EV Digest 4545
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Racing 3wheels, Re: 3 wheel EV's trike pick up,
and CUSHMAN Truck
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Racing 3wheels,
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Modeling the Freedom EV,
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) NEV
by "Mark Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Segway
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6) RE: Racing 3wheels,
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Segway
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8) Re: DCP T-Rex and DC/DC in closed space?
by Ben Apollonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: My EV trike building article August ESSN is up!
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: tilting, Re: Racing 3wheels,
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Racing 3wheels,
by Fortunat Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Ampabout East, an' Stuff
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Deka dominato. Now: Are they as good as Optima or Exide? What would
the racers use?
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) 1971 Electra King 2 Door Electric Car - $2500
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) What would you do with 19 million amps?
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Tubes
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
17) Re: What would you do with 19 million amps?
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Racing 3wheels,Comments ideas
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
> Snippage and comments interspersed.
>
> --- Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If you are cornering hard enough to lift a wheel on the 4wh, then
>> the
>> equivalent 3wh has already flipped over. Do the math, the physics
>> and
>> geometry involved are pretty simple.
>
> If you assume no suspension this would be true. Lots of cars in
> autocross will lift a wheel. All that means is one end of the car is
> stiff (or has limited wheel travel), the other end is soft. The
> "equivalent" 3 wheeler would be OK in this case.
Hmm, I don't think so. Generally you lift a wheel because of the
anti-sway bar. I'm not sure if a swaybar would be a good idea or not on a
three wheeler. If it was a good idea, then I suppose that it would be
possible to lift your inside wheel before enough weight has transfered to
flip the vehicle. But now you only have TWO wheels providing traction,
compared to three wheels on the 4wh. Granted the other inside wheel on
the 4wh probably isn't adding much traction.
>
> This is sometimes touted as an advantage for 3 wheelers. In a 4 wheel
> car, wheel loads can go from 0 to about 2x static (and often do for
> the rear wheels of front wheel drives in autocross). 3 wheelers tend
> to have a more constant load on each wheel, especially over uneven
> terrain. This can be destabilizing, though, as a 3 wheeler will tilt
> more if a wheel drops in a hole.
This is only true for 3wh when moving slowly over uneven terrain. When
cornering hard on a smooth surface, the weight will transfer to the
outside on a 3wh just as it will on a 4wh.
The forces a 3wh will see will actually be HIGHER than a 4wh, because it
has one less wheel to spred the weight out over.
>> I'll grant you that triangles have structural advantages, but even
>> without
>> the higher forces on the corners of the frame, it's not going to
>> reduce
>> the totatl vehicle weight by 1/4.
>> Take a look at the frame in the book "Build your own sports car". I
>> particularly like the photo of the author holding up the completed
>> frame.
>> The complete frame weighs less than 1/10 of the total vehicle
>> weight,
>> probably less than 1/12.
>
> I think we might be doing an apples-to-oranges comparison again. If
> you assume the same width and length of vehicle, the 3 wheeler should
> be much lighter, but will have about 1/2 the interior volume. If you
> keep interior volume constant, then the weight savings would be less.
> In general, the fewer the number of wheels, the more weight per wheel
> the vehicle can handle.
Ok let's add up the things that have weight in the vehicle:
Driver hmm same weight in either vehicle
Motor hmm ditto
Batteries? Controller? cabling? same-same.
Transmission, steering, pedals, etc. same weight
Front windshield? Probably the same.
Suspension? Well the three wheeler has one less wheel, however it's
wheels will have higher loads. So they need to be heavier per wheel to
maintain the same safety margin. In fact it's quite possible that the
total weight of the wheels and suspension will end up about the same.
Frame? Well it will probably weight slightly less even though it needs to
be stronger at the attachment points and will have higher stress on each
corner. But I don't see a significant weight savings.
Body? Well this will probably be where you save the most weight, But
again I don't see you saving much. Assuming that the sides close into a
truncated triangle, the back end will be smaller, but the sides will be
slightly longer. Your biggest savings will be on the top and bottom, but
again, not much.
Yes it will probably be lighter, but since all the heavy stuff stays the
same weight, it won't be much lighter. I'd be surprised if it added up to
even 10%.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> Also consider; the 3wh has higher loads on each
>> wheel. This means that
>
> That just means more traction on that wheel,
> that's a good thing!! And since it has 1/4 less weight
> to counter, improves traction overall.
You know Jerry, you keep trowing that figure out, but you still haven't
explained it.
Considering that probably 1/2 the vehicle weight is going to be batteries,
how do you come up with a 3wh weighing 1/4 less than an equivelent 4wh?
Are you seriously claiming that eliminating 1 wheel will drop the weight
of the motor/chasis/body/driver/etc. by 1/2?
>> > You can make the 3 wheeler chassis much
>> > lighter than a 4 wheeler.
>>
>> Lighter, perhaps, but "much" lighter? I doubt it.
