EV Digest 4676
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Siemens EV Motors
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Buses talk...
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) AGM battery mgmt system
by "Gabriel Alarcon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Buses talk...
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Closed tailgate of the truck
by Mark Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: NEDRA race location change?
by TiM M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Closed tailgate of the truck
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: AGM battery mgmt system
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: IOTA
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: 924 EV
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Help with battery wiring, avoid looping back
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: NEDRA race location change?
by "Tom Shay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: 924 EV
by Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: 924 EV
by Kevin Coughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Help with battery wiring
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RPM question
by Stefano Landi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) searching for pulleys as shown in Grassroots videos
by Stefano Landi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: EV pulbicity Re: Montreal Gazette article today, Sept. 6
by "Doug Hartley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: NEDRA race location change?
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) RE: Long range RE: Frustr. of AC vs. DC; batt. tech. for newbies;
philosophizing
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) RE: 924 EV
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
The sad fact is that there is no real reason why an AC motor "has" to be
matched to its inverter, any more than a series DC motor has to be
matched to its PWM controller.
This is what BRUSA thinks about it, and they know their stuff:
http://www.brusa.biz/products/e_motoren108.htm
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It is mathematically calculated fairly easily.
It is the same type of calculations as the claims that
if all 750 million (or whowever many I forget) PCs in the
world will be put to work to crack PGP's encryption,
it will take 200 years to do it. There is no direct proof, but
it is all calculatable based on the CPU productivity and probability
theory.
If you choose not to believe it, fine by me.
damon henry wrote:
I still don't believe your bus will hold up for 228 years with only 1
undetected error.... In fact I bet you will have a hard time pointing
out to me anything manmade that will work for that much time at all let
alone error free... If it's not for marketing, what's the point of
making a claim that is so obviously unrealistic.
Absolutely realistic. Again, it is not the rate of the errors on the
bus, it is the rate of undetected and thus uncorrected errors.
Corrected error as far as user is concerned is no error.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does anybody know when a BMS is required for AGM's? For instance, when a
certain number are wired in series, parallel or a combination of those. What
BMS are commercially available out there?
Gabe.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think you misunderstand Damon.
Two gadgets with life time error free is one thing (esp if
a "life" is 1 year. No difference in gadgets.
But comparing error detection capabilities, you can tell that the
hardware/software solution capable of letting only one error
to slip undetected in 1000 years is *more capable* than the one
allowing one error in 300 years, although there is no direct
consequence to you, or any our hardware with moral obsolence in 10 years.
So there *is* difference in gadgets. Which one do you thing
they'd use for space Shuttle which lives, perhaps, 10 years?
Victor
damon henry wrote:
Why not... easy I don't believe the material that forms the bus will be
useable in 228 years. You show me one piece of electronics that is
still functional from 228 years ago and then I'll believe :-) That's
what makes this claim ridiculous, not that the theory is wrong or even
tough to understand, just that the implemtation trumps the theory.
Either these numbers were made up by someone in marketing, or someone
has been engineering in a vacuum again. Besides why say 1 error in 1000
years, why not just say error free over the lifetime. Surely if you can
claim only one undetected error over an unrealistic timeframe it is no
more of a stretch to claim error free.
From: Nick Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: Buses talk...
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:45:31 -0700
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 05:35:38PM +0000, damon henry wrote:
> I still don't believe your bus will hold up for 228 years with only 1
> undetected error....
Why not?
If you put a checksum on a packet, it is simple math to determine how
strong
the checksum is, and therefore how many packets at what corruption
rate will
statistically defeat the sum.
I can believe these numbers will be amazingly huge.
Here is a fun quote from Bruce Schneier on this point:
MD5 is a 128-bit hash; the odds of two texts having identical MD5
hashes are 1
in 2^64. SHA-1 is a 160-bit hash; the odds of two texts having
identical SHA-1
hashes are one in 2^80. Assuming the two hash functions are
independent -- a
reasonable assumption -- then the odds of two texts having identical
MD5 and
SHA-1 hashes are 1 in 2^144.
The universe will either collapse on itself or the galaxies will drift
apart
into nothingness before you find such a pair of texts.
