EV Digest 4904
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Seres Motor Field
by England Nathan-r25543 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Riddle me this (newbie)....
by Fortunat Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) CAD models for common EV components.
by Mike Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Wheel motors
by "Jonathan W. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Adapter plate thickness
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Range Extending
by "Stefan T. Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Riddle me this (newbie)....
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) I bought a motor, and there is one more available if you want it
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
9) Re: Ev convert, me and the car.
by laptop2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: I bought a motor, and there is one more available if you want it
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: R/C Electric Mower
by John David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Riddle me this (newbie)....
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Unveiling the Gamera Nine
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
14) Re: Unveiling the Gamera Nine
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: dc to dc converter
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Unveiling the Gamera Nine
by John David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Battery Charging
by "Joe Strubhar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Battery Charging
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Range Extending
by Mark Coccimiglio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Series Wound vs Sepex 6.7" ADC motor
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Adapter plate thickness
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) RE: Ev convert, me and the car.
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Series Wound vs Sepex 6.7" ADC motor
by "Nick 'Sharkey' Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Battery Charging
by Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks, you folks verified my though that the field strength would increase and
RPM would decrease.
How would the increased field affect the motor amps at partial throttle?
Would this motor with an 8 turn field then handle higher voltage better?
Meaning it would take more voltage to saturate the iron?
What is the difference between a "sep-ex" motor and a "shunt wound" motor? They
sound the same from my perspective.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 8:21 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: Seres Motor Field
The magnetic field per amp would increase in the field.
The motor gurus could probably give you a better answer and please correct me
if I got something wrong. The way I understand it the product of the amps and
the number of turns is called amps-turns and the magnetic field strength is the
same if you have 1 amp flowing thru 100 turns or 100 amps fowwing thru 1
turn(approximately)
If they got the design correct in the first place in a series motor changeing
this may make things worse.
if more turns means smaller wire then the max amps for the whole motor goes
down, what you gain in magnetic field you loose in armature strength. The field
resistance goes up and will require more voltage to get the amps flowing. I
don't think we can consider this field weekening because the current is still
limited by the total resistance.
But this is sometimes a great thing to do.
if the field was radically changed to 100 turns of a smaller gauge wire
making it a high voltage low amperage winding, then it can be controlled by a
seperate controller and things like regenerative brakeing,reversing, and field
weakening become easier. These are called seperatly excited or "sep-ex" for
short.
Can this be done to a stock 9" motor ????
Can we find a field controller to complement the zilla?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jeff,
That isn't true. EPA mileage numbers ARE based on
testing, not just analysis. They don't test on the
street, but they run a prescribed cycle on a wind
tunnel dyno.
The reasons for the discrepencies between the EPA
numbers and the numbers that an average person gets
are many, but the most significant is that the EPA's
test cycles (FTP 75, for the city and HWFET for
highway) are outdated. They have not been updated in
some time, so they don't really reflect the type of
driving most americans do.
Toyota and Honda may be (somewhat) to blame too since
I suspect they tuned their hybrid system to acheive
optimal fuel economy on the test cycles, rather than
to acheive optimal economy in 'real' dricing
conditions.
~fortunat
--- Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> EPA estimates are based on a set of formulas, NOT
> test drives. They
> didn't have good models for hybrids. and some were
> low and others were
> high. They'll get it eventually. I like
> http://www.fueleconomy.gov/ who
> shows a 2004 insight avarage of 77.5 mpg right next
> to the lower EPA
> numbers. :-)
>
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
I was wondering if there was a community repository of autodesk or other
cad files for EV components. I've been working on designing my car in
Autodesk Inventor 10 and this would be a huge boon to anyone trying to do
this.
Otmar, Roderick, others: Can you provide models for the components you
make/sell?
-Mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If you want other motor suggestions, what about a Nissan Super Motor? You
could connect one to power a 4WD linkage.
I only have looked, not touched, and have no idea about availability. YMMV.
STAY CLEAR OF NETGEAR
_________________________________________
Jonathan Smith
Wonderful Human Being
_________________________________________
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In my case the hole already in the end of the warp 9 is only slightly
bigger than the pilot shaft and would have left no bearing material AND
i had a thicker than normal clutch. So I ended up with my own motor bell
on the motor side of the adapter plate to establish the position. My
plate is 5/8 thick aluminum tooling and it seems plenty strong
http://cvevs.jfs-tech.com/dsc00020.jpg
http://cvevs.jfs-tech.com/dsc00037.jpg
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, I know this comes up every-now-and-then, but I had a thought:
What I would really wish for is an EV for zippin' around town (0 -
40MPH, stop & go traffic), and a hybrid for short highway/byway cruises
(40 - 60MPH, steady speed)...