>
> Then how come my body/frames weight only 235lbs
> with excellent stiffness and crashworthness?
Oh and I suppose there is no way you could build one with four wheels that
didn't weigh more than twice as much? Because, given that the number of
wheels has no effect on the weight of the batteries, motor, driver, etc,
in order for your dubious claim of saving 25% to be true, the body and
frame would have to weigh far more than twice as much with four wheels.
> Now compare that to a 4wh's weight for the same
> qualities, strength. And I could have built it in
> under 100lbs if I didn't want crashworthyness which as
> it turned out was a very good thing.
> Show me any 4wh car that can come even close to
> that?
The Porsche 1 litre comes to mind. I wonder how much the Tango's frame and
body weighs?
>
>>
>> > Give it 3 wheel drive and it could
>> > accelerate faster out of the turns due to lighter
>> weight.
>> >
>
> A well designed 3wh will slide before flipping.
>> This doesn't mean (or
>> prove) that it will out perform a well designed 4wh.
>> Nor does this mean
>> that it won't flip under circumstances where an
>> equivelent 4wh would not.
>
> No but it does mean it is stable. And with good
> enough tires to hold the road, handles excellently.
I have never claimed otherwise. I'm just disputing your continuous claim
that 3wh handle BETTER than 4wh.
> Actually you are guessing much more than I have
> been. But I have much more experience at it!
Only because you haven't bother to guess or even present any facts to back
up your opinions and claims.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jerry a few more things needed:
1) is the weight distribution of 66-34 front/rear?
2) do you have an *actual* motor torque curve? Without it I cannot do
much. I do not know how to figure out a torque curve based on motor type
and voltage.
3) is this a fixed gear 4.3:1?
4) what is the width of the tires?
5) I will program in the CG
6) what is the ground clearance?
7) is there a clutch?
There is no software, that I know of, that will model a 3 wheel aero trike,
so I will have to make it either a car or motorcycle. Since it does not
lean like a motorcycle, the suspension will be more like a car.
Victoria, BC, Canada
See the New Beetle EV Conversion Web Site at
www.cameronsoftware.com/ev/
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jerry dycus
Sent: August 1, 2005 8:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Modeling the Freedom EV,
Hi Don and All,
--- Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jerry, I am interested to model the performance of the Freedom EV, if
> can you supply me with the specs, I will run it against a variety of
> cars and report back on its relative performance.
Don't you need more info than the below? What type of performance sim
are you going to do?
What about CG- 12" high as most cars are 16-24"
high, Tire type, brand, ect make hugh differences? Can it do 3wh vs 4?
Tire RR .008 for econo,range, stock - .012 for race
Would really like power required at various speeds with the low drag
tires.
While I can see you doing power required well, handling isn't going to
be easy, accurate without much more data.
>
> - weight
Reg 1400lbs Race 1000lbs
12 T105s 6 Orbitals or more with bigger
controller
> - weight distribution
66-34
> - is front or rear wheel drive?
Rear
> - motor torque curve
D+D, the former ADC owners, 2- ES22's series/parallel equal to 2- 6.7
A89 type type wound for 72vdc, 5,000rpm at 125 amps
Altrax 7245 controller Race, bypass contactor
> - gear ratios and final gear ratio
4.3-1
> - Cd
.23
> - height and width
4'x 4.5" average max width, upper 4' wide and lower 5' wide max so 18sq'
frontal area.
> - tire size
23" dia, 14" rims
>
>
> Don
>
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
-
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Gail,
I saw an "IT" from Florida that was emailed me at home that looked cute.
The Kewet is also good but hard to find. There are some IT's in Florida but
I forget the website at the moment. Could search google. I was looking at
converting a Cushman 3-wheeler patrol vehicle.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: hybrid battery question
>
> Thanks a lot for the responses to the battery question. I have forwarded
> them to the young lady who was interested and hope she will decide to buy
> a hybrid when she is shopping for a new car.
>
> David and Bob, you made me feel terribly guilty about even considering a
> gasoline powered car so I will now investigate what is out there in NEV
> land. I was wavering over which way to go and I think you guys pushed me
> back in the appropriate direction. I do not need to go very far, or very
> fast. I just retired and will now be spending my time helping out at the
> ice skating studio so wanted a car with the following features:
> - brakes always work
>
> - lights allow me to see at night, and come on without having to bang the
> dashboard multiple times
>
> - windshield wipers don't fall off at night in the middle of a storm
>
> - contactors all work
>
> For several months I have had functional EVs, thanks to the efforts of
> Richard Furniss who replaced a lot of parts and did a lot of work. Now
> they are falling apart again because they are old. Richard has a job, is
> President of the LVEVA, has a family, etc. so is not sitting around
> waiting to work on my cars, but fits them in when he has time and it is
> not too hot in his garage. It was pretty easy to ride my electric bike to
> my office or take the bus on really rainy days, so it wasn't too big a
> deal when the cars were all broken. Getting to the ice studio is more
> difficult as I will have my skates in my backpack, the route is uphill
> coming home, and none of the bus routes go close. Also, I have an elderly
> dog who may need to go in for medical care and although she is small,
> hauling her on my bike would not be practical, especially if it happens to
> be one of our 117 degree days. So, I think a NEV would serve my purposes
> reasonably well. An Insight would be way more luxurious than I need. Any
> recommendations as to which NEVs are really cool? Lee Iacocca had one a
> few years ago that was very cute but I don't know if it is still being
> built.