So there you go! You just need to build both an MD5 and SHA1 sum into the
protocol, and you will never have an undetected error in the lifetime
of the
buss. Then again, it looks like you can already say that ;)
> In fact I bet you will have a hard time pointing out
> to me anything manmade that will work for that much time at all let
alone
> error free...
Not quite 228 years, but still pretty amazing.
http://www.energyquest.ca.gov/time_machine/centennial_lightbulb.html
> If it's not for marketing, what's the point of making a
> claim that is so obviously unrealistic.
>
> >From: Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> >To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> >Subject: Re: Buses talk...
> >Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 10:21:38 -0700
> >
> >Lee,
> >
> >It's the same as MTBF failure rate - these things can be calculated
> >and predicted quite accurately. We do it all the time in semiconductor
> >industry to predict life time. It predicts it statistically,
> >specifying acceptable failure rate and probability.
> >
> >In case of the bus errors, the rate can be calculated as well.
> >
> >Note, I said *undetected* error occurs that often. A bus errors
> >occur far more frequently, but are transparent to the user -
> >bad data is ignored and automatically re-transmitted, it is
> >partially built in the silicon and also part of the standard
> >protocol. So application sees no errors.
> >
> >This has nothing to do with marketing.
> >
> >Victor
> >
> >Lee Hart wrote:
> >>>>This is enough because combined with CAN error handling capability
> >>>>the undetected error rate is stunning 1 error per every 1,000 years
> >>>>in a vehicle running 2000 hours/year with 500 kbps bus loaded 25%.
> >>
> >>
> >>damon henry wrote:
> >>
> >>>Ummmm yeah right how did someone come up with this. In a
non-leap year
> >>>there are 8760 hours so it would take 228 years to prove this. I
don't
> >>>believe the standard has been around quite that long :-)
> >>
> >>
> >>It's basically a guess, based on statistics and a lot of assumptions.
> >>You start by assuming an average bit error rate; say, 1 bad bit per
> >>million. You then assume these bad bits are randomly distributed;
i.e.
> >>two bad bits might be anything from right next to each other to two
> >>million bits apart. Then you look at where two bad bits need to be
in a
> >>packet to cancel each other out so the packet still appears to be
> >>correct (and so fools the error-detection algorithm).
> >>
> >>It will turn out that there is a short list of places in the packet
> >>where these two bit errors have to occur. You the figure out how
long it
> >>will take before the two error bits just happen to land there.
> >>
> >>The trouble is, all this assumes you have perfect knowledge about the
> >>noise source. In reality, noise is unpredictable. So such
calculations
> >>are largely useless except as a crude way to compare two different
> >>systems (or for Marketing people to "sell" you on their system).
> >
> >--
> >Victor
> >'91 ACRX - something different
> >
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My apoligies I guess I overedited my email. Yes dropping your truck tailgate is
bad for aero based on some past tests that you site. Dropping your truck
tailgate is bad also because it changes the rigidness of the bed which could
potentially be bad in collisions and other situations.
I did it for the sole purpose so drivers behind me didn't know I had an
electric vehicle. It was the only way my wife would talk to me if I drove my
truck to work so I figured it was better to drive it in with the tailgate down
then not drive it at all and drive a 15mpg 1989 toyota van.
I closed it a few days later because I got some stuff at the store and had to
close it. I think it is probably still in the upright position.
"Brown, Jay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is a good explanation... http://www.awtrucks.com/tailgateup.htm
Snip>>>>>>>>
I'm an aerodynamics engineer. When I was in the U.S. Air Force a few
years back, I worked with folks from the Lockheed low-speed wind tunnel.
In the 1970s aircraft production went into a slump, and Lockheed started
looking.for other customers for its wind-tunnel services.
Prime candidates were automakers, and Lockheed was successful in
convincing Ford, among others, that the wind tunnel wouId help them
reduce drag and wind noise on their vehicles.
Needless to say, in the past 15 to 20 years, Lockheed has learned a lot
about car and truck aerodynamics.
Anyway, they actually performed drag tests on pickups with the tailgate
both up and down, and found that drag was actually LOWER with the
tailgate CLOSED!
