EV Digest 4556
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) thermally conductive gel
by brian baumel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: ev mower
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: thermally conductive gel
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: thermally conductive gel
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: thermally conductive gel
by "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Rod Hower <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
17) Well, so much for that....
by Chris Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout
Rabbit.
by Electro Automotive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Deka Intimidator Test Results
by Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Deka Intimidator Test Results
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.(OT:
proposed EV operating costs)
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: ev mower
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
by Otmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: Deka Intimidator Test Results
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28) Salt Flats 130 Club
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29) Re: 96v Voltsrabbit vs 26 Exides or Optimas for a Wayout Rabbit.
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
30) Re: EV fuse on ebay
by "Doug Hartley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
31) Re: ev mower
by Martin Klingensmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
hello all,
does anyone have a suggestion for thermally conductive
gel? my idea is to take a car seat and change all or
most of the surface area that is contacting the person
to a thermally conductive gel. tubes running through
the gell will distribute cold, for lack of any other
word, from a peltier pump to the person. I'm just not
sure where to obtain or what type of gel to use. any
suggestions?
Brian B.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Steve,
>Thanks a lot-every little bit helps.
>The adventure continues,
>Bruce
>
>
>
I think your problem is that mowers really aren't the pinnacle of
efficient machines. The one you have [like the one I fixed today] has
two hydraulic units to control the drive sytem [or is it a
tractor-rider?] as well as a rubber v-belt driving through a PTO and
electric clutch spinning a dozen bearings here and there, right?
Do you have a zero-turn-radius mower?
You could try to find 2 gearboxes and motors. Your drive system would be
a LOT more efficient than the hydraulic units.
The mower deck is a hard deal because you really need a V belt there to
take the shock of hitting rocks and things unless you come up with a
good way to run the blade through a rubber spider coupling. Check the
bearings anyway, they may be stiff.
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://wwia.org/
http://nnytech.net/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David wrote:
> Now, just for the heck of it, let's compare specific energy for these packs at
> this power level (10kW) :
>
> Optima: 13.5kWh / (26 * 19.9kg) = 26Wh/kg
>
> US 125: 13.9kWh / (16 * 30.45kg) = 28.5Wh/kg
That's sort of whack all things considered. Especially when thinking
about what each battery is capable of outputting without damage. At
least it is too me. It just seems like someone who is new to this
would get the impression that the flooded battery offers more
"power".. which on one hand might be the case, but on the other(400
amp discharge limit?) isn't..
Or am I just completely wrong?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is there only one part of your body you care to cool off?
Victor
brian baumel wrote:
hello all,
does anyone have a suggestion for thermally conductive
gel? my idea is to take a car seat and change all or
most of the surface area that is contacting the person
to a thermally conductive gel. tubes running through
the gell will distribute cold, for lack of any other
word, from a peltier pump to the person. I'm just not
sure where to obtain or what type of gel to use. any
suggestions?
Brian B.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
brian baumel wrote:
> my idea is to take a car seat and change all or
> most of the surface area that is contacting the person
> to a thermally conductive gel. tubes running through
> the gell will distribute cold, for lack of any other
> word, from a peltier pump to the person. I'm just not
> sure where to obtain or what type of gel to use. any
> suggestions?
What if you take the existing cover off the seat, then cut out a back
and forth path for the tubing to fit in, then use spray adhesive and
the tubing will be the same height as the surface in the existing foam
padding?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ryan Stotts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> David wrote:
>
> > Now, just for the heck of it, let's compare specific energy
> for these
> > packs at this power level (10kW) :
> >
> > Optima: 13.5kWh / (26 * 19.9kg) = 26Wh/kg
> >
> > US 125: 13.9kWh / (16 * 30.45kg) = 28.5Wh/kg
>
> That's sort of whack all things considered. Especially when
> thinking about what each battery is capable of outputting
> without damage. At least it is too me. It just seems like
> someone who is new to this would get the impression that the
> flooded battery offers more "power".. which on one hand might
> be the case, but on the other(400 amp discharge limit?) isn't..
>
> Or am I just completely wrong?