>
> As a member of the Citizens Advisory Committee for the RTC I have the
> opportunity to inquire about the installation of bicycle lockers and
> electric vehicle charging whenever there are discussions about new
> facilities. I really should be driving something that needs the EV
> charging so I can plug in and report back on how great it is, when they
> finally turn the power on. It sounds like we may be getting close to
> having charging in the park-and-ride locations.
>
> Thanks again for the hybrid info.
>
> Gail
>
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Bob Rice wrote:
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David (Battery Boy) Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "EV Discussion List" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 10:58 PM
> > Subject: Re: hybrid battery question
> >
> >
> > > Eee gads, Gail is talking about using GASOLINE! What is the world
coming
> > to?
> > > BB
> > > Hi All;
> >
> > The OILIES are winning! Sigh, when EVen Gail is looking for a
gasser.
> > But at least she is looking in the right place.IMHO I think you would be
> > very happy, for now, with a Insite. Ask John Wayland about his, they are
> > still honeymooning at 70 MPG or better.
> >
> > Seeya
> >
> > Bob
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Segway is a great tool for getting around campus, short commutes and the like.
I couldn't recommend using them with ice skates. Range is ok (12-15 miles). The
issue would be time. at 12 mph top speed, 3 miles commute would be 15-20
minutes, but depending on traffic (people walking), it could be more.
It is fun to ride, not too difficult to get comfortable with. It is a little
heavy for putting into a pickup truck. It will fit into some cars. I doubt a
bus.
Lots of fun, but a little much $ (a GEM electric might work better)
Peter
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> All right, how about substantial proof? Or even
>> substantiated proof?
>
> I think the multiple articles, road/track tests of
> the Trihawk Stu put up are real proof. Now where is
> yours?
Uhh? Sorry, but that article did NOT claim that the trihawk is better
than all 4wh race cars.
They did claim better skid pad tests than 'many' sportscars, but not all
of them.
Try again.
> Morgan's 60 yr race winning records is also proof.
Proof of what? That it won races a long time ago? That doesn't prove
that 3wh are better than 4wh, especially when we are talking about modern
race cars.
I noticed you've dropped that part of the subject line. Are you trying to
change the subject so you can claim you are right?
>> Hmm, as I recall you frequently state that 3wh out
>> perform 4wh, period.
>
> I said most any.
No you didn't and frequently don't. This started out with someon asking
if a 3wh racecar would out perform a 4wh racecar and you said "yes!"
> There are a few racing 4whs that
> are as good or maybe better but cost $200k or so vs my
> $13k. I'll take that thank you ;-))
You mean most racecars (many of which cost less than $13K), and you
haven't even tested yours yet, so at this point you don't KNOW that it
will outperform a VW bug.
>> From: http://www.rqriley.com/3-wheel.htm
>> "Designing to the three-wheeler's inherent
>> characteristics can produce a
>> high-performance machine that will out corner many
>> four-wheelers."
>> Note it says "many" not "all"
>
> As above, there are a few racing , high $
> sportscars 4wheelers that will and some custom ones.
And you are basing this statement on what? Oh yeah, your opinion again.
>> Also read the part about, "Rollover Stability of
>> Conventional Non-Tilting
>> Three-Wheeler" They talk about widening the track,
>> lengthening the
>> wheelbase, or lowering the COG to obtain rollover
>> stability that "...can
>> equal the rollover resistance of a four wheel car"
>
> And I take it even farther by optimizing them with
> Batt weight for really excellent handling.
Which would also help a 4wh and maintain it's advantages.
> Did you read the part about transistion response
> being about 3x's as quick? How much will that save in
> a road course?
Yes, but he didn't bother to back up that claim, as well as several other
questionable claims in the article.
Personally I don't believe everything I read just because someone wrote it.
> How about almost no polar moment?
That's not true, logically it can't even be true. Lower polar moment,
maybe. Even then that depends on your choice of components for the wheels
and suspension, etc. and placement of batteries, etc.
It's quite possible that due to the reduced floor space your 3wh will have
a HIGHER polar moment than an equivelent (length/width) 4wh. Since the
wheels HAVE to be closer to the COG in a 3wh.
>> Consider, if we have the exact same track and
>> wheelbase, then the triangle
>> formed by the wheels of a 3wh will fit inside the
>> rectangle of the 4wh.