How about a dual-mode hybrid? Instead of thinking of the gas motor as a
generator or primary drive or even secondary drive, use it as an
on-board part-time supplemental drive; a range-extender.
(Warning! complete off-the-cuff approximations ahead)
Say it takes about 15HP to maintain speed at 55MPH on the flat... and
that equates to about 130A at 120VDC. If you could lower the HP the
electric system needs to provide in those conditions in half, say 8HP,
then your charge should last more than twice as long (peuket and all),
right? Well... there is a whole class of efficient, clean burning
4-stroke engines in the 5-20HP class that are power tuned to the
2000-4000RPM band and weight less than two batteries worth. How about
this configuration:
+----------+
| |
+--+ | 10HP ICE |
|\/| | | |
| | |=| |
|/\| | +----------+
##+--+
## \-- Centrifugal Clutch
##
## +------------+ || +--------
|\/| | | || | \
| |==| EV Motor |==||==| Trans |=== -> Diff
|/\| | | || | /
+------------+ || +--------
The ICE remains off around town and disconnected from the drivetrain,
then when you get on the highway, the ICE is started and throttled along
with the elec motor (proportional bias). Or maybe this would be a
"cruise control" setup? The idea is to provide half the typical cruise
power with an ICE in it's ideal and most efficient mode: cruising. It is
basically just offsetting the extra HP needed at high speed, which
allows for a lower Amp draw on the batteries, which allows for a longer
drive...
This setup (if it works) would very much match my driving patterns using
a 50 mile battery capacity: around town during the weekdays (10-20
miles/day - all electric), then out of town on the weekends occasionally
(20 - 80 miles round trip - 20% electric, 80% electric+ICE). That would
allow for the use of a 2-4 gallon gas tank, which comes out to just
around 2 batteries worth of total extra weight, and once a month
fill-ups of $10.
Is this particular configuration perhaps worth pursuing?
Now I know there are many who disapprove of hybrids of any sort, but
this is just a passing thought; a brain-storm if you will, so feel free
to bash away at will ;)
--
Stefan T. Peters
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:48:26 -0800 (PST), Fortunat Mueller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jeff,
>
>That isn't true. EPA mileage numbers ARE based on
>testing, not just analysis. They don't test on the
>street, but they run a prescribed cycle on a wind
>tunnel dyno.
Not quite. The Federal Test Procedure (the formal names) are run on
chassis dynamometers. (Ford has about 150 of 'em in a huge building in
Dearborne. A "driver" sits in the driver's seat and follows the
prompting on a video monitor. At Ford, the monitor displays a
tolerance band of the speed he has to maintain and it is up to him to
keep his speed within the bands. These are VERY skilled drivers and
their actions can make or break a vehicle's emissions compliance.
During the test cycle, the entire contents of the exhaust are bagged
in large teflon bags. This blends the total emissions from the cycle
into one mass that is sampled and the constituents analyzed. From
this sampling the EPA mileage is computed.
This is a scientific and highly repeatable method of computing
mileage. As the EPA and car makers say, the actual values are
irrelevant other than for comparisons. A car with a city mileage of
30 gets better mileage than one rated at 28 but that does not
guarantee the car will get anything close on the street. Only if the
drive happens to coincide with the FTP will it agree.
EPA spent a lot of time a couple or three decades ago developing these
driving cycles to be representative of city and highway driving
respectively. Demographics and road conditions have changed in that
time but the EPA wisely keeps the test the same so that comparisons to
past years can be made.
>Toyota and Honda may be (somewhat) to blame too since
>I suspect they tuned their hybrid system to acheive
>optimal fuel economy on the test cycles, rather than
>to acheive optimal economy in 'real' dricing
>conditions.
EVERY manufacture tunes to the FTPs. NO exceptions. Too much rides
on the outcome, both for emissions compliance and CAFE. The firmware
in PCMs, even older ones, is chock-full of routines that not only
optimize the tuning for conditions expected during the FTPs but also
designed to detect that an FTP is being run.
There was a rather (in)famous incident with Cadillac a few years ago
where they went a bit far and got caught. They knew that the FTP,
both at their facilities and at EPA's, was always run with the
driver's side door open. So they wired an input to the PCM from the
door switch that caused the PCM to switch to "special" tuning when it
detected a combination of door open, gear in "D" and speed > some
value.