You're just completely wrong ;^>
Well, not quite. David has shown a comparison of specific *energy*, not
specific *power*. What he is explaining/illustrating is that at the
*same* modest power level, the floodeds have similar energy density to a
similar weight pack of Optimas.
A comparison of specific power would be in terms of W/kg, not Wh/kg, and
the Optimas would come out on top due to having less voltage sag.
As far as the 400A discharge limit, the flooded is capable of far more
current than this. The issue is one of how much does the life of the
battery decrease when subjected to such currents and is that decrease
acceptable. It is certainly claimed that if high current draws are
routine, then the Optima will likely survive longer, however, I don't
believe anyone has offered more than anecdotal support for this theory.
I'm not saying this isn't the case, but I suspect that this theory is
based on people replacing a heavy, low-voltage pack of floodeds with a
lighter, higher voltage pack of YTs and discovering that the YT equipped
batteries last longer than the floodeds despite allowing the controller
to use a higher current limit. Problem is that the heavy, low voltage
pack may well have experienced sustained high currents while the
lighter, higher voltage pack sees similar (or higher) peak currents, but
for shorter duration and perhaps not as frequently.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi David and All,
--- "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 4 Aug 2005 at 10:13, Electro Automotive wrote:
>
> > Compare your watt hours per system. For the
> Optimas, I get 55AH x 156V x
> > 2 strings = 17160 watt hours. For the floodeds I
> get 235AH x 96V = 22560
> > watt hours.
>
> With all due respect for your years of experience, I
> can't entirely agree with
> this analysis. The capacity for both batteries will
> be significantly closer at
> real world EV currents.
Great analysis below David.
The one thing left out thoygh is costs.
Orbitals CG T 125's
Batts, $2600 $1120
Regs 600 0
Charger $1500 $800
Wires,ect 300 150
$5000 $2070
Then in 3 to 7 yrs, pay the batts again! And you
don't ned as expensive controller to take advantage of
the AGM's and will bust fewer axles, transmissions
with the GC batts.
And if you screw up the charge, the GC you can
just add water instead of replacement.
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
>
> According to what I can find online, an Optima YT
> provides 75 amps for 32
> minutes. We're working with a double string, so if
> all goes well, we'll actually
> get 150 amps for 32 minutes, or 80 amp hours.
> Neglecting sag, a 156v
> double string should thus give 80 * 156 = 12.5 kWh
> into a consistent 150
> amp load.
>
> A US 125 battery will deliver 75 amps for 125
> minutes; Uve's calculator tells
> us that it will provide 134ah at 150 amps. So a 96v
> string, sweating its way
> through at 150 amps, will yield 12.9 kWh.
>
> Thus, the US 125s will provide 3% more energy at 150
> amps, while weighing
> 30kg (6%) less. Not nearly as large a difference as
> the C20 comparison
> would suggest.
>
> But this still isn't entirely fair, because the two
> packs are not providing the
> same amount of ^power^. So, let's even things out
> and see what happens.
>
> Most conversions (in my experience; YMMV) need about
> 10kW to maintain
> 55 mph. So let's repeat the above for a consistent
> 10kW drive.
>
> At 10kW, our Optima pack will have to produce 64
> amps (32a per string), and
> our US pack, 104 amps. Uve's calculator tells us
> that at 32a an Optima will
> yield 43.4ah (43.4 * 2 * 156 = 13.5kWh for the
> pack); and that at 104 amps
> the US pack will give us 145ah (145 * 96 = 13.9kWh).
>
>
> Again we see the same slight 3% advantage for the
> floodies.
>
> The higher the power demand, the closer the race
> becomes, and at some
> point the Optimas become the better choice (purely
> on range) for a heavy-
> footed driver.
>
> Conversely, in a lazy 30 or 40 mph saunter with a
> relatively light footed driver,
> the US 125s are likely to walk all over the Optimas
> for range.
