EV Digest 4553
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Thoughts on Range
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Thoughts on Range
by John Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Battery de-sulfation
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Details, production costs, ect Re: Freedom EV by Jerry Dycus
by "Tom Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Thoughts on Range
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Thoughts on Range
by John Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Thoughts on Range
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Freedom EV by Jerry Dycus
by "Tom Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: E-Meter Questions
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Fuel cell bike
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Fuel cell bike
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Fuel cell bike
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: E-Meter Questions
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: PWM Controller for motor and charging?
by "Nick 'Sharkey' Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Fuel cell bike
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Range in a Prizm
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: PWM Controller for motor and charging?
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Deka Intimidator Test Results
by David Kronstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Toronto Canada newspaper article "Plug in to new hybrid concepts"
by Lock Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Where the heck are you thinking of putting them? Is the back seat coming
out?
From: Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Range
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 15:25:29 -0400
I will be *extremely* interested in your results, as I'm thinking of
replacing the Prizm's pack with 250-300 of these batteries. Popping up the
voltage a bit would be nice, but more importantly one can run the car for a
true 40ah. If I tried to do that with the 52ah Hawkers, they would die.
My guess is you will get a nice little boost. So far a single string of 30
of these batteries powers my Elec-trak much better than the 5 year old
T105's. It also easily out-performs six Hawker Genesis 26ah batteries in a
3*2 string (52ah)
It's kind of weird to run the tractor around with a pack of batteries that
small. I can't wait for snow.
Chris
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
John,
Why do you need to keep Optimas at all?
John G. Lussmyer wrote:
I'm going to try running my Sparrow on BB600 NiCd cells. 137 of them to
be exact.
So the pack will be:
NiCd Optima YT
164V 156V (nominal)
452 lbs 558 lbs
~40AH ~45AH (? at 65A)
The NiCd's are a lot stiffer than the YT's. Their voltage stays up
pretty well until the very end. They also don't suffer from Cold weather
nearly as much.
I think I'll get more useable range, since you REALLY don't want to take
the YT's down to 80 or 90% DOD, and the NiCd's don't really care. (Just
don't reverse them.)
(Note that this is a non-trivial conversion, as I'll have to modify the
under-seat battery box.)
Any comments or ideas?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 01:27 PM 8/3/2005, you wrote:
Where the heck are you thinking of putting them? Is the back seat coming out?
65 under the seat, 72 up front. (back seat? in a Sparrow????)
This does require modifying the under-seat battery box to be about 1"
deeper. (PITA)
If I didn't need relatively easy access to the tops of the cells, I could
probably get 20 more under the seat.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The "blind" part applies to situations where the results are
subjective. It is not necessary to rely on subjective measurements in
this case so "blinding" the test is unnecessary. Some (most) reports
are perhaps based on how they "feel" about battery capacity, stating
they used that pulser recovered trolling motor "all day" with little
objective measure. OK, yeah, those guys could benefit from double
blinding it but the results are still of little value. The obvious
solution is to take objective measurements, which is totally
straightforward with a battery.
Of course an unbiased tester is essential in either case. Using biased
procedures, reporting exaggerations, misrepresentations, or outright
lies of course invalidates the results in any study, blind or not.
Danny
Lee Hart wrote:
Neon John wrote:
A "double blind placebo controlled trial" refers to tests
involving human subjects.
I agree. We don't need all this for a battery test.
But it helps if the investigator is "blind" (doesn't know which test
data was produced by which charger). Human nature being what it is,
people will inadvertently (or deliberately) "bias" the test when they
know the outcome they want.
For example, you just paid $50 for a miracle battery charger. You want
it to work so your wife won't blame you for wasting money. So, you sorta
lie to yourself about the test results. When you test the new charger,
you don't take careful measurements and exaggerate the benefits. When
you test the old one, you under-estimate its performance.
The cure is a blind test. Have someone else charge the battery, and not
tell you which charger was used. Or put the two chargers in identical
boxes so you don't know which is which. You test it, and evaluate the
results (#1 was better). THEN you find out which one charger #1 is. It
may well turn out #1 is your old chargeg, not the fancy new one that you
hoped would "win".
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks, Jerry, for telling us about your Freedom EV. I'll look forward
to learning more as work on the car progresses.