I'm a little foggy on the details but I believe some technician ran a
cycle with the door closed and the emissions were remarkably
different. One thing lead to another and Cadillac had to do a large
recall and fit new CALPACs to the affected models, as well as pay a
large fine.
John
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I think I finally found that bargain basement motor that I have been
searching for, so I bought it.
It is a drive motor off a 36 V Hyster E30FR forklift (E-Bay item:
7562163332). I got a picture of the thing and it has an external shaft with a
gear
bolted to it. The gear can come off, but I don't know exactly what is behind
it.
I have pictures if anyone wants to buy the other one. Just e-mail me off list.
This motor has the great feature of having a brake. I think that will come
in very handy in my EV.
The motor is 8" x 16.25" excluding the shaft and the brake. I think that is
a pretty decent sized motor to drive a small EV. Time will tell if I am
correct. I got it for $162 including shipping which I think is a pretty good
deal.
If anyone wants details or may be interested in the other one, let me know
off list. The motor will arrive in a few days, so there is still time to
purchase the other one.
In addition, I located another source in the Southeast where I can get used
industrial truck drive and pump motors as well as controllers (of the GE EV1 84
V variety, pot boxes, fuses, contractors, etc.) These are very basic low end
components that may be suitable for a small low speed (0 - 45 MPH) commuter
EV. I plan to go out and look at all the available merchandise in the next few
days - 2 weeks. If anyone is interested, in small industrial truck motor,
please contact me off list, and I will see what my source has available. Note:
I have no affiliation with the source and take absolutely no responsibility
for any representations of merchandise or merchandise that he has. I am simply
offering to look at some motors and take some pictures for some fellow
hobbyists while I am out there. This is just to help you out if you are in the
market for similar parts. I'll take some pictures, make some measurements,
write
down name plate data etc. I'll give you that with his name and phone number.
The rest would be up to you. I haven't seen the condition of the stuff yet,
but I think some of it may be OK to use in a first EV project.
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ya sorry about the typo, it is a Straight 6.
Im so used to saying V8 when explaining my 600 hp impala that the V just
stuck with me.
http://ecahost.com/impala
About the carbs of the Z, i rebuilt them 3-4 times, replaced the
need/seats with some ball types and I think one is sticking open or
closed right now. Milage varies depending hot its running from day to
day, but the carbs need work they are falling apart and one has a crack
on top of the spring/oil resivour letting vaccume leak out. Its either
$300-500 to get all new carbs for it. Or $5000+ to convert it to EV.
I think EV would be fun, im always into projects. Im looking to
converting it to EV mostly because I originally bought this car to hold
a high power V8 but I already got a high power V8 impala even if its
alot heavier. And if I keep the Z with a gas motor much longer thats a
serious chance im gonna go crazy and start ordering parts for turbo v8
which is just gonna cost my thousands in gas.
An EV would probably be cheaper in the very end.
I im not sure i want to do a dual electric motor as thats just more cost
for batterys, motor, and motor controler.
I kinda have a rough estimate in my head that I would like to use the
144v curtis 500(550?)amp controler, and a 8-9" motor keeping the trans
if Im gonna need the 1st gear for hill climbing. I do know how to shift
without using a clutch if thats nessasary even though its particularly
difficult with the Z's 5speed, but that could just be due to how rough
the motor runs.
I'd also like to stick with 10-12 batteries. 6-8 in the back over the
gas tank, and 4 or so under the huge hood these things have if I can fit
it in. I plan to do as much work myself as I can. I can weld, wire
anything, and fabricate a little as long as it doesn't require the
precision down to thousands :) .
I'd like to start out cheap, and then add things as I get more funds
like extra safety futures and switches etc, but to start I'd like to
only have maybe a bit-red-cutoff switch a large fuse near the batteries.
Adding rev limiters and other safety contacts later if this is possable?
/end long windedness
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Looks like a good motor. I don't recognize the DE plate so I don't know what
motor it is but the price can't be beat, you got a great deal. Keep us posted
as to how it works. Knowing what works and what doesn't is 90 % of the battle.
Best of luck
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I finally found that bargain basement motor that I have been
searching for, so I bought it.
It is a drive motor off a 36 V Hyster E30FR forklift (E-Bay item:
7562163332). I got a picture of the thing and it has an external shaft with a
gear
bolted to it. The gear can come off, but I don't know exactly what is behind
it.