>
> Now, just for the heck of it, let's compare specific
> energy for these packs at
> this power level (10kW) :
>
> Optima: 13.5kWh / (26 * 19.9kg) = 26Wh/kg
>
> US 125: 13.9kWh / (16 * 30.45kg) = 28.5Wh/kg
>
> dr
>
>
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Philippe Borges wrote:
>> my mistake: IXFN280N085 is 16000pf = 16 nf = 0,016 uf
Danny Miller wrote:
> So at 15KHz, 10v Vgs, and you want to get charged in less than
> 2% of the cycle period= 120mA of gate current. I am neglecting
> the capacitance between the drain and gate. That coupling can
> be significant especially with higher voltages. Also gate cap
> isn't constant but a function of Vgs itself. Anyways, you get
> the idea.
If you really spent 2% of your cycle time to switch, the heat and
switching losses would be frightening. During this time the transistor
sees full current while the voltage goes between 0 and full pack
voltage.
Suppose you are switching 100v at 100a. The peak power during the
switching transition is 100v x 100a = 10,000 watts! Even 2% of this is
200 watts, which is an unacceptable amount of heat. You need to switch
faster to get the switching losses below the conduction losses.
Ok, say you switch at a more reasonable speed like 160ns. To charge a
16nf gate capacitance from 0 to 10v in 200ns takes i = 10v x 16^-9f /
160e-9s = 1 amp. And that's not allowing for gate-to-drain capacitance
or Miller effects.
--
"One doesn't discover new lands without consenting to lose sight of the
shore for a very long time." -- Andre Gide
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jerry dycus wrote:
> Then in 3 to 7 yrs, pay the batts again!
The way I see it, lets say your current fuel costs are $40 a week.
The pack replacement ends up being cheaper..
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
There is a thermal paste that is used to join heat sinks/fans to processors
in computers. You could try that.
With enough patience,
you can milk a porcupine
David C. Wilker Jr.
USAF (RET)
----- Original Message -----
From: "brian baumel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 2:49 PM
Subject: thermally conductive gel
hello all,
does anyone have a suggestion for thermally conductive
gel? my idea is to take a car seat and change all or
most of the surface area that is contacting the person
to a thermally conductive gel. tubes running through
the gell will distribute cold, for lack of any other
word, from a peltier pump to the person. I'm just not
sure where to obtain or what type of gel to use. any
suggestions?
Brian B.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
my little knowledge and experiment make me feel anxious about 120ma
requirement, looking at market there is a lot of 3A, 5A, 8A mosfet driver,
it is not for pleasure of racing electron :^)
i seen (after few experiment in "poping" mosfet) peak power to open (fast)
much more than 120ma, though 120ma should suffice to keep door open.
Philippe
Et si le pot d'échappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
Forum de discussion sur les véhicules électriques
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by Logisystems
> That makes more sense.
>
> So at 15KHz, 10v Vgs, and you want to get charged in less than 2% of the
> cycle period= 120mA of gate current.
> I am neglecting the capacitance between the drain and gate. That
> coupling can be significant especially with higher voltages. Also gate
> cap isn't constant but a function of Vgs itself. Anyways, you get the
idea.
>
> Danny
>
> Philippe Borges wrote:
>
> >oups sorry my mistake: IXFN280N085 is 16000pf = 16 nf = 0,016 uf
> >though still very hard work for a gate driver :^)
> >
> >Philippe
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Nick 'Sharkey' Moore wrote:
>On 2005-08-04, Martin Klingensmith wrote:
>
>
>>This is more of an "evtech" list subject, isn't it?
>>
>>
>
>Sorry all. I didn't know that that one existed: I'll subscribe
>to that too and stop boring you all here with my enthusiasm for
>things that go spark in the night :-).
>
>-----sharks
>
>
>
No, I don't mean to play "topic cop" I was just stating what I thought.
Certainly you can discuss it here until someone gets irritated but you
may get better discussion on the evtech list.
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://wwia.org/
http://nnytech.net/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Yeah, I just threw out 2% from nowhere and it probably wouldn't be fast
enough for this power level. Now that is only counting vgs rise time
too, switching time is always less than that. For example if vgs-on is
10v and the threshold is 4v, then 40% of the time is not spent in an
intermediate, non-switching region. And if the current is such that
vgs=7v is enough to drive it, then only 30% of the transition time is
spend in the intermediate region. Actually I didn't include that the
transistion time would also apply to turning off the device so heat
generation is basically double.