This ran counter to their intuition (and yours). The reason is that a
closed tailgate sets up a large "bubble" of stagnant air that slowly
circulates around the bed of the truck (we aero types call this a
("separated bubble"). When air approaches the truck, it "sees" the
bubble as part of the truck. So to the air, the truck looks like it has
a nice, flat covering over the bed, and the air doesn't "slam" into the
vertical tailgate.
If the tailgate is open, or replaced by one of those "air gate" nets,
however, that nice, separate bubble in the truck bed does not form (it
"bursts").
Then the air approaching the truck "sees" a truck with a flat bed on the
back of a tall cab. This is a very nonaerodynamc shape with a very LARGE
drag.
So, believe it or not, it's best for gas mileage to keep the tailgate
CLOSED. Hope this information is helpful.
Ed Fitzgerald
Research Assistant
Department of Aero/Mechanical Engineering
University of Notre Dame
Snip>>>>>>>>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay Brown
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Humphrey
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:01 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: RE: Closed tailgate of the truck
Do you recall if they tested the difference between a short bed and a
longbed truck.
I know with my shortbox truck (6ft) that keeping the gate up is indeed
better. but I seem to recall that the gate down on the longbed (8ft) was
better, but it probably wasn't.
It seems like it would be really easy to test this on an EV truck.
Stay Charged!
Hump
Original Message -----------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Victor Tikhonov
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:54 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Closed tailgate of the truck
Despite very spread misconseption about closed tailgate of the truck
increasing grag, you will find that keeping it closed will
*reduce* the drag compared to open gate.
I can explain why, but do your careful measurements.
It was great talk about this very issue on KTSA radio in San Antinio
years
ago. The drag was measured and closed gate won, which is very
counterintuitive. But one can't argue with measurable facts. Only ignore
them.
Victor
Mark Hastings wrote:
>
> I think tommorow I'm going to drop my tailgate like I see so many
> other pickups do. That is where the electric vehicle sign is pretty
> much embedded in. I do have two large purple electric cords on the
> side that I can't get rid of but maybe they'll think I'm an
> electrician.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm OK with the place, it was the date that
didn't work out for me. I flew up for the day from Los
Angeles last year and had a great time. I met some
people and put faces with posts. I have a standing
obligation for the labor day weekend and was
disappointed to learn I'd have to skip it this year.
Maybe next year....
TiM
______________________________________________________
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Always better as making the truck bed "shallower".
But I'm not an aero engineer.
Victor
arthur marquardt wrote:
What about tonneau covers less or more drag?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Humphrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: Closed tailgate of the truck
Do you recall if they tested the difference between a short bed and a
longbed truck.
I know with my shortbox truck (6ft) that keeping the gate up is indeed
better. but I seem to recall that the gate down on the longbed (8ft) was
better, but it probably wasn't.
It seems like it would be really easy to test this on an EV truck.
Stay Charged!
Hump
Original Message -----------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Victor Tikhonov
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:54 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Closed tailgate of the truck
Despite very spread misconseption about closed tailgate of the truck
increasing grag, you will find that keeping it closed will
*reduce* the drag compared to open gate.
I can explain why, but do your careful measurements.
It was great talk about this very issue on KTSA radio in San Antinio years
ago. The drag was measured and closed gate won, which is very
counterintuitive. But one can't argue with measurable facts. Only ignore
them.
Victor
Mark Hastings wrote:
I think tommorow I'm going to drop my tailgate like I see so many
other pickups do. That is where the electric vehicle sign is pretty
much embedded in. I do have two large purple electric cords on the
side that I can't get rid of but maybe they'll think I'm an
electrician.
--
Victor
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 03:11 PM 8/09/05 -0700, Gabe wrote:
Does anybody know when a BMS is required for AGM's? For instance, when a
certain number are wired in series, parallel or a combination of
those. What BMS are commercially available out there?