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerry dycus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 5:37 AM
Subject: Details, production costs, ect Re: Freedom EV by Jerry Dycus
Hi Tom and All,
--- Tom Shay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Freedom EV has be mentioned a number of times on
this
discussion list, but is there somewhere on the
Internet to get details
about the car including pictures and information
about building
progress?
The only place now is the EVProduction Wiki with
pics under progress and pics of the white mock up are
under Jerry Dycus or E woody in the EV Photo Album.
Sorry I don't know how to put up the URLs.
The production tooling for the composite
unibody/chassis is just about finished with putting on
the final touches over the next few days as I
rearrange my shop to make room for producing them.
I don't like to put up a website until I have
something to sell and the first ones are spoken for
anyway by some of those supporting it so really no
need to sell for a while. And I want a good finished
one, a small factory before I go mainsteam public with
it. I'm doing it underground at home to save money
until sales allow me to get a real production place.
If you really want to know more details, there is
a list, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, see if that
works now I've changed my browser settings, though it
costs at least $25 to join though most put in much
more than that. That is where the money to do this is
coming from, from members of this and other lists I'm
on that want to see EV's put into production that
joined me. You would recconize many of them.
And if anyone wants to go into production of their
own EV, we are there to help you as that's the goal,
not just the Freedom EV. Most of the details needed to
do just that are already in it's archive.
Interestingly, it is only costing about $10k to
put it into production!! And people say it costs a lot
to do that!! Of course that's mostly for parts, some
proffessional mold work as I do most all the design,
labor for free.
And at $13k base price before options like A/C,
unlimited range generator, there is quite a good
profit built in.
I have been proposing this for many yrs and some
decided to see if I could do it ;-)) I, with my boat ,
composite low volume production experience made me
about the best one to actually get this done.
Though no reason others couldn't use a kitcar like
a Ferrari Daytona knock off, Fiberfab Valkrie
GT-40, ect to do the same with much less work. These
done right and Waylandized, could easily go for $50k+.
Expect a Freedom composite unibody/chassis in
about a month, a glider in about 2-3 months and a
finished one in 3-4 months depending on weather, money
coming in, luck in finding good sources of the many
parts needed which is the hard part.
I'll build only the first 2 completely then have
the glass production guys build the composite part and
hire others to assemble the production ones.
As it's a low production method with an upper
limit of about 3,000/factory/yr I'll be eventually
selling EV factories in a 40" container to those who
may want to do this in other states and countries as
there is already much interest in them.
I hope these matasisize into many more, different
EV's as they get experience, put their own mark on the
EV's/hybrids.
Right now could use a good suspension person who
could help in finding good ball joint, bushings,
steering parts sources at reasonable prices as that is
the most vexing problem at the moment. Fla has few
sources of them. I have fall back parts but would like
better ones.
While I will make good money on this, it's
purpose is to spread EV's through the county and
inspire others to do the same.
I'm not a long term production person but a
design, production setup, problem solver so once this
is going well, I'll sell out and just design, consult,
help and move on to non dam river/tidal electric
generators where the money really is amoung other
things.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How many pounds of each will you use? The BB's aren't much better than lead
density wise. You can draw them down more. 200 weigh 680 pounds. Just
compare the weights to the Optimas and you should get that ratio of range.
You have 568 pounds. How does that compare to the Optima weight? LR....
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Lussmyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Range
At 11:08 AM 8/3/2005, you wrote:
Why do you need to keep Optimas at all?
I'm not. I was just comparing the BB600 pack that I am planning on using,
to the "normal" Optima YT pack that a Sparrow uses.
I'm kind of wondering if I'll get much of a range improvement with the
BB600 cells.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't know but he said the controller will now be silent. Lawrence
Rhodes..............
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: "Zappylist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
Cool, what part number fet is going into it? What switching freq is it
using?
Danny
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
My 1221B repair and upgrade to 144vdc will be using 35 56amp fets. Will
be totally silent. Will see 1900 amps for 250ms. Will be 900 amps
maximum. They count on 150 amps continuous on level ground. Jim at
Logixsystems prides himself on making a tough controller out of the
Curtis line. I'll post to the list about my success or failure with this
controller. Thanks to the Zappy list for this information. It is going
to cost me 750 dollars. Craig (Deafscooter) take note.