Sure, shorter time is great. Amps would certainly be better.
Danny
Lee Hart wrote:
If you really spent 2% of your cycle time to switch, the heat and
switching losses would be frightening. During this time the transistor
sees full current while the voltage goes between 0 and full pack
voltage.
Suppose you are switching 100v at 100a. The peak power during the
switching transition is 100v x 100a = 10,000 watts! Even 2% of this is
200 watts, which is an unacceptable amount of heat. You need to switch
faster to get the switching losses below the conduction losses.
Ok, say you switch at a more reasonable speed like 160ns. To charge a
16nf gate capacitance from 0 to 10v in 200ns takes i = 10v x 16^-9f /
160e-9s = 1 amp. And that's not allowing for gate-to-drain capacitance
or Miller effects.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Ryan and All,
--- Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jerry dycus wrote:
>
> > Then in 3 to 7 yrs, pay the batts again!
>
> The way I see it, lets say your current fuel costs
> are $40 a week.
> The pack replacement ends up being cheaper..
>
Yes it usually is but the GC batt pack saves you
much more money where the AGM pack is much closer to
break even depending on just what you do, use, replace
with the EV.
For my E woody fuel is $.01/mile and GC Batts
$.03/mile so $.04/mile overall cost which compared to
a 40mpg 2 seat car at $.06/mile for gas is much
cheaper for the EV. As the price of gas rises as it
will, this gets larger.
And since most EV's are paid for, car payments are
less.
But if AGM's were used the gas car would cost less
if you didn't include repairs, oil changes, ect ICE's
need.
If you use Ni-cads over 10 yrs as they cost less
than 2 packs of AGM's new and basicly free after that
with a 20+ yr life so I'd go that way if I was going
to spend the big bucks.
As always, YMMV.
Jerry Dycus
>
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
120mA is woefully inadequate.
I use 2A IR2110 for my BLDC control and it's just
enough (70A continuous control). I think Otmar uses
40A? gate drive.
I remember scope traces back in 1994 while at GE that
had 4A initial pulse to gate on the MOSFET modules.
Keep in mind that the 4A is only for mSec.
The key is to have plenty of gate drive to quickly
gate on the FET, which requires high peak current.
Rod
--- Philippe Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> my little knowledge and experiment make me feel
> anxious about 120ma
> requirement, looking at market there is a lot of 3A,
> 5A, 8A mosfet driver,
> it is not for pleasure of racing electron :^)
> i seen (after few experiment in "poping" mosfet)
> peak power to open (fast)
> much more than 120ma, though 120ma should suffice to
> keep door open.
>
> Philippe
>
> Et si le pot d'échappement sortait au centre du
> volant ?
> quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
> http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
> Forum de discussion sur les véhicules électriques
> http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Danny Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:28 PM
> Subject: Re: 1221 Controller repair& upgrade by
> Logisystems
>
>
> > That makes more sense.
> >
> > So at 15KHz, 10v Vgs, and you want to get charged
> in less than 2% of the
> > cycle period= 120mA of gate current.
> > I am neglecting the capacitance between the drain
> and gate. That
> > coupling can be significant especially with higher
> voltages. Also gate
> > cap isn't constant but a function of Vgs itself.
> Anyways, you get the
> idea.
> >
> > Danny
> >
> > Philippe Borges wrote:
> >
> > >oups sorry my mistake: IXFN280N085 is 16000pf =
> 16 nf = 0,016 uf
> > >though still very hard work for a gate driver :^)
> > >
> > >Philippe
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've posted this before, but now seems a good time to mention it again. If you
surf on over to:
http://www.ccds.charlotte.nc.us/~jarrett/EV/cost.php
There is a little web page I wrote when Owned my 59 Henney Kilowatt. It allows
you to compare the cost of ownership of your EV vs your Gasser. There are a lot
of factors I'm sure it does not take into account and if anyone would tell me
what they are I'll add them.
Even so, it is a pretty good representation of the problem.
James
>
> Hi Ryan and All,
>
> --- Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Jerry dycus wrote:
> >
> > > Then in 3 to 7 yrs, pay the batts again!