Hi Gabe
AGMs require a BMS as soon as the owner can see a cost/benefit result that
says to do it. Two AGMs in series have the potential to get out of balance
if one is at a different trmperature to the other, or if one has a higher
self-discharge rate to the other. Paralell pairs balance to each other,
voltage-wise. But paralell pairs mask battery faults until you suddenly
find the pair go down. On my conversion-in-progress I elected to use dual
strings of AGMs, each with their own Rudman regulator. The challenge with
most regulator systems and charging systems is that the regulators and the
chargers are unrelated to each other. Rudman regs are (now) designed to
match Rudman PFC chargers, I would expect that Brusa charging systems would
do similar (Victor?).
Apart from that, the choices pretty much come down to DIY solutions. I am
using some cheap programmable logic controllers to integrate the signals
from the Rudman regs, and control a dumb-as-a-brick transformer charger in
a manner that the AGMs and regulators should be happy with.
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That is the one I am high bidder on. There are plenty of others. Just find
one with 0 bid and go from there. Thanks LR.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cwarman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 12:45 PM
Subject: IOTA
So has anyone mentioned that these IOTA DLS-55AMP Power Converters would
not work well in a EV and if there would be any special considerations on
using one of these as opposed to a Zivan NG1 or any other type of DC DC
converter that everyone else is using.
The link to ebay to one of these auctions is
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=4573062189&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
Thanks
Cwarman
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is not the 924 a front engined water cooled rear wheel drive car? If you
wanted to put in a 911 or VW transaxle up front, would you end up making it
a front wheel drive? Yikes! That might be a bit of work!
Or did you plan on putting the transaxle and motor in the rear? I expect you
would have to get out the cutting torch to replace a differential with a
transaxle, they are quite a bit bigger.
Do not forget you will have to rework all the shifting mechanism as well as
clutch mechanism. This is not easy work.
If you want to do this simply to get around building a custom adapter plate,
don't bother. Adapter plates can be built very rough and crude indeed if
you are too cheap to spend the money. See grassrootsev.com
I am sure ElectroAutomotive or your local machine shop can set you up with a
quality adapter plate at the lowest possible cost.
Don
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 Ray Brooks
Sent: September 8, 2005 7:32 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: 924 EV
I wonder how hard it would be to adapt a 911 or even a VW type 1 transaxle
to the 924 chassis. The only real challenge would be the inner CV joints and
with a little luck those may either fit perfectly or require minor fiddling.
With the above mentioned transaxles the adaptor bits are readily available.
The electric motor would be mounted in the back of the car eliminating the
weight of the forward bellhousing, driveshaft, etc.
If the VW tranny would work it would save a lot of money vs the 911 trans
and would probably have a more usable 4th gear.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Phillip
Rotating 11 and 15 will work and is a good idea.
Swapping 23 and 20 without rotation would put the @#$@ side posts facing
each other in what could be a fiery speed- bump-plasma-worthy EVent.!
Same with the other swaps mentioned :-(
Roland, these inquires are actually because of something you said about
battery racks, avoiding loop back as you called it.
Thanks for raising the issue. I tried to balance potential between any
two points against "being reasonable" about cables.
Yes 12v, center posts on these excide XCD and side posts.
http://www.exideworld.com/products/automotive/exide_select_orbital_XCD.html
no filler caps! amen
flipping 20,21,22,23 will result in sidepost to side post potential
problems (Pun intended)
Thanks on the EV250, I need to look at the zilla wireing diagram! now!
I shouldn't have to worry about blowing tops off of sealed batteries,
not in a box, during charge, right?
My metal racks are painted then sprayed with poly coat. There is no
hold down frame, instead the shortest path to metal will be to the hold
down bolts that are on 3.1 centers on these batteries. I may make a
phenolic washer that the two bolts are recessed into if it becomes a
problem.
Right now I have fender washers and 5/16 bolts 8 inch long.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It's a shame that more people don't attend NEDRA races at Woodburn. A
better venue would help but the basic problem is that not very many people
are interested in racing of battery electric vehicles. Only a small
minority of
the people is interested in electric vehicles and only a minority of that
minority
is excited about drag racing.
Let's admit that electric drag racing excites hardly anyone except the
participants. The lack of noise is a disappointment; most of the
excitement of a
drag race is induced by the noise. And the electric cars are slugs compared
to
ICE drag racers. While few electric dragsters can exceed 100 mph, the
faster
ICE racers can exceed 300 mph.