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
415-821-3519
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 01:56 PM 8/3/2005, you wrote:
How many pounds of each will you use? The BB's aren't much better than
lead density wise. You can draw them down more. 200 weigh 680
pounds. Just compare the weights to the Optimas and you should get that
ratio of range. You have 568 pounds. How does that compare to the Optima
weight? LR....
See my earlier message that contained exact counts and weights. (137
BB600's vs 13 YT's)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OOPs, guess maybe I should have started a new thread. It was Chris's Prizm
I was wondering about.
From: John Lussmyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Range
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:40:06 -0700
At 01:27 PM 8/3/2005, you wrote:
Where the heck are you thinking of putting them? Is the back seat coming
out?
65 under the seat, 72 up front. (back seat? in a Sparrow????)
This does require modifying the under-seat battery box to be about 1"
deeper. (PITA)
If I didn't need relatively easy access to the tops of the cells, I could
probably get 20 more under the seat.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
He say's this mod will work with the B but not the C. LR. The address is
on the Voltage Forum. Can't see that site now. LR.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
On Aug 3, 2005, at 11:20 AM, Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
My 1221B repair and upgrade to 144vdc will be using 35 56amp fets. Will
be totally silent. Will see 1900 amps for 250ms. Will be 900 amps
maximum. They count on 150 amps continuous on level ground. Jim at
Logixsystems prides himself on making a tough controller out of the
Curtis line. I'll post to the list about my success or failure with this
controller. Thanks to the Zappy list for this information. It is going
to cost me 750 dollars. Craig
Please keep us informed. I would be interested in such a modified Curtis
1221B controller. How do I contact Logixsystems? I have a spare Curtis
1221B and an EV Buggy :-)
Paul "neon" G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I know about this group. It costs $25 dollars to join the group and
read the messages. I'd join the group if it were free.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: Freedom EV by Jerry Dycus
Tom Shay wrote:
The Freedom EV has be mentioned a number of times on this
discussion list, but is there somewhere on the Internet to get details
about the car including pictures and information about building
progress?
This is the only site I know of for it so far:
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/EVProduction/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's generally not the controller that makes the noise but the motors.
The magnetic field variations physically shake the structure of the
stator, rotor, and housing.
Hmm, meethinks he's putting in a 200v IRFB260N... just a guess. Now the
biggest n-channel mosfet I could find in 200v is a 580 amps IXYS module,
it costs a lot more than 10 of those. But the mounting is far, far
easier and having 10x fewer transistors tends to make it 10x less prone
to failure. IXYS looks like something they put a lot of quality
control into too. IXYS makes some rocking stuff- that huge module has a
ceramic insulated backing so there's no issues with insulator failure
and little issue with insulator thermal resistance. They put cable
screw terminals on the component itself so you don't have the big issues
associated with running hundreds of amps through a PCB trace either.
Danny
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
I don't know but he said the controller will now be silent. Lawrence
Rhodes..............
----- Original Message ----- From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: "Zappylist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
Cool, what part number fet is going into it? What switching freq is
it using?
Danny
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Shunts-R-Us:
http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=search&item=SNT-600&type=store
Now a shunt may work to 2.5x- even 10x its value- for a brief pulse.
That is a question of how much thermal capacity it has to prevent it
heating up to the point where it will melt from a surge. The rated
current should otherwise be a dissipation limit. But the point to keep
in mind is that the shunts are usually designed to put out 50mV at the
rated current. If you go up to 10x then it will put out 500mV, which
the meter may or may not be able to interpret. This might either exceed
the analog level the input stage is capable of handling, or the math
performed on the value inside the controller might not be able to handle
such large numbers.
Danny
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
I think they max out at 500 amps, since they're mainly meant for AC
drive vehicles, but if you need more you can just use a
double-current shunt and double the readings. Victor can give you
more info on that.
No, you use (and BRUSA makes) different shunt. 200A shunt will
work to 500A, 500A shunt will work to 2,500A and so on.
Any shunt works up to 2.5x of its rated value.
You program shunt factor in (or order preprogrammed counter),
so the readings are always true, no need to multiply anything.
Also, they can make custom shunt value for you if satandard
ones do not cover your needs for some reason.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Can't wait for the fuel cells to start wandering onto the surplus market:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0802_050802_fuelcellcycle_2.html
because I can't afford to buy a bunch of bikes and rip the cells out of
them.