> >
> > The way I see it, lets say your current fuel costs
> > are $40 a week.
> > The pack replacement ends up being cheaper..
> >
>
> Yes it usually is but the GC batt pack saves you
> much more money where the AGM pack is much closer to
> break even depending on just what you do, use, replace
> with the EV.
> For my E woody fuel is $.01/mile and GC Batts
> $.03/mile so $.04/mile overall cost which compared to
> a 40mpg 2 seat car at $.06/mile for gas is much
> cheaper for the EV. As the price of gas rises as it
> will, this gets larger.
> And since most EV's are paid for, car payments are
> less.
> But if AGM's were used the gas car would cost less
> if you didn't include repairs, oil changes, ect ICE's
> need.
> If you use Ni-cads over 10 yrs as they cost less
> than 2 packs of AGM's new and basicly free after that
> with a 20+ yr life so I'd go that way if I was going
> to spend the big bucks.
> As always, YMMV.
> Jerry Dycus
>
>
>
> >
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just a side note: If you're working on charging Prius batteries:
1) Use the BQ2004 series chips. They have peak voltage detection
thresholds that are much tighter than the 2003.
2) Understand that the Prius batteries need a taper off a 1C charge.
3) Understand that the Prius batteries will explode if charged
uncontained at 1C, and the vent pressure caps do not appear to blow.
4) Monitoring pack temp does not detect pressure build-up
I'm not sure if these batteries can be quick charged. They work great on
my 2004 based charger at 3amp rate, they do not work at the 7amp rate of
the N-FET based 2003 charger.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Conversely, in a lazy 30 or 40 mph saunter with a relatively light footed
driver,
the US 125s are likely to walk all over the Optimas for range.
Which is where most dailiy drivers spend most of their time.
Shari Prange
Electro Automotive POB 1113 Felton CA 95018-1113 Telephone 831-429-1989
http://www.electroauto.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Electric Car Conversion Kits * Components * Books * Videos * Since 1979
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I did indeed neglect the other considerations related to battery choice. All I
was trying to demonstrate is that in real world situations, whether golf car
batteries deliver more range or not depends on what kind of vehicle they're
powering, and how you drive it. I think I recall that Lee's rule of thumb is
that
the crossover point is around 150 amps - below that GC wins, above that
AGM wins (for range only).
Now, when it comes to cost per mile, golf car batteries are the undisputed
winner, 'way out in front. That would still be true even if one beat them
mercilessly and cut their cycle life by 2/3. At one time I calculated the cost
per mile of golf car batteries as 2 cents, and Optima G31s as 14 cents! (The
calculation of cost per mile for YTs will be left as an exercise for the
reader. ;-)
Cost is of central importance to me, but to someone who spends his
Saturday nights at the dragstrip, it might be close to inconsequential. Most
people don't win drag races with golf car batteries.
Still, for a daily driver - well, run your EV 100,000 miles and the cost
difference is a cool 12 grand, plus interest.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is there a website that has all the different lead acid battery test
results in one place? It would make it easier to make comparisons.
Tim
David Kronstein wrote:
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 ---
> http://www.ccds.charlotte.nc.us/~jarrett/EV/cost.php
>
> There is a little web page I wrote when Owned my 59 Henney Kilowatt. It
> allows
> you to compare the cost of ownership of your EV vs your Gasser. There are a
> lot
> of factors I'm sure it does not take into account and if anyone would tell me
> what they are I'll add them.
>
> Even so, it is a pretty good representation of the problem.
The hard part to calculate in my case is the "miles driven per year".
8000 miles a year is doable with the gasser since out of state trips
happen with it. The electric being a commuter, errand, run about
car..
Still though, I do this for environmental reasons and as a hobby. A
hobby with potential and a future. Gas cars have a questionable
amount of fuel left. And if that's not enough, potential supply
issues always lurking. And emissions..
Not to mention as the fuel cost increases..
Have you see the price of a barrel of oil lately? Also, look at those
wholesale gas prices! $3/gal will be here soon at this rate...
