >me there's enough evidence to say this one is it.
>
> http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/CHP_sled300.html
>
> The above is the writeup of the project. "Click on Read More..." to
>
> see the details. It is a "lithium powered motor" inside the v-twin.
> --
>
>
> Auf wiedersehen!
> ______________________________________________________
> "..Um..Something strange happened to me this morning."
>
> "Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in
> sort of Sun God robes on a pyramid with a thousand
> naked women screaming and throwing little pickles
> at you?"
>
> "..No."
>
> "Why am I the only person that has that dream?"
> - Real Genius
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK, gotta admit when I'm wrong, the video confirms it's electric.
I think that is the tranny in picture 12, they said the electric
motor is hidden inside the gasser motor.
You'd think a motorcycle designer would jump at a chance to exploit
the opportunities an electric drivetrain would give in chopper
styling -- it was a shame to hide it in ICE components!
--- Michael Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> The motor is shown in Picture 12 of the project slides.
>
> >I'm excited about the notion of lithium chopper -- just not clear
> to
> >me there's enough evidence to say this one is it.
>
> http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/CHP_sled300.html
>
> The above is the writeup of the project. "Click on Read More..." to
>
> see the details. It is a "lithium powered motor" inside the v-twin.
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Of course it is. Look at the early pictures. It clearly shows an electric
traction motor. Lawrence Rhodes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Dymaxion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: Lithium chopper?
I saw that, too. I don't know these things by sight, are one of those
a controller, or are they the relays and electronics for the
motorcycle ignition and lights?
I don't see room for a usable amount of batteries. If they hid an
electric motor in the ice motor or tranny it'd have to be pretty
small.
I'm excited about the notion of lithium chopper -- just not clear to
me there's enough evidence to say this one is it.
--- Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Dymaxion wrote:
> Thanks for the link. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I
didn't
> see anything that indicates this is an electric chopper. Maybe
just
> the starter battery is Lithium?
This pic is rather telling:
http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/chp_sled/project/13.html
This one too:
http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/chp_sled/completed/34.html
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The pictures don't show an electric motor anywhere.
The only thing that looks like one is the harley trans
which has the chain on one side of the bike and the
primary drive belt on the other. The motor must be
inside the S&S engine case, but the area inside the
case for the crankshaft is rather small since these
motors have a dry sump. seems like a wasted
opportunity.
Gadget
--- Lawrence Rhodes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course it is. Look at the early pictures. It
> clearly shows an electric
> traction motor. Lawrence Rhodes.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Dymaxion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 9:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Lithium chopper?
>
>
> >I saw that, too. I don't know these things by
> sight, are one of those
> > a controller, or are they the relays and
> electronics for the
> > motorcycle ignition and lights?
> >
> > I don't see room for a usable amount of batteries.
> If they hid an
> > electric motor in the ice motor or tranny it'd
> have to be pretty
> > small.
> >
> > I'm excited about the notion of lithium chopper --
> just not clear to
> > me there's enough evidence to say this one is it.
> >
> > --- Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> David Dymaxion wrote:
> >> > Thanks for the link. Maybe I'm missing
> something here, but I
> >> didn't
> >> > see anything that indicates this is an electric
> chopper. Maybe
> >> just
> >> > the starter battery is Lithium?
> >>
> >> This pic is rather telling:
> >>
> >>
> >
>
http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/chp_sled/project/13.html
> >>
> >>
> >> This one too:
> >>
> >>
> >
>
http://www.bigbearchoppers.com/gallery/bbc_builds/chp_sled/completed/34.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Mail
> > Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the
> tour:
> > http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
> >
>
>
visit my website at www.reverendgadget.com
--- End Message ---