>> Simple geometry will prove that you can form a cone
>> with a larger base
>> inside the rectangle than will fit inside the
>> triangle.
>> This means that the 4wh design can handle higher
>> cornering loads than an
>> equivalent 3wh.
>
> It better to handle it's higher weight, polar
> moment, slower transistion time it has.
Until you offer some logical reason why 3wh save as much weight as you
claim, I'm not going to even discuss any of your claims based on the lower
weight.
> But all these make it handle much slower, worse
> than a 3wh EV!! And that doesn't include being able to
> take corners sharper from being narrower in the rear.
Since racecars frequently slide the rear end out in corners this isn't
much of an advantage.
> So what little advantage in apparent track width is
> swamped by it's other deficencies.
Which deficiencies? Please back up your claims with SOMETHING.
> And I have designed
> out the track width advantage anyways as the tires are
> the cornering limiting factor, not stability, no?
In a race car? Yes, but only if you accept that limit. If you do, then
you will loose to the 4wh race cars with better traction.
>> >> If you keep all other design constraints the same
>> >> (except number of
>> >> wheels), then logically speaking a well designed
>> >> three wheeler can NOT
>> >> handle all situations as well as a well designed
>> >> four wheeler.
>> >
>> > But just the opposite is sometimes true that
>> 4wh
>> > cannot handle some things as well as a 3wh can.
>>
>> Such as? This is basically what I was referring too
>> earlier, your
>> propensity to make statements, without backing them
>> up.
>
> You have made up a few yourself ;-))
I believe I stated reasons for all of my claims, can you point out the
ones I missed?
> I was refering to sharper turning, faster
> transistion time, lower polar moment, lower CG,less
> weight
Please show how you get
1) sharper turning (other than narrower rear end)
2) faster transistion time? (other than someone else unsubstantiated claims)
3) lower CG??? Three wheels does cause lower CG.
4) I'm still waiting for you to explain you lower weight claims.
>so my statements were based on facts.
Andthose facts are? Proven how?
> Yours? Wishful thinking, lack of 3wh knowledge,
> assumptions.
Now you are making assumptions, inluding unfounded claims about my lack of
knowledge of which YOU know zip.
>> Umm, bullsh__ I don't know of ANY 4wh vehicle where
>> one wheel, suspension
>> and unneeded frame equals 1/4 of the total weight.
>> In order to drop that much weight you are changing
>> some other design
>> criteria.
>
> No I don't. As David said, you can lower
> body/frame weight as the forces are so much lower in
> frame torsion with 1 rear wheel vs 2. You also forget
> extra drivetrain componants like extra driveshaft,
> diff, ect.
> So all of this easily gives a 1/4 less weight
> advantage and better performance with the same power.
On a battery powered vehicle? Where 1/2 it's weight comes from batteries?
I don't think so. What about all the other heavy components? Motor? Driver?
Even on a ICE it wouldn't add up to 1/4.
>> It depends on what part of handling you want to
>> optimize. I said "approx
>> 70%" because most folks prefer to improve cornering
>> at the expense of a
>> small drop in maximum braking ability.
>> In fact if you check out some of the actual 3wh
>> designs folks have been
>> pointing out, some (like the Trihawk) even go as far
>> as 75%.
>
> They may be weighing it without the driver which
> when in the seat, brings it to 66-34 ratio probably.
No not even likely <rolls eyes>.
Besides 70% assumes the driver is sitting in the vehicle. As I said this
is to improve cornering while sacrificing a small amount of braking.
>> > Any where do you have any proof that ever
>> > happened? With it's low CG, my E woody has no
>> brake
>> > dive at all. So lets see your proof on that?
>>
>> What does "dive" have to do with anything? As for
>> proof that it's ever
>> happened, I'm assuming you mean endos? There are
>
> First you must dive before you can endo so if you
> don't even dive, no chance of endo.
Not true, vehicle without suspension can endo and they CAN'T dive.
Endoing is cause by the COG moving in front of the front contact patch,
brake dive can contribute to it, but is NOT required for it to happen.
Besides I didn't claim that endoing was a normal problem for 3wh, it only
that it CAN be if you move the COG to far forward.
>> numerous accounts of
>> this happening on pedal powered trikes. I don't
>
> They have high CG's, narrow and nothing like my
> 3wh EV's in any way as you know, so why bring them up?
Now you're displaying your ignorance. Many of these have their COG below
their axles, perhaps 1 foot off the ground.
>> recall any on 3wh
>> motorcycles, probably because the designers took
>> this into account.
>
> Many rear engined, high CG 3wheelers have rolled
> and I have campained against them on this and other
> lists. There is no reason for a bad handling 3wheeler
> as it takes the same amount of materials, work to
> build a good or bad one.
> But the same can be said for SUV's too.
Absolutely, that was my point. But with their narrower footprint 3wh come
closer to the edge and can easily go over it.