How many people wouldn't change to hydrogen electric if it were
possible? OK, right now hydrogen is a little hard to come by, but then
getting a place to charge isn't convenient like a gas station either.
Danny
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Danny Miller wrote:
> Can't wait for the fuel cells to start wandering onto the surplus market:
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0802_050802_fuelcellcycle_2.html
>
>
> because I can't afford to buy a bunch of bikes and rip the cells out
> of them.
>
> How many people wouldn't change to hydrogen electric if it were
> possible? OK, right now hydrogen is a little hard to come by, but
> then getting a place to charge isn't convenient like a gas station
> either.
>
> Danny
>
If it were:
1. Possible
2. Inexpensive
3. Efficient
4. Not a carrier for coal energy
I would do it. Because it will be neither (1...4) I would not.
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://wwia.org/
http://nnytech.net/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, the electrics being discussed here aren't #2. #1 is a subjective
matter, if you want more than a very modest range it is not possible.
#4, well, don't kid yourself, over 50% of the electricity in the USA
comes from coal fired plants. There is hope hydrogen can be produced by
other means than simply burning coal for electricity used for hydrolysis
of water into hydrogen. For example some plans call for breaking down
fossil fuels such as methane directly into hydrogen. #3 is a matter of
opinion as well, electric vehicles are fairly efficient from the power
outlet on but again you're pretty much dealing with electricity that
comes from a coal fired plant.
Danny
Martin Klingensmith wrote:
If it were:
1. Possible
2. Inexpensive
3. Efficient
4. Not a carrier for coal energy
I would do it. Because it will be neither (1...4) I would not.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
>
> My 1221B repair and upgrade to 144vdc will be using 35 56amp fets. Will be
> totally silent. Will see 1900 amps for 250ms. Will be 900 amps maximum.
> They count on 150 amps continuous on level ground. Jim at Logixsystems
> prides himself on making a tough controller out of the Curtis line. I'll
> post to the list about my success or failure with this controller. Thanks to
> the Zappy list for this information. It is going to cost me 750 dollars.
I hate to say it, but I can't imaging any way to make a Curtis 1221
chassis survive 1900 amps peak, 900 amps sustained for any length of
time. The fundamental design isn't that good. Oh, I know they can make
it work for a little while; but the life expectancy is going to be poor.
Get a guarantee in writing, and hope for the best.
--
Every act of conscious learning requires the willingness to suffer an
injury to one's self-esteem. That is why young children, before they
are aware of their own self-importance, learn so easily. - Thomas Szasz
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Danny Miller wrote:
Shunts-R-Us:
http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=search&item=SNT-600&type=store
Now a shunt may work to 2.5x- even 10x its value- for a brief pulse.
What I meant, was the BRUSA shunts work up to 2.5x of rated value together
with analog conversion PCB without distortion of the current reading
and retaining spec'd accuracy. The shunt itself, of course, will
handle 5x or 10x of the current, whatever power it can dissipate,
just analog input of the converter will be overloaded.
What you show on the photo is jsut a shunt itself. Many companies
make accurate shunts. Show me 1% accurate and isolated solution
attached to it.
But the point to keep
in mind is that the shunts are usually designed to put out 50mV at the
rated current.
Usually, but this number can be anything and chosen by designer
for the circuit that is attached to the shunt. BRUSA shunts, for
instance, develop 60mV at rated current, not 50mV.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2005-08-03, Lee Hart wrote:
> Nick 'Sharkey' Moore wrote:
> > are the controllers for driving permanent-magnet motors (like the
> > Etek) just MOSFET PWM controllers?
>
> Pretty much the same. PM motors have much lower inductance, so the
> controller needs to be designed to work with very low inductance motors.
> Or, you need to add a physical inductor of 50-100 microhenries so the
> controller's current limit will work properly.
Thanks Lee (and Victor) ... the inductance thing is particularly
interesting, I hadn't thought of that. It'd be a pretty hellacious
inductor to handle the current, I guess!
(I'm really quite unlikely to try building my own controller
or even charger, but it's nice to know how they work.)
> Yes, there have been lots of controllers that do both motoring and
> regeneration. Roughly speaking, it doubles the number of semiconductors
> in the controller, or they need contactors to re-arrange the existing
> semiconductors between motor and generator operation.