I have pictures if anyone wants to buy the other one. Just e-mail me off list.
This motor has the great feature of having a brake. I think that will come
in very handy in my EV.
The motor is 8" x 16.25" excluding the shaft and the brake. I think that is
a pretty decent sized motor to drive a small EV. Time will tell if I am
correct. I got it for $162 including shipping which I think is a pretty good
deal.
If anyone wants details or may be interested in the other one, let me know
off list. The motor will arrive in a few days, so there is still time to
purchase the other one.
In addition, I located another source in the Southeast where I can get used
industrial truck drive and pump motors as well as controllers (of the GE EV1 84
V variety, pot boxes, fuses, contractors, etc.) These are very basic low end
components that may be suitable for a small low speed (0 - 45 MPH) commuter
EV. I plan to go out and look at all the available merchandise in the next few
days - 2 weeks. If anyone is interested, in small industrial truck motor,
please contact me off list, and I will see what my source has available. Note:
I have no affiliation with the source and take absolutely no responsibility
for any representations of merchandise or merchandise that he has. I am simply
offering to look at some motors and take some pictures for some fellow
hobbyists while I am out there. This is just to help you out if you are in the
market for similar parts. I'll take some pictures, make some measurements,
write
down name plate data etc. I'll give you that with his name and phone number.
The rest would be up to you. I haven't seen the condition of the stuff yet,
but I think some of it may be OK to use in a first EV project.
Steve
---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't think it's pointless. The robo mower you mentioned doesn't
look nearly as powerful as my MM1000 and I sometimes have to go over
tall grass twice. Also, if I can convert my mower to remote control
for a few hundred bucks, I'd still save a ton compared to either of
the retail options mentioned in this string. And even if I could
afford the robot mower, I wouldn't be able to mow common areas around
my house the way I do now. Sorry, I'm not laying guide wire all around
the neighborhood. My brother also uses my electric mower and wouldn't
be able to use the robo mower without installing the wires around his
yard. Plus, it would be a neat toy ;-) Found a book at Amazon called
Robot Builders Bonanza that looks like it might be what I'm looking
for.
John David
On 11/13/05, Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Naw, that's almost pointless to make it remote controlled since you
> still have to operate it. You want the Friendly Robotics Robomower.
> All electric and uses a staked perimeter wire to decide where to stop
> moving.
>
> Danny
>
> John David wrote:
>
> >All,
> > I found this website, http://evatech.net/ , via Make Magazine
> >and looks like an awesome idea to adapt to a battery powered mower. I
> >have Black and Decker MM1000 and am thinking about adapting this idea
> >to it. Are there any remote control car experts on the list? How "off
> >the shelf" are R/C car parts? Would they adapt to wheel chair motors
> >easily? Programming a chip is out of the question for me for now. This
> >would also be a great way to add battery capacity to the mower. If you
> >don't have to push it then battry weight isn't much of an issue. My
> >MM1000 has two motorcycle-size gel cell batteries and if I had a setup
> >like this I could easily double them. This would also be great for EV
> >PR. Though it's not much of an issue with electric mowers, hearing
> >protection would be a strong selling point with something like this.
> >Some things I would need to sort out:
> >
> >-A dead man switch for the mower blade, maybe a pinkie switch on the
> >hand controller.
> >-A steering system. By the looks of the website, they experimented
> >with both castering front wheel with differential driven rear wheels
> >which would require two motors and a discontinued model with battery
> >driven rear wheels and a forward steering system though it still used
> >two motors. I wonder if one motor would have enough guts to push
> >something like this?
> >-I would like to keep the option of bagging the grass so would have to
> >change the component location to keep the rear area clear for grass
> >catcher attachment.
> >
> >Any ideas?
> >
> >John David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I imagine when the EPA wants to modify its testing criteria, it ends up
confusing a lot of people. I.E. your 2005 hybrid gets a rated 70 mpg
and the new improved 2006 model with 10% better economy gets rated 60
mpg, but only because the changed the testing method, a lot of people
will be dismayed. They're not going to go back and rerate all the old
vehicles ever made so any attempt to chart mpg of vehicles sold over
different years would be virtually meaningless due to these flaws. I
bet some congressmen would assume the industry is backpedalling and
raise a stink about it.