If we want to convince people to drive electric cars, we need to find a
better
way than drag racing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Trough" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:28 AM
Subject: NEDRA race location change?
This year's poor spectator and participant turnout numbers at Woodburn
caused some significant discussion on the topic of how to grow this sport
amongst a number of people in attendance.
I understand the desire to choose a geographic location that is accessible
to a large number of users, but I don't believe Woodburn is the best
choice for a NEDRA event, ESPECIALLY the nationals. Woodburn is literally
in the middle of nowhere and honestly, I could see no impact nor interest
in the EV racing from the Jr dragster crowd. I don't think we are changing
any perspectives or planting any seeds there.
The Wayland Invitational made this painfully obvious. There were FAR more
spectators and FAR more serious racing participants. Additionally, the
electrics were having FAR more impact on both spectators and racers alike.
A number of people were comparing the electrics favorably with full blown
race rigs and many seeds are planted every time Plasma Boy makes a good
showing at the evening drags.
Add the fact that the track is located in a major population center and
you actually have some ability to promote a national championship event
locally to improve the turnout (at least among the spectators).
I think that if the NEDRA leadership is serious about growing this sport,
they need to locate the nationals in a population center, and time it to
cooincide with another significant racing event so that the electrics can
have the maximum impact possible. The Portland track would make an
excellent choice and they are even serviced by an electric train so that
people can attend without burning gas to get there.
In my opinion, Woodburn just isn't cutting it. Even with Wired coverage of
the event before hand, we had the lowest turnout ever during a year with
unprecidented interest in electrics. I believe it is time for a change.
Do you want to maintain the status quo of dwindling participation, or do
you want to make some changes to insure a future for this sport?
I'm sure I am not the first person to make these suggestions.
Something to think about....
-Ken Trough
Admin - V is for Voltage Magazine
http://visforvoltage.com
AIM - ktrough
FAX/voice message - 206-339-VOLT (8658)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've only been lurking a couple of days, but this addresses one of my
early questions... why the focus on what is a very critical alignment of
motor to existing tranny/tansaxle? why not dump the whole she-bang and
bolt direct to a CV joint/half-shaft? trannies burn power and are heavy,
my very rudimentary knowledge leads me to believe that two motors direct
connected to the flange where the cv joint connects to the transaxle
would be easier. This flange just has to be bolted up square and
centered, but if the final position is off a few fractions of an inch
from where it was originally attached its okay as the part is made to
move anyway?
I had been working on how to spell this out more logically, but was
caught by how relevant the discussion below was, and so I ramble.
I realise there are many other issues which I will get to eventually,
but this was just off the top of my head. Of course, 1:1 drive ration
may be a problem?
thanks for indulging a total n00b!
Andrew
Don Cameron wrote:
Is not the 924 a front engined water cooled rear wheel drive car? If you
wanted to put in a 911 or VW transaxle up front, would you end up making it
a front wheel drive? Yikes! That might be a bit of work!
Or did you plan on putting the transaxle and motor in the rear? I expect you
would have to get out the cutting torch to replace a differential with a
transaxle, they are quite a bit bigger.
Do not forget you will have to rework all the shifting mechanism as well as
clutch mechanism. This is not easy work.
If you want to do this simply to get around building a custom adapter plate,
don't bother. Adapter plates can be built very rough and crude indeed if
you are too cheap to spend the money. See grassrootsev.com
I am sure ElectroAutomotive or your local machine shop can set you up with a
quality adapter plate at the lowest possible cost.
Don
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 Ray Brooks
Sent: September 8, 2005 7:32 AM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: 924 EV
I wonder how hard it would be to adapt a 911 or even a VW type 1 transaxle
to the 924 chassis. The only real challenge would be the inner CV joints and
with a little luck those may either fit perfectly or require minor fiddling.
With the above mentioned transaxles the adaptor bits are readily available.
The electric motor would be mounted in the back of the car eliminating the
weight of the forward bellhousing, driveshaft, etc.