Yeah, I was wondering about that. If you could use the same silicon
for motoring and regeneration, or even just for regeneration and
recharging, that'd save you a bit of money off the total cost.
(For my 48V beastie, I'm thinking that it's likely to be 300A peak drive
current, and maybe 100A peak recharge/regen current, so there's some
things for me to think about ...)
> --
> Every act of conscious learning requires the willingness to suffer an
> injury to one's self-esteem. That is why young children, before they
> are aware of their own self-importance, learn so easily. - Thomas Szasz
> --
Nice quote ... what it reminds me of is trying to learn foreign
languages ... it's much easier to learn when you're there and
you have to and you can balance self-esteem against hunger!
-----sharks
--
"(I never even thought of using a radio controlled toy on an airplane, but
now that they say I can't, I'm guessing it's way fun.)" -- Penn Jillette
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Danny Miller wrote:
> Well, the electrics being discussed here aren't #2. #1 is a
> subjective matter, if you want more than a very modest range it is not
> possible. #4, well, don't kid yourself, over 50% of the electricity
> in the USA comes from coal fired plants. There is hope hydrogen can
> be produced by other means than simply burning coal for electricity
> used for hydrolysis of water into hydrogen. For example some plans
> call for breaking down fossil fuels such as methane directly into
> hydrogen. #3 is a matter of opinion as well, electric vehicles are
> fairly efficient from the power outlet on but again you're pretty much
> dealing with electricity that comes from a coal fired plant.
>
> Danny
>
This has been talked about many times on the EV list before so I'll just
save it.
Yes, most of it is a matter of opinion.
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://wwia.org/
http://nnytech.net/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Where the heck are you thinking of putting them? Is the back seat
coming out?
That's one possibility. Another is to put some in the trunk, some in the
front, all over the place. But putting them in the middle would probably
work best.
Actually plan #1 is to buy a cheap trailer from Harbor Freight, use my
new Elec-trak welder and build battery boxes in the trailer. Low
profile, easy to service, with an interconnection to the main pack via
the Magnecharger service port.
Chris
From: Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Range
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 15:25:29 -0400
I will be *extremely* interested in your results, as I'm thinking of
replacing the Prizm's pack with 250-300 of these batteries. Popping up
the voltage a bit would be nice, but more importantly one can run the
car for a true 40ah. If I tried to do that with the 52ah Hawkers, they
would die.
My guess is you will get a nice little boost. So far a single string
of 30 of these batteries powers my Elec-trak much better than the 5
year old T105's. It also easily out-performs six Hawker Genesis 26ah
batteries in a 3*2 string (52ah)
It's kind of weird to run the tractor around with a pack of batteries
that small. I can't wait for snow.
Chris
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
John,
Why do you need to keep Optimas at all?
John G. Lussmyer wrote:
I'm going to try running my Sparrow on BB600 NiCd cells. 137 of
them to be exact.
So the pack will be:
NiCd Optima YT
164V 156V (nominal)
452 lbs 558 lbs
~40AH ~45AH (? at 65A)
The NiCd's are a lot stiffer than the YT's. Their voltage stays up
pretty well until the very end. They also don't suffer from Cold
weather nearly as much.
I think I'll get more useable range, since you REALLY don't want to
take the YT's down to 80 or 90% DOD, and the NiCd's don't really
care. (Just don't reverse them.)
(Note that this is a non-trivial conversion, as I'll have to modify
the under-seat battery box.)
Any comments or ideas?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I believe they are just replacing the existing
old FET's with new ones having a lower Rds on (that is
the conduction losses are much lower). They may also
change the gate resistor for faster switching times (I
don't really know what they are changing).
I guess the real question is how much current can the
existing PCB traces can actually handle.
I wonder if they have conducted any thermal tests to
see if it can handle higher currents (my guess is no,
they are making an educated guess based on copper area
that connects to the existing traces).
Since they are swapping out TO-220 devices the case
for IXYS modules or anything else is a moot point, you
can't redesign the circuit board easily to handle a
module.
Maybe Lawrence can report back on how this new control
handles the amps!
Rod
--- Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's generally not the controller that makes the
> noise but the motors.
> The magnetic field variations physically shake the
> structure of the
> stator, rotor, and housing.