>> It is possible to build a commuter vehicle where the
>> maximum g force
>> available from the tires limits the COG cone to the
>> point where it sits
>> entirely inside the triangle formed by the wheels.
>
> Yes and exactly what I have done.
Never claimed otherwise. I was disputing your claims that a 3wh racecar
would be superiour to a 4wh racecar, and your frequent claims that 3wh are
naturally superiour to 4wh.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<<Too expensive for what it is last time I looked at it. Remember all
the hype for it? "Cities will be built around this." Maybe if it was
~$20, everyone would have one....>>
No, I don't remember any hype for it. Ever. Period.
In fact, I have never ever heard of one, or seen one, until the other day. I
think it's one of those differences between living in the southeast US vs.,
say, the west coast. It certainly wasn't marketed, advertised, hyped, etc. in
any place I've ever lived.
My interest in it wasn't because I wanted one. Personally, I wouldn't pay
$500 for it, and it simply amazes me that people cheerfully shell out $5000. I
think to myself "who are these people?" My interest was strictly business,
seeing as how this guy is a big distributor, and looking to do more business
where I am currently living. Just a thought is all, really.
Thanks.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
400CFM from a 120mm fan? I'm a bit skeptical...
I've been able to find one from Delta that will do 245CFM at 48V and
1.28A, but it is a rare monster. I stole a peek inside my T-Rex &
found it has a 24V, 450mA Elina fan...they don't seem to offer anything
better than 120CFM.
So, I'm thinking maybe 220CFM 12V would be more than enough? Granted,
there are still issues of air circulation in the trunk and making sure
that all 220CFM (less in reality, of course) pass over the T-Rex and
vent out of the trunk, but that's probably doable. Still, since you
were one of the designers this thing, I'm probably going to follow your
judgment on the matter, and just try to squeeze Mr. T-Rex in the engine
compartment with everything else. It does involve cutting fewer holes
in my car, and less chance of zorching my controller.
Thanks, Rich!
-Ben
On Aug 1, 2005, at 2:48 PM, Rich Rudman wrote:
Very Bad...
You need about 500 CFM of cool dry air. Or a fan from the outside that
is
the same as the fan on the T-Rex. That's a 4.7(120MM) moving about 400
CFM
in free air.
We didn't put that size of fan in there for fun....We did it for a
reason....
Rich Rudman
Manzanita Micro
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Apollonio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 10:28 AM
Subject: DCP T-Rex and DC/DC in closed space?
Hi all,
For my Porsche 914 conversion, I'm considering mounting my controller,
a DCP T-Rex 1000, and my DCP DC/DC converter in the car's rear trunk.
There's enough clearance to fit them, even with the removable top
stored in the trunk, and it would protect them from the elements (plus
look nice). However, I am concerned that the lack of airflow could
cause problems. Is this a decidedly bad idea? How about if I add
some
ventilation fans?
Thanks
-Ben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerry dycus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 10:50 PM
Subject: My EV trike building article August ESSN is up!
>
>
> Hi All,
> Here is the EV article on how to build the
> GC transaxle based trike below. It's just part 1 of 2.
> It's my first published work ;-)
> We had 21,000 downloads last month and only
> 7 months old.
> HTH's,
> > Jerry Dycus
> >
> > > Hi Jerry;
Congrats! Way to go, getting the EV word out. Hey EVerybody surf over to
ESSN, lots of fun stuff there. He Lone Wolf has the right idea to tread a
little lighter on Earth. That you, Jerry, sitting on thre Trike in the
Pix?The pix of the wind turbine and the Junkers plane. He just LIKES
Junkers, so he shared it with us. My kinda guy<g>!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bob, don't klick on it it just came up that way??> > > Larry D. Barr
> > > Editor/Publisher, Energy Self Sufficiency
> > Newsletter
> > > http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html
> > > Owner, Rebel Wolf Energy Systems
> > > http://www.rebelwolf.com/
> > > Founder/Moderator, 12VDC Power group
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/12VDC_Power
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> > If you want narrow, then you are correct.
>> Though
>> > a lot has to be said for just 2 wheels for real
>> eff.
>>
>> True, but 2wh are not self-stable when stopped. Well
>> not generally, I've
>
> But it's quite easy to put your feet down!! Or you
> can do outriggers, ect. Many ways to skin that cat.
Sure, but I want to include a pedal powered generator, you it's a little
hard to pedal when you feet are on the ground. Not to mention the
problems foot holes/trapdoors add to an aerodynamic body.
I don't outriggers. You either have to remember to deploy them, or add an
automated system which adds complexity and another failure point.
Besides, I've seen the results of a couple crashes caused by failure to
remember to deploy or retract outriggers.
I'm trying to keep it simple.
>> IIRC the GM lean machine used hydraulics and a
>> computer to control the
>
> No it doesn't.