If the VW tranny would work it would save a lot of money vs the 911 trans
and would probably have a more usable 4th gear.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually, the 924 has the motor and clutch up front, and the transaxle is
already in the back. Power goes from the clutch housing directly to the rear of
the motor in the front to the transaxle in the back of the car.
--- Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is not the 924 a front engined water cooled rear wheel drive car? If you
> wanted to put in a 911 or VW transaxle up front, would you end up making it
> a front wheel drive? Yikes! That might be a bit of work!
>
> Or did you plan on putting the transaxle and motor in the rear? I expect you
> would have to get out the cutting torch to replace a differential with a
> transaxle, they are quite a bit bigger.
>
> Do not forget you will have to rework all the shifting mechanism as well as
> clutch mechanism. This is not easy work.
>
> If you want to do this simply to get around building a custom adapter plate,
> don't bother. Adapter plates can be built very rough and crude indeed if
> you are too cheap to spend the money. See grassrootsev.com
>
> I am sure ElectroAutomotive or your local machine shop can set you up with a
> quality adapter plate at the lowest possible cost.
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
> 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 Ray Brooks
> Sent: September 8, 2005 7:32 AM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: 924 EV
>
> I wonder how hard it would be to adapt a 911 or even a VW type 1 transaxle
> to the 924 chassis. The only real challenge would be the inner CV joints and
> with a little luck those may either fit perfectly or require minor fiddling.
> With the above mentioned transaxles the adaptor bits are readily available.
> The electric motor would be mounted in the back of the car eliminating the
> weight of the forward bellhousing, driveshaft, etc.
>
> If the VW tranny would work it would save a lot of money vs the 911 trans
> and would probably have a more usable 4th gear.
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, I have revised my drawing.
Now one last question (yeah right)
Do I run the cable down the hole for the fuel sending unit and under
the car where the fuel lines were to the engine compartment? Probably
best in a conduit.
Or
Do I run it under the carpet and find/make a hole thru the firewall to
the engine compartment?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A thread on this must have shot through the EVDL many a time, could someone
be so kind as to indicate the archive if you happen to know. I did Google it
but never came across anything, then again it was 3 AM when I did that.
Basically I'm looking for a circuit/idea for making an RPM for my upcoming
D & D / Altrax / 72V US battery Ford Festiva conversion.
Any help would be appreciated.
Stefano
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello everyone,
Stefano here again the budget-minded Ford Festiva converting guy. I watched
the grassroots video again last night for what seems like the 14th time.
I've been trying to locate a source for this split (tapered) hub pulley
things that the fellow shows on his bench. I understand the overall idea and
since my EV is on a very strict budget I was wondering if someone might have
any leads as to where I might source pulleys like those shown. Or failing
that if you know of another method to home-brew hubs for a keyed 7/8" shaft
for my D & D please guide me gently to a URL or source of info.
thanks,
Stefano
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Jerry, Noel, and all,
Thanks for your encouragement!
I was called today to come into the CBC studio Saturday morning to be
interviewed for CBC Radio One, All in the Weekend program. It should be
another opportunity to spread the word some more.
Best Regards,
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "jerry dycus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 3:40 PM
Subject: EV pulbicity Re: Montreal Gazette article today, Sept. 6
Hi Doug and All,
Way to go Doug !!
There is starting to be a lot of EV related articles
especially on the plug in Prius project that has did full page spreads and
smaller articles and many mentions other the last month, Probably 30 times
I noticed on TV or the paper.
The Local TV talk show Kathy Fountain want me to be a
show as soon as I have a Freedom EV running.
So all you out there call in your local talk shows,
write your local papers and tell them about the joys of EV's. .Mention
the jobs, national, economic security aspects of it too as that gets the
attention of many who wouldn't consider them before.
Now is the time to counter act the misinformation the
auto companies have been spreading.
Thanks,
Jerry Dycus
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I agree with this in many ways but as a motor guy looking to toughen these
motors up to take the abuse, I'm hoping we will see a trickle down to building
tougher daily driver motors. I'm sure many advancements have trickled down to
everyone through what has been learned at the track from those that race EV's.