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/commodities/energyprices.html
If one was to have a high performance electric vs's a high performance
gas car which gets less then 5 mpg easily, not to mention, really
putting out some serious emissions; well in my case, with the car in
question being either gas or electric, I choose electric: more fun,
less maintenance, no exhaust. If it's a little more expensive; so be
it.
I really don't like the smell of exhaust anymore(never did, but just
notice it more now and can't stand it). Not to mention all the
maintenance.
Electric is just a win win situation. The range limitations won't be
forever. Are greedy people in control of the lithium battery
production?
http://img285.imageshack.us/img285/3557/eng0hp.png
http://www.ci.edmond.ok.us/Electric/elec_rates.html
For a high 90 something percent of the time, an electric will get me
everywhere I need to go.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Tim wrote:
> Is there a website that has all the different lead acid battery test
> results in one place?
This page has some: http://www.manzanitamicro.com/download.htm
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David wrote:
>I think I recall that Lee's rule of thumb is that
> the crossover point is around 150 amps - below that GC wins, above that
> AGM wins (for range only).
Good point.
> Still, for a daily driver - well, run your EV 100,000 miles and the cost
> difference is a cool 12 grand, plus interest.
Maybe so, but lets compare the alternative to using gasoline
instead(or are you suggesting a $12,000 price difference between using
flooded vs AGM's for 100,000 miles?).
$40 a week in fuel. I'm not joking about that either. Stop and go
city driving, hilly streets, poor aerodynamics, big tires with 35 psi
in them, some ~14 mile one way trips down the interstate at 70 mph.
Fuel is currently $2.19/gal here.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/
Lets just use $2/gal for this battery vs fuel comparison.
$40/week * 52 weeks a year = $2,080
Fuel - 87 octane:
1 year = $2,080
2 years= $4,160
3 years= $6,240
4 years= $8,320
If I have a 336v pack of AGM's(28) at $100 each = $2,800
How many years might this AGM pack last me? How many years do
flooded's last? (I gotta have my performance though regardless.)
Gas vehicle in question is a 4 wheel drive(dead weight + parasitic
drag), '98 Jeep Grand Cherokee, with a 4 liter in line 6 and a slush
box automatic.
If it was converted to electric(possible even manual trans too), it
could do everything it currently does, day in, day out(minus the out
of state trips), and not have to be refueled twice a week.
The only reason it's not converted to electric? The upfront cost of
the conversion.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
James, I threw a few numbers into this nifty calculator.
My daily driver is a 1996 Ford Contour with the 2.5 liter
170 horsepower V6 and a Diablo performance chip installed to
it(Probably pushing the ponies to the 180-ish range), and if
I go easy on the throttle, I can average about 25 miles per
gallon or so, a little above the EPA rating. When I floor
it, 0-60 is about 7.5 seconds or so timed, best 7.0, stock
is listed at 7.7. 1/4 mile drag can be done in about 15.5 or
so @ 89-90 mph. The performance chip keeps the governor from
doing its job(normally restricted to 112), and this car has
been double the highest speed limit in my area(and gets very
scary at that speed). It's an automatic, unfortunately,
handles like crap(FWD), grossly overweight at about
2,900-3,000 pounds, and is not the fastest of things but is
quite a sleeper given how docile it looks(Another good
sleeper is a late 90s Geo Prizm. 0-60 in 9 seconds, very
unexpected from such a car). No one suspects this car, and I
have repeatedly embarassed 90s era V6 Mustangs and Camaros
with this car, blowing their doors off. Despite this, I hate
it, it's way too big, far too heavy, not fast enough, and it
seats 4 people(YUCK!).