>
> Hmm, meethinks he's putting in a 200v IRFB260N...
> just a guess. Now the
> biggest n-channel mosfet I could find in 200v is a
> 580 amps IXYS module,
> it costs a lot more than 10 of those. But the
> mounting is far, far
> easier and having 10x fewer transistors tends to
> make it 10x less prone
> to failure. IXYS looks like something they put a
> lot of quality
> control into too. IXYS makes some rocking stuff-
> that huge module has a
> ceramic insulated backing so there's no issues with
> insulator failure
> and little issue with insulator thermal resistance.
> They put cable
> screw terminals on the component itself so you don't
> have the big issues
> associated with running hundreds of amps through a
> PCB trace either.
>
> Danny
>
> Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
>
> > I don't know but he said the controller will now
> be silent. Lawrence
> > Rhodes..............
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Danny Miller"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Cc: "Zappylist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 11:48 AM
> > Subject: Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by
> Logisystems
> >
> >
> >> Cool, what part number fet is going into it?
> What switching freq is
> >> it using?
> >>
> >> Danny
> >
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Nick 'Sharkey' Moore wrote:
Yeah, I was wondering about that. If you could use the same silicon
for motoring and regeneration, or even just for regeneration and
recharging, that'd save you a bit of money off the total cost.
It depends. In general sort of yes, but it's like buying a TV with
integrated VCR and DVD player in it. It may cost less than all 3
separate units combined, but
1 - you can't upgrade any one of them
2 - if any fails, most likely everything quit working and you got
to replace whole unit (like PS died or such).
For this reasons people prefer to have separate units.
For the same reason Siemens doesn't integrate chargers
into inverters and in fact quit integrating DC-DC either.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi All,
Polar Battery was gracious enough to lend me a Deka Intimidator for
testing, and I think you might be interested in the results.
Here's a quick summary:
38.75AH @ 50A (to 10V)
35AH @ 100A (to 10V)
Drops to 10.3V @ 500A & 100% SOC
Int. Resistance 3.9mOhm
100A max recharge @ 50% SOC (to 14.5V)
See all the raw data here:
http://www3.telus.net/tesla/Deka%20Intimidator.xls
How do these results compare to Optima and Orbital? A friend and I are
thinking of using this battery in a conversion (Firefly, 144-168V).
David
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Aug. 1, 2005. 01:00 AM
Photo caption:
CODY STORM COOPER FOR THE TORONTO STAR
Some experts say hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius, above, could be
made even more fuel efficient if they were retrofitted to allow owners
to plug their battery into a wall socket overnight for recharging.
Plug in to new hybrid concepts
TYLER HAMILTON
There's a vibrant debate going on south of the border that's hardly
being heard in our neck of the woods.
It has to do with hybrid vehicles, and whether we can achieve the full
benefits of "hybrid vigour" by resting on the laurels of existing
technologies.
Hybrid cars such as the popular Toyota Prius are great for fuel
economy. They get on average 25 kilometres per litre of gasoline by
relying on a 280-volt battery to assist with acceleration. The battery
is routinely recharged through a small generator and by capturing
energy from braking.
The question is whether today's hybrid cars can be substantially
improved over a relatively short period through further crossbreeding,
to the point where the massive investments we're seeing in fuel-cell
vehicle development and commercialization, as well as the associated
infrastructure changes needed to support it, begin to make little
sense.
What if the battery in a hybrid car was more powerful and had greater
range? What if owners had the option of charging that battery by
plugging the car into a wall socket at night? What if, instead of using
gasoline to fuel the internal combustion engine component of a hybrid,
domestically produced biodiesel or ethanol-blended fuels became the
dominant and cleaner-burning option?
Unexpectedly, some U.S. Democrats and Republicans have become united in
the view that building such a superior hybrid is an issue of national
security and deserves the highest of priority. Plug-in hybrids would be
able to tap domestically produced electricity from the grid, they
argue, meaning less dependence on foreign oil and the unstable regimes
pumping it out.
The transportation industry accounts for more than half of all oil
consumed in the U.S. and Canada. Dramatically cut down on that
consumption and North America has more control over its economic
destiny, the idea goes.
Publicly, most automakers are ducking the issue and emphasizing
potential pitfalls of building hybrid cars with plugs, but pressure is
mounting behind the scenes to give the idea some life.