Racer and dailies are just different sides of the coin, both trying I hope to
reach the same goals.
Just my 2 cents
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Tom Shay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's a shame that more people don't attend NEDRA races at Woodburn. A
better venue would help but the basic problem is that not very many people
are interested in racing of battery electric vehicles. Only a small
minority of
the people is interested in electric vehicles and only a minority of that
minority
is excited about drag racing.
Let's admit that electric drag racing excites hardly anyone except the
participants. The lack of noise is a disappointment; most of the
excitement of a
drag race is induced by the noise. And the electric cars are slugs compared
to
ICE drag racers. While few electric dragsters can exceed 100 mph, the
faster
ICE racers can exceed 300 mph.
If we want to convince people to drive electric cars, we need to find a
better
way than drag racing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Trough"
To:
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:28 AM
Subject: NEDRA race location change?
> This year's poor spectator and participant turnout numbers at Woodburn
> caused some significant discussion on the topic of how to grow this sport
> amongst a number of people in attendance.
>
> I understand the desire to choose a geographic location that is accessible
> to a large number of users, but I don't believe Woodburn is the best
> choice for a NEDRA event, ESPECIALLY the nationals. Woodburn is literally
> in the middle of nowhere and honestly, I could see no impact nor interest
> in the EV racing from the Jr dragster crowd. I don't think we are changing
> any perspectives or planting any seeds there.
>
> The Wayland Invitational made this painfully obvious. There were FAR more
> spectators and FAR more serious racing participants. Additionally, the
> electrics were having FAR more impact on both spectators and racers alike.
> A number of people were comparing the electrics favorably with full blown
> race rigs and many seeds are planted every time Plasma Boy makes a good
> showing at the evening drags.
>
> Add the fact that the track is located in a major population center and
> you actually have some ability to promote a national championship event
> locally to improve the turnout (at least among the spectators).
>
> I think that if the NEDRA leadership is serious about growing this sport,
> they need to locate the nationals in a population center, and time it to
> cooincide with another significant racing event so that the electrics can
> have the maximum impact possible. The Portland track would make an
> excellent choice and they are even serviced by an electric train so that
> people can attend without burning gas to get there.
>
> In my opinion, Woodburn just isn't cutting it. Even with Wired coverage of
> the event before hand, we had the lowest turnout ever during a year with
> unprecidented interest in electrics. I believe it is time for a change.
>
> Do you want to maintain the status quo of dwindling participation, or do
> you want to make some changes to insure a future for this sport?
>
> I'm sure I am not the first person to make these suggestions.
>
> Something to think about....
>
> -Ken Trough
> Admin - V is for Voltage Magazine
> http://visforvoltage.com
> AIM - ktrough
> FAX/voice message - 206-339-VOLT (8658)
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jerry, good point. A lighter vehicle and or more
> aero vehicle is a great
> way to improve range.
I'm at 45 mi. range max with 144V of floodies in a
_Honda Civic_. I have no space left to safely (GVWR)
put them!
> Don
>
> * People are using Lithium batteries with lower
> voltage DC systems.
>
Anyone want to steer me to a post on this? I'm ready
to pony up more cash for batts. and a regulator
system, if they exist...
> * People are using Lead Acid with high voltage AC
> systems.
Of course, with careful BMS/regulation.
>
>
> I think your complaint is simple. It has little to
> do with AC or DC, high or
> low voltage. Your complaint is the standard: current
> battery technology
> sucks and does not allow us the range we get with
> our ICE vehicles. Either
> that, or better range is just too darn expensive.
>
> Let's see if I've got this straight...
>
> If we want longer range and less space/weight in our
> rigs taken up by
> batteries, the current solution is to move from
> flooded lead acid to LiPo.
>
> But LiPos can't have hard current pulls. So we have
> to compensate with
> higher voltages.
>
> But our DC series wound (cheap) motors can't take
> the higher voltages, but
> _are_ made for higher current.
>
> So we upgrade to an AC controller and motor that
> does _best_ with higher
> voltages & lower current.
>
> But the LiPo batteries also need careful thermal
> regulation on current both
> on driving, and on charging. And the controllers in
> some cases need water
> cooling, adding yet another layer of complexity.