In progress and hopefully to be completed in early 2007 is
my Triumph GT6. It will be an EV, and when I have it going
as an EV, I'm so going to ditch my gasser. 0-60 is simulated
around 6 seconds, depending on tire size, top speed may be
anywhere from 130 to 150 limited by motor RPM, 140-ish
desired. At 65 mph, my efficiency may end up on par with or
even better than Blue Meanie, in the case the car undergoes
drastic reductions in drag all over the car and it already
has a significantly smaller frontal area than Wayland's
beauty. With perhaps a pack of 28 Orbitals(or 25 Optimas)
shoehorned into this car, range could be 80-100 miles per
charge driving easy using 25 amps or so to cruise at highway
speeds. 40 miles would more than meet all my needs, but if I
can honestly tell people I could go 100 miles, maybe even
take them on long distance trips(relative to lead acid EVs),
they may really think long and hard about EVs being
practical for them. With that amount of range, I'd be
discharging my batteries much less, allowing perhaps cycle
life enough for 50,000 miles(20-25 miles range to 20%
discharge, 2,000 or so cycles expected at that discharge
amount, although if performance is abused 100% of the time,
range and cycle life will drop hard). Without a
fiberglass/lexan weight reduction, I'm looking at 2,600
pounds weight, with weight reduction, potentially below GVWR
at < 2,400 pounds. The car may or may not happen that way,
but regardless, lets look at the comparison between the two
vehicles:
Miles Driven Per Year: 12,000
Current Gasser: 1996 Ford Contour GL w/V6
Gasoline Cost per Gallon: $2.20
Miles per Gallon of Gasser: 25
Cost of Oil Change: $7 (Do it myself)
Frequency of Oil Change (miles): 2,000
Inspection Cost (per Year): $40
Yearly Misc. Costs (radiator fluid, etc): $100
Operating Costs per Mile: $.103
Proposed Electric: 1969 Triumph GT6+
Cost per KW/H of Electricity: $.10 (Even though it only
costs $.04 to generate. Getting my own wind turbines is
looking pretty good now.)
Watt HR/Mile of Electric: 130
Charger Efficiency: 92% (PFC)
Battery Efficiency: 85% (Optimas or Orbitals)
Inspection Cost (per Year): $40
Yearly Misc. Costs (Distilled water, etc): $20
Battery Pack Replacement Cost: $2,800
Battery Pack Lifetime (Years): 4
Operating Cost per Mile: $.080
My high performance Triumph would turn out to be 25% cheaper
than my somewhat mellow gasser. TRhis is an unfair
comparison since it doesn't include the low engine life of
the gas engine and long life of the electric motor.
Over 150,000 miles, the electric Triumph would save $3,450.
This is not counting the fact that the EV needs no engine
maintenance and all of that crap. Over about a decade,
assuming 12,000 miles per year, about a $12k conversion
cost, and the chassis holds out(and I keep it maintained and
rust free), it would pay itself off when you throw in the
fact that the electric motor lasts 500,000+ miles while the
gas engine for the Contour maybe 150,000 miles or so(With
90,000 on the odometer already). Porsche Boxter performance
for Geo Metro money. A great idea if you ask me. As the gas
prices rise, a car like this would really be in style.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think your problem is that mowers really aren't the pinnacle of
efficient machines. The one you have [like the one I fixed today] has
two hydraulic units to control the drive sytem [or is it a
tractor-rider?]
yep two hydraulic wheel motors and two pumps. the tractor would probable be
more efficient , but the zero turn gets the job done fast . I cut 10 yards a
day somtimes .
as well as a rubber v-belt driving through a PTO and
electric clutch spinning a dozen bearings here and there, right?
yep .
Do you have a zero-turn-radius mower?
yes, sounds like you know your mowers. .
You could try to find 2 gearboxes and motors. Your drive system would be
a LOT more efficient than the hydraulic units.
The older ones had a chain drive to each wheel , and this could be replaced
with motors , I would need 2 speed controllers , no big deal , I was a
little surprised to see 80 amp with the thing just sitting there , funny it
didn't use that much more when moving .
The mower deck is a hard deal because you really need a V belt there to
take the shock of hitting rocks and things unless you come up with a
good way to run the blade through a rubber spider coupling. Check the
bearings anyway, they may be stiff.
there be lots of places to save a little , I was thinking that with a amp
meter I'll be able to see what's using up the power.
steve clunn
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://wwia.org/
http://nnytech.net/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 5:55 PM -0700 8/4/05, Rod Hower wrote:
120mA is woefully inadequate.
I use 2A IR2110 for my BLDC control and it's just
enough (70A continuous control). I think Otmar uses
40A? gate drive.