> It uses foot pedals cconnect to the rear wheel
> chassis at slow or high speed for upright, tilt and
Ahh yes, you're correct. I was thinking of the tilting tadpole I saw in
mother earth a while back, can't remember what it was called now.
Anyway, the lean machine is very similar to what I'm planning.
> One could use many methods like a lever, brake,
> pedals working on the rear wheel chassis for upright
> at dead slow, stopped. Quite easy though I prefer feet
> on the ground. KIS
Pedals are a no-go for the above stated reason. I'm experimenting with
different lever activated systems. Mostly trying to see whether I want
one center mounter tiller or two side mounted levers (one for each hand)
The pedaling requirement messes up a lot of otherwise good ideas.
>
> But how would you turn at very low speeds?
That has been a problem, trying to find a design that works well at high
and low speeds. I've come up with a couple designs that work, but they
are more complex than I like.
> If you
> have an angled gooseneck in the middle at higher
> speeds it will have high forces in a turn and always
> need to fight it from the crown in the road.
Current design has the pivot below the shoulders and it's center axis
intersects the ground slightly in front of the front wheel contact patch.
Kind of akward at low speeds though.
> While very low height and frontal area gives low
> aero drag, I refuse to do it despite the drag savings
> as you have too much chance of being road kill! I
> believe in enough height, eyes at 48", to see and be
> seen as the best way to stay alive.
Being seen isn't all it's cracked up to be. I've been hit by cars (while
cycling) several times. On two occasions the driver difinitely saw me and
hit me anyway. I prefer being able to avoid the accident by manuvering if
possible. Small vehicles with low centers of gavity have the advantage
here. 48" eyelevel raises the COG way to high for my tastes.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor,
'Freedom Car' is not a GM program. It is the name that
DOE has given to the whole slew of their advanced
vehicle development programs, including recently the
massive fuel cell development and fleet demonstration
efforts.
see :
http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/about/partnerships/freedomcar/index.shtml
also, Jerry has been pretty consistent calling his
three wheeler 'Freedom EV', which from a copyright
perspective (and consumer recognition perspective) is
definitely different than 'Freedom Car'.
I like the name Freedom EV; i hope I also like the car
(trike).
~fortunat
--- Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, the name "Freedom car" (program) was taken by
> GM for quite a
> long time, for instance part of this program is GM's
> Sequel(FCEV):
>
http://www.gmeurope.com/technology/downloads/BURNS_SequelLon1119.pdf
>
> Jerry couldn't care less of course, but this may be
> confusing
> to someone who already read of existing "Freedom"
> vehicles before
> this name appeared on EVDL. Usually the trade marks
> and such program
> names are respected *at least* to avoid confusion.
>
> Victor
>
>
> ProEV wrote:
> > Hey Everybody,
> >
> ...
> >
> > < As the tooling is about done on the Freedom
> EV, we
> > will see fairly soon, won't we?
> > I hope to join the Imp EV soon on the SCCA
> courses
> > here in Fla within a yr. >
>
>
> --
> Victor
> '91 ACRX - something different
>
>
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: Ampabout East, an' Stuff
> Bob Rice wrote:
>
> >right after my CitiCar daze,
>
> How did you get involved with that anyways?
>
> Hi Ryan;
Well, a long story. I was working at Bob Aronson's Electric Fuel
Propulsion of Detroit, I started there in the end of the Mars 2 converted
Renault R -10's , say 68-or9, he was doing for anybody that wanted to spend
5k for a Renault Electric. Mostly power co.s Jey Leno could have walked in
to our door and bought all he wanted<g>!But this was in a different time in
a galexy far far away. Bob Beaumont was one of the principles in EFP back in
those daze. He wanted to take a different tack than Bob A as to the way to
go with EV's. Beau wanted to go lightweight, a NEV in those times. He had
played with golf carts gearing them up to 30 or so, and liked the results.
He wanted to lighten things up rather than Bob A's desire to convert BIG
cars. I think Roland Weiench has one of the Aronson Big Boys he built as a
one-off, a few years later. Things didn't look too good at EFP and Bob B
made us, Ron Gremban an' I an offer we didn't, can't say COULDN'T refuse. To
stay in EV's and be able to eat, and a roof over our heads. Down side was
the Citicar operation was in Sebring FLA, a place that isn't fit for human
habitation! Sorry you FLA philes, I can't take the 95 degree heat AND humidy
day in day out. They say the coast of FLA is nicer?OK it WAS nice in the
winter although I do remember frost in Frostproof, there IS a town in FLA
named that, I'm not making this up!!Just down the road from Sebring.But it
warmed up to a nice temp by lunchtime.