"Such development should have the highest research and development
priority because it promises to revolutionize transportation economics
and to have a dramatic effect on the problems caused by oil
dependence," write George Shultz, former U.S. secretary of state, and
James Woolsey, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, in a
June position paper on oil and U.S. national security.
They argue that battery development for plug-in hybrids "should for the
time being replace the current research and development emphasis on
automotive hydrogen fuel cells."
(Note: Dennis Campbell, president of fuel-cell developer Ballard Power,
calls plug-in hybrids an interesting idea but maintains it's only a
stopgap toward the inevitable. "Fundamentally you still must rely on
the combustion of fossil fuel. That's the soft underbelly of the hybrid
or plug-in hybrid strategy," he told the Star last week.)
Shultz and Woolsey co-chair the Committee on the Present Danger, a
bi-partisan group of politicians, academics, and thought leaders who
are working to "contain and defeat" threats against the United States.
Senators Jon Kyl, a Republican, and Joseph Lieberman, a Democrat, are
honorary co-chairs of the committee.
And they're not alone. You've got the Federation of American Scientists
also cheerleading for plug-in hybrids. Then there's the Institute for
the Analysis of Global Security, whose "Set America Free" campaign is
being led by former senior defence official Frank Gaffney.
Thomas Friedman, the influential New York Times columnist, wrote last
month that this unlikely alliance a group he calls the "geo-greens"
present a compelling case. "We don't need to reinvent the wheel or wait
for sci-fi hydrogen fuel cells," wrote Friedman. "The technologies we
need for a stronger, more energy-independent America are already here."
He blamed government namely the Bush administration for failing to
move the country on to the geo-green path.
Despite this political inertia, a feisty group of rogue Prius owners
has taken the technology into their own hands, by essentially "hacking"
into their vehicle systems and modifying the cars into plug-in models.
In some cases, they're installing more powerful battery packs.
It comes at a considerable cost, but for them the message is important:
It can be done, and with mass production it can also be affordable.
"Toyota's engineering of the system means it's not impossible to get to
this second stage," says Felix Kramer, founder of the California Cars
Initiative, whose sole mandate at the moment is to raise awareness of
plug-in hybrids and to spur Toyota and other automakers into supporting
it.
Estimates vary, but one U.S. security think tank says a plug-in hybrid
optimized with existing technologies could be driven 100 kilometres
using half a litre of gasoline.
Talking to Kramer, plug-in hybrids seem like a no-brainer. He envisions
a vehicle that is plugged in at night during off-peak hours when
electricity is cheapest. The battery would be powerful enough to cover
at least the first 20 to 30 kilometres of driving, which most of us
don't exceed in the average workday. If someone needed to drive longer,
then the gas-engine automatically kicks in to provide relief for the
battery.
Unlike a pure electric vehicle, there's no risk of losing charge and
being stranded halfway through a long trip. With gasoline as a backup,
you'd have the range that all-electric vehicles have never been able to
achieve, but using a fraction of the fuel you'd normally use each year
with a conventional car.
At the same time, charging the battery overnight would, in terms of
electricity prices, cost a fraction of the price of gasoline at the
pumps. Occasional drivers who take short trips would hardly need to
fill up with gas.
"It creates redundancy in the system," says Thomas Homer-Dixon,
director the Trudeau Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the
University of Toronto, where he studies the complex challenges of
creating sustainable societies.
Homer-Dixon says plug-in hybrids may just be one piece of a much larger
puzzle, but he likes the idea of building resilience into energy and
transportation infrastructures as a way of spreading risk. Building
plug-in hybrid cars or adding renewable energy systems such as wind
farms into the grid not only help ease the burden on the environment,
it makes us less vulnerable by eliminating central points of failure.
Our sickening dependency on oil is a central fault. An oil crisis
simulation conducted last month in Washington, D.C., found that a
sudden 5 per cent drop of global oil supply would cause crude oil
prices to rise to $161 (U.S.) a barrel. As a result, gas at the pumps
shot up to nearly $6 a gallon and U.S. consumer confidence plunged 30
per cent, according to the simulation.