That's in the ballpark Rod.
The Z2K sees 70 Amps of gate drive 31 thousand times a second. 1/2
the time positive and half the time negative. The Z1K only sees half
that, 30 Amps.
--
-Otmar-
http://www.evcl.com/914 My electric 914
http://www.CafeElectric.com/ Zilla controllers. A few actually in stock!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It might be diffacult to accurately compare these batteries to most other
Lead-Acid batteries used in EVs.
Lead-Acid batteries are normally considered to be 100% discharged at
1.75VPC (10.5V on a 12V bat), so most test results stop at that point.
The only other batteries I know of that are tested down to 1.67VPC (10V)
are Hawkers.
Of course I'm not sure how long Hawkers or Dekas will last if repeatedly
discharged to 10V.
If you do some digging you can find discharge information on Hawkers website:
http://www.enersysreservepower.com
> Is there a website that has all the different lead acid battery test
> results in one place? It would make it easier to make comparisons.
> Tim
>
>
> David Kronstein wrote:
>
>> 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 ---
I was just reading up on how to join the "130" club on the Salt
Flats, and am doubly revved up to then read about your machine again.
The 130 club is for street legal machines, and doesn't require a ton
of safety equipment like the other classes. You have to go between
130 mph and 140 mph to join the club. Even if you don't make it you
still can see how fast your car will go. It would be nice to see some
EVs join the club! I'm trying to join the club with my Camaro this
summer, and hopefully my conversion will be done enough to try for it
Summer 2006.
The Salt Flats are a great place to try out aero mods. This is one
kind of racing where the battery weight doesn't hurt as much, and can
actually help! Another advantage EVers have is no power loss due to
the 4200 foot altitude (and density altitudes of 8000 feet common in
summer).
It'll be September 14 through 17, 2005
<http://www.saltflats.com>
--- John Westlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> In progress and hopefully to be completed in early 2007 is
> my Triumph GT6. It will be an EV, and when I have it going
> as an EV, I'm so going to ditch my gasser. 0-60 is simulated
> around 6 seconds, depending on tire size, top speed may be
> anywhere from 130 to 150 limited by motor RPM, 140-ish
> desired. At 65 mph, my efficiency may end up on par with or
> even better than Blue Meanie, in the case the car undergoes
> drastic reductions in drag all over the car and it already
> has a significantly smaller frontal area than Wayland's
> beauty.
> ...
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jamie Marshall wrote:
> Bill Dube's "Wabbit", where he managed to put 6 under the
rear seat.
> Optimas.
>
> Pictures at:
> http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/014.html
Look at that spare room under the hood. He could fit a
substantially larger chunk of lead if he wanted too, but it
would throw the weight distribution off a bit, would need a
controller upgrade, and he already has a nice set of NiCds
in place of the Optimas anyway.
Bill needs to update his Austin EV entry.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Philippe,
Thanks, I much appreciate your "heads up" (as some would call it in the
U.S.), about the fuses. (For me recently, it was more like "head down,
pushing the EV" with a blown fuse.)
Best regards,
Doug
Montreal, Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 1:09 PM
Subject: EV fuse on ebay
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
STEVE CLUNN wrote:
>> a LOT more efficient than the hydraulic units.
>
> You could try to find 2 gearboxes and motors. Your drive system would be
>
> The older ones had a chain drive to each wheel , and this could be
> replaced with motors , I would need 2 speed controllers , no big deal
> , I was a little surprised to see 80 amp with the thing just sitting
> there , funny it didn't use that much more when moving .
>
>
I meant to add that since gas engines can't stop and change direction
almost instantly, the engineers often come up with elaborate hydraulic
systems like these. Electric motors can stop and change direction almost
instantly so the lossy hydraulics aren't really necessary.
I know we all want to push all-electrics here, but maybe you could have
a small gas engine for the wheels and use electric for the blades or
vice-versa? Mowers don't go that fast so they shouldn't require a lot of
power to the drive wheels but you already have an expensive rugged
hydraulic drive system in place.
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://wwia.org/
http://nnytech.net/
--- End Message ---