Back to the story, So I was in on the ground floor at Citicar. This made
us painfully aware of how much goes into building a car, ANY car, from
scratch. OK ,come up with a working DOOR that will close, windows lifting
mechanizing, as you familiar with Citicars we did a crappy job.Guilty, for
the easy to make solid axle in front. It was a copy of my Taiwan homemade
car of a few years earlier. Rugged, easy to fabricate, as was the Gerdes
Disc brake caliper. Those were aircraft stuff, but they dragged like the
crappy trailer rear brake drums, we couldn't seen to get round drums or
discs back then, The leaf springs were golf cart stuff, as were the 2 hp
motors that we were using, that were overloaded running along on level
ground. The "Controller" Guilty! A too simple series parallel setup without
enough softening resistors. Wiring too flimsy. Gees! If I knew what I know
now, but, sorry Citicar guyz I was on a rocky learning curve, too. Gees If
we coulda had Alltraxes back then, a decent a frame suspension and a better
BODY! I hated that THING that they went with. I'm a big guy, The damn
windshield is right in my face, no seat adjustment, one size doesn't fit
all! Jerry? Where were you when we NEEDED you<g>!??I wanted to slant the
flat windshield up at the botton, so you woulda had a bit of face room, it
woulda resembled his inclosed golf cart, the grandpa of the Citicar. Had we
built the car with fiberglas instead of the 4th grade looking industrial
arts class job with the abs plastic, crap body that we settled with. OK
those were and Sebring Non Life and climate Ron an' I had had enough. I went
back to CT, finding a job with Amtrak, that lasted til last week, when I"
pulled the pin," retired, after 30 years. See my OTHER post.
OK other stuff;
>
> >at Warfield, Chicago, always fun to visit a DC motor factory, to see
> the motors >we know and love being born.
>
> Try and get some pics of one of those mythical 15" monsters...
> I'll look around<g>!
> Also see if they have anything even more fierce that could be put in an
EV...
>
> I only want the most fiercest motor in all the land... ;)
>
I'll ASK around, how deep are your pockets??
> Might have to see what one of these 13" motors is good for... ( I
> suspect the 15" might not have much rpm potential?)
>
> Just what is the absolute upper amp limit of the 13" motor anyways?
Howbout a killer Jim Husted siamonise setup like Wayland has?
See that at Woodburn, seeya there?
Bob
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
1900 pounds is not an option. One string of heavy batteries that would act
like the little Optimas & Exides is what I am after. The Deka battery you
mentioned would put a 156v pack at just over 800 pounds. This should give
good performance with a Baby Zilla. Limited to 300 amps it would also help
range. Now Otmar may have other ideas but this 1980 Rabbit isn't going to
be driven too hard. It's for San Francisco and it's hills so 300 amps will
be needed on occaision. What might also work is two strings of 26 Exide
batteries but I shudder at the price of that pack. It would also give
better range at just over 1000 pounds. The whole point of this question is
to get away from large amounts of small batteries. This is to save money.
Isn't there anything out there that is tough as an Optima or Exide at about
60 pounds? Lawrence Rhodes.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Deka dominato. Now: Are they as good as Optima or Exide?
On 1 Aug 2005 at 13:28, Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
I'm looking for a battery with more weight(for more range, About a 60 to
70pound battery) for a 156v pack. How would the Deka batteries stack up?
You could use the 8G27s, but you'd need to keep current under 300 amps for
a
single string. If you could find a used Brusa AC drive (GT20 motor and
AMC
325 controller, 156-180v, 250a max), that would work nicely in a light EV
(<
2500 lb).
Or, use the 8GGC2 - 6 volt golf car batteries. C20 = 180ah, RC75 = 92
min.
Those should be good for 550 amp loads. A 156v pack would be pretty
massive
though - almost 1900 lb.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to the "from" address above may not reach me. To
send me a private message, please use evdl at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/car/88239269.html Seen on Craigs List.
Don't email me about it. I have no relation other than pointing out an
Electric for sale. I wouldn't pay 2500 for it though.
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>From Slashdot
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/01/1040217&tid=14
<http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/01/1040217&tid=14>
On July 27, scientists at the National Nuclear Security
Administration's Nevada Test Site said they generated a current equal to
about four times all the electrical current on Earth. During the few
millionths of a second that it operated, the 650-ton Atlas pulsed-power
generator discharged about 19 million amps of current through an
aluminum cylindrical shell about the size of a tuna can. Official news
release is available from the DOE
<http://www.nv.doe.gov/news&pubs/newsreleases/Pdfs/ATLAS_Resumes_Work_NT
S_07272005.pdf> (PDF).
19 million amps - and it only weighs 650 tons :-)
Mark
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick 'Sharkey' Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2005 12:33 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Tubes
>
> On 2005-08-01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I knew all that (sorry). Those are the "trees." I wanted the
> > "forest," which you (thankfully) just provided. You just told me it
> > was a variable resistor. That's what I wanted. Thanks anyway, though.
>
...
snip
...
> Now, consider that a MOSFET is a variable resistor which
> can be twiddled very quickly between a very high resistance
> and a very low resistance ...
>
> -----sharks
The "Very fast" part is where much the heating of the FET* happens.