So why don't the major car manufacturers want to save America? Honda
and Ford, which both have hybrid vehicles on the market, did not return
calls for comment. DaimlerChrysler is reportedly tinkering with the
idea of plug-in hybrids. Toyota, quite understandably, is hostile to
the idea of consumers modifying their Prius hybrids, citing potential
safety risks, high costs, and warning that such actions will void the
manufacturer's warranty.
"Toyota is very concerned from both the safety and emissions viewpoint
by those pursuing this path and does not support these modifications,"
said Canadian spokesperson Wes Pratt.
Fact is, Toyota put a lot of money and many years into designing the
Prius to be exactly the way it is, so it's in no rush to abandon that
strategy. It has also gone out of its way through aggressive marketing
to assure people they don't have to plug in their cars at the end of
the day.
But Toyota's concerns about safety and emissions are legitimate, as are
others. The nickel-metal hydride battery systems in today's Prius
aren't powerful enough to make a plug-in hybrid practical. But moving
to more advanced and powerful batteries, such as lithium-ion systems,
creates some problems.
The most significant issue is heating. Lithium-ion batteries are
vulnerable to "thermal runaway" meaning they can heat up to 800
degrees Celsius in event of a circuit failure or manufacturing defect.
The result is that the batteries catch fire or blow up.
"If there's an error there could be big damage done," says Chris
Winiewicz, director of marketing at lithium-ion battery maker Valence
Technology Inc., which itself is experimenting with plug-in hybrids.
Valence says it has overcome this safety issue by altering the
chemistry of lithium-ion systems. It uses batteries based on phosphate
rather than cobalt, reducing temperatures in the case of a thermal
runaway to less than 200 degrees Celsius.
"So it's a significantly safer chemistry," says Winiewicz.
As lithium-ion technology gets better, lighter, more efficient and
cheaper, companies such as Valence, Toshiba Corp. of Japan and
Mississauga-based Electrovaya Inc. have set their sites on the plug-in
hybrid market. Valence has already modified a Prius with its Saphion
technology, giving it 18 times more usable energy and tripling its fuel
economy for trips of 100 kilometres or less. But Toyota and other
critics of the plug-in hybrid have other dire warnings. They say
batteries that are constantly charged, fully drained and charged again
will have a short life, requiring a pricey replacement only a few years
into owning the vehicle. Consumers won't tolerate that cost.
Winiewicz says Toyota designed the Prius so the battery is never
drained below 85 or 90 per cent, and there's no reason why the same
limits couldn't be applied to lithium-ion batteries to preserve battery
life while still achieving 30 or more kilometres in all-electric mode.
Finally, Toyota plays the environmental card. It points to the shift of
pollution from tailpipes to the grid, which in Ontario and throughout
the U.S. is still heavily dependent on burning coal.
"Almost 60 per cent of U.S. electricity is generated by burning coal
so (we're) not sure plugging in cars in the end offers very much
environmental benefit," the company says, adding that it may be
"trading one form of emissions for another."
There's also the fact that some jurisdictions, such as Ontario, are
already maxing out their grid. Would plug-in cars cause the
infrastructure to crash?
In the short-term, charging cars during off-peak hours could easily be
handled by the grid and might even create more stability, experts say,
pointing out that over time more power infrastructure would be needed.
And that infrastructure will increasingly come from renewable energy
systems, such as wind power, or from cleaner-burning natural gas and
emission-free nuclear.
"There's a general misconception about the grid. They think it's as
dirty as gasoline, but in fact it isn't," says Kramer. "Besides, in the
future, it's much easier to clean a few central power plants than
millions of cars."
Homer-Dixon says a wells-to-wheels comparison of using gas in cars
versus charging them on the grid shows that the latter is more
efficient. Provided the jurisdiction can support the load, plug-ins
hybrids have merit.
"There may be places where plug-in hybrids may be better than others,"
he says.
Marc Kohler, business development manager for Valence's vehicle systems
program, says the major automakers appear to be acting disinterested,
but it's not the full picture.
"Publicly they have to say one thing, but R&D guys are actively
researching it," says Kohler, pointing out that high oil prices,
national security issues, the fact that the technology is available,
and the slow progress of fuel-cell cars has created an ideal
environment for pursuing plug-in hybrids.
"Everything is coming in line making this the next logical step," he
says. "Being the market has already accepted hybrids and more and more
are coming out, I don't think this is a flash in the pan."
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