>
> In summary, we either drive a $6-9,000 DC floodie EV
> with short range, or we
> drive a $50,000 AC LiPo EV using some parts from
> corporations (Siemens,
> Metric Mind), and others that either our fellow
> hobbyists are cranking out,
> or which we cobble together from a schematic
> ourselves.
>
> Ummm, door number three, people? (Bide our time for
> LiPo regulation to
> become more ubiquitous? Wait for the Subaru and
> Mitsubishi EVs to hit the
> markets?)
>
> If Toyota is sitting on a pile of cash, _they_ would
> seem to be the best
> candidate to (re)-introduce EVs, and eat some R&D
> startup costs, _not_
> Mitsubishi heavy Ind. or Subaru...
>
> And what about the heat pumps that were in the
> RAV4_EV? Who made them?
> Where can we get them?
>
> Is that about where us on-roaders are, or am I
> missing something after 6
> years on the list?
> peace,
>
>
> '92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD
> available)!
> www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
> ____
> __/__|__\ __
> =D-------/ - - \
> 'O'-----'O'-'
> Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came
> out of the steering
> wheel? Are you saving any gas for your kids?
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina
> relief effort.
>
>
'92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD available)!
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Andrew, take a look at the motor power curves and calculate the torque at
various speeds for the wheels. You will soon see that you need some sort of
gear reduction. Once you do this, then plot the power curve with your fixed
gear, and you will realize that a single gear will be a compromise between
acceleration and top speed (sometimes a drastic compromise). This may be OK
for a NEV, but for a highway EV, it is too much of a compromise.
This is why most on-road and highway EVs use the transmission.
Don
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 Andrew Sackville-West
Sent: September 8, 2005 3:56 PM
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
Subject: Re: 924 EV
I've only been lurking a couple of days, but this addresses one of my early
questions... why the focus on what is a very critical alignment of motor to
existing tranny/tansaxle? why not dump the whole she-bang and bolt direct to
a CV joint/half-shaft? trannies burn power and are heavy, my very
rudimentary knowledge leads me to believe that two motors direct connected
to the flange where the cv joint connects to the transaxle would be easier.
This flange just has to be bolted up square and centered, but if the final
position is off a few fractions of an inch from where it was originally
attached its okay as the part is made to move anyway?
I had been working on how to spell this out more logically, but was caught
by how relevant the discussion below was, and so I ramble.
I realise there are many other issues which I will get to eventually, but
this was just off the top of my head. Of course, 1:1 drive ration may be a
problem?
thanks for indulging a total n00b!
Andrew
Don Cameron wrote:
> Is not the 924 a front engined water cooled rear wheel drive car? If
> you wanted to put in a 911 or VW transaxle up front, would you end up
> making it a front wheel drive? Yikes! That might be a bit of work!
>
> Or did you plan on putting the transaxle and motor in the rear? I
> expect you would have to get out the cutting torch to replace a
> differential with a transaxle, they are quite a bit bigger.
>
> Do not forget you will have to rework all the shifting mechanism as
> well as clutch mechanism. This is not easy work.
>
> If you want to do this simply to get around building a custom adapter
> plate, don't bother. Adapter plates can be built very rough and crude
> indeed if you are too cheap to spend the money. See grassrootsev.com
>
> I am sure ElectroAutomotive or your local machine shop can set you up
> with a quality adapter plate at the lowest possible cost.
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
> 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 Ray Brooks
> Sent: September 8, 2005 7:32 AM
> To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu
> Subject: 924 EV
>
> I wonder how hard it would be to adapt a 911 or even a VW type 1
> transaxle to the 924 chassis. The only real challenge would be the
> inner CV joints and with a little luck those may either fit perfectly or
require minor fiddling.
> With the above mentioned transaxles the adaptor bits are readily
available.
> The electric motor would be mounted in the back of the car eliminating
> the weight of the forward bellhousing, driveshaft, etc.
>
> If the VW tranny would work it would save a lot of money vs the 911
> trans and would probably have a more usable 4th gear.
>
>
--- End Message ---