Since it takes some fraction of a second to switch from very high to very low,
it must spend that time at the in-between resistances.
Obviously, the faster the FET can switch, the less heating accures.
Also, the less often you do the switching, the better. There are practical
lower limits for switching frequency, due to the other parts in the system like
capacitors and motor.
I most of the EV motor controllers I've seen switch at a steady frequency
around 20,000 cycles per second (20 khz), some faster , some slower.
Then they vary the duration (width) of the "on" pulse to get different
effective voltages at the motor.
Some controllers change to a lower frequency (5 khz?) at low power levels to
reduce heating by keeping the switching period a small percent of the on period.
*MOSFET is a "sub-species" of FET, the semiconductors that act the most like
tubes. MOSFET = Metal Oxide Semiconductor-Field Effect Transistor
Mike Shipway
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:40 AM
Subject: What would you do with 19 million amps?
> >From Slashdot
> http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/01/1040217&tid=14
> <http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/01/1040217&tid=14>
>
> On July 27, scientists at the National Nuclear Security
> Administration's Nevada Test Site said they generated a current equal to
> about four times all the electrical current on Earth. During the few
> millionths of a second that it operated, the 650-ton Atlas pulsed-power
> generator discharged about 19 million amps of current through an
> aluminum cylindrical shell about the size of a tuna can. Official news
> release is available from the DOE
> <http://www.nv.doe.gov/news&pubs/newsreleases/Pdfs/ATLAS_Resumes_Work_NT
> S_07272005.pdf> (PDF).
>
> 19 million amps - and it only weighs 650 tons :-)Definately not an on
bored charger!
>
> Mark
>
> Hey! What a few hundred tons among friends?Old RR expression, 19 million
ampsGood for a few White Zombie runs at Woodburn!
A new charger for Rich?
Seeya
Bob
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi EVerybody;
Seems like were getting a bit off track with the 3 wheeler thing. Sorta
like the Auto mags that sneer at Hybrid cars performance. Hell, the Prius,
old one, for example, has plenty of "Go" for most of us. I mean really how
often, J. Wayland excepted<g> NEED 0-to60 in 4 or 5 seconds. Gees! People
out there can't EVen merge onto the freeway right with a car dripping with
GO. How many times do you have to slam on the brakes to dodge somebody in a
fast enough car to merge gracefully?That DON'T!
To the point. If the 3 wheeler will give decent, safe, non capsizing
handling with REASONABLE use. Thats all that matters. An after market would
spring up that you could gussy it up to climb walls, run across ceilings ,
whatEVer. But for now lets think of reasonable speed and handling BREAKING
the stranglehold of Big Oil. The wonder of Oil Free transportation, and a
little fun, easy to park, maintain, cheap to buy. And pride in being
different, actually DOING something about consumption, talk is cheap, DOING
stuff takes a bit more. I have put my money where my mouth is. I believe, in
EV's and new ideas. A Better Sparrow, has Jerry here,a TWO seater so you can
tale Whomever with you AND bring home the groceries.
Who ELSE out there is taking the car by the horns and DOING something?
Well, OK there is the Commuter car, but that's a bit pricy, convert a
Something Else to an EV, that's what WE are doing, because we BELIEVE in
EV's and I know they work.Driving my crappy old Rabbit for 6 years now. I
say crappy because it is, what the hell, an OLD car. I don't care it shows
that a nobody can make a working EV, use it to go to all the enchanting
places I go EVeryday, work, Well That's out now, just retired. But
everywhere else I need to go in Life.Well, cheating ,to Woodburn, gotta use
Prius this year.
I can see, EVentually a 13k or so Freedom EV in alotta guyz driveways, in
a few years. EVers first, Joe Sixpack, down the road when he sees the EVer
driving it every day, and fed up with gas prices. His wife thinks it's
"Cute" trys it and wants one of her own, SHE picks out the color<g>!
Jerry's 3 wheeler can, and will, be basic transportation, like an old
V-Dub Beatle. You old timers remember those? NO Radio, NO gas gage, no heat,
Ha Ha! But you loved it's willingness, it wanted to run, was quirky and
cute, went like hell in snow,etc! Not to mention the great tongue in cheek
ads they did.
Before getting carried off in clouds of contentment, on anything with
wheels, tha talent of the List will be Jerry's best asset, as it would be if
I had Bill Gates money, or Osamas' I would, could hire many of you for a no
holds barred EV. Bear with us, I want to see my dream of SOME form of EV
that can be fun and usefull, make the grade. and be easy to maintain. Gail,
I think we have something you could use? Hang in there. Your EV may be along
in our lifetime?!
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerry dycus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 10:25 PM
Subject: RE: Racing 3wheels,
> Snip snip snip here.
Leave the racing stuff to those who choose to, lets get something in
production here.
OK down from my soapbox, step right up...over to you.
Seeya at Woodburn!
Bob
--- End Message ---