Danny
jerry halstead wrote:
Here's the Consumer Reports article on how most cars don't get the
mileage that the sticker's advertise:
http://cdn.consumerreports.org/static/0510fue0.html
Lots of info, including a list of the best and worse performers in
various size classes.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That's right, listers and lurkers, you heard it first from the Maker. Jim
Husted's latest creation has left the nest. This super-shortened 9" with a
tailshaft has both adjustable brush rigging and coils plumbed for
series-parallel shifting. More info on the motor and it's funny name are
online at www.karmanneclectric.blogspot.com
Cheers,
Jay Donnaway
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jay Donnaway wrote:
> coils plumbed for series-parallel shifting.
I'm interested in knowing how well that works out. If good, I'm going
to have to get mine setup like that..
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to Bill, Nancy, and All,
Bill & Nancy wrote:
Hi,
I was looking at dc to dc converters at
http://www.powerstream.com/dc-72.htm for use in my evw. They output 9
amps with a 10 amp peak and 124 watts. Would this be adequate power to
the 12 volt system with headlights in use for short distances, approx.
1 mile.
Thanks,
Bill
What kind of vehicle? Not knowing this, here's a bit of general info:
Technically, no. The average car needs about 15-16 amps to run the
'headlight circuit'. This includes the headlights, taillights, front
park lights, side marker lights, and interior dash and switch
illumination. This does not include the extra power drawn when you hit
the brake pedal, which can be anywhere from 4-8 extra amps, depending on
how many bulbs light up when you hit the brake pedal. Older vehicles
like 60's era cars and trucks and minimalist type vehicles will require
less lighting power, say, 12 amps or so. At 9 amps continuous, this
dc-dc will still not keep up even with such an older vehicle with its
simpler light circuit.
On the other hand, 1 mile isn't very far....you could even do it on just
a 12V battery, though your headlights wouldn't be all that bright as
they're used to running at 13.8 - 14.3V. Depending on the size of your
unassisted 12V battery, the lights may sag the battery down to anywhere
from 11.7V to as low as 11V for a smaller sized 12V battery. The
headlights would make pretty poor light at just 11V.
Lastly, if the dc-dc you're looking at is robust enough and can stand
being held at an over-amped level, it's 9 amps into a 12V battery being
pulled at 15-16 amps, would certainly help[p things out. 16 amps minus 9
being put towards the effort, is only a 7 amp power draw. At this low
current level, that the battery might only sag down from 12.8V to 12.4V
or so.
The best solution, would be to use a more powerful dc-dc that can
deliver all the power your EV's 12V system might need.
See Ya.......John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Jay,
What type of range do you expect to get out of these and what are
you using to charge them?
John David
On 11/14/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's right, listers and lurkers, you heard it first from the Maker. Jim
> Husted's latest creation has left the nest. This super-shortened 9" with a
> tailshaft has both adjustable brush rigging and coils plumbed for
> series-parallel shifting. More info on the motor and it's funny name are
> online at www.karmanneclectric.blogspot.com
> Cheers,
> Jay Donnaway
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't think so, Bill - others may differ, but the gas produced by charging
is not very flammable or explosive, and is in such small quantities that is
is not a potential problem.
Joseph H. Strubhar
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.gremcoinc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill & Nancy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 10:26 AM
Subject: Battery Charging
> I was informed by someone that it would be unsafe to charge my pack in
> the garage because of the gas produced from charging and the water
> heater pilot.
> Will it be necessary to park outside to charge?
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:56:07 -0800
I don't think so, Bill - others may differ, but the gas produced by
charging
is not very flammable or explosive, and is in such small quantities that is
is not a potential problem.
No - flooded lead acid batteries give off hydrogen ( and oxygen) gas when
charging, particularly when equalizing. This is not a matter of personal
opinion.
Hydrogen IS very flammable and explosive ( if constrained when ignited)
. Check out this site to see what can happen when hydrogen from charging
batteries ignites:
http://www.detrick.army.mil/bulletin/safety/work/batteryexplosion.cfm
PLEASE, everyone. When posting about safety-related issues, be sure you
know that your claims are really true. Don't guess.
Phil
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Try CalCars.org 's "Prius+" project.
http://www.calcars.org/priusplus.html
Stefan T. Peters wrote:
Ok, I know this comes up every-now-and-then, but I had a thought:
What I would really wish for is an EV for zippin' around town (0 -
40MPH, stop & go traffic), and a hybrid for short highway/byway
cruises (40 - 60MPH, steady speed)...
How about a dual-mode hybrid? Instead of thinking of the gas motor as
a generator or primary drive or even secondary drive, use it as an
on-board part-time supplemental drive; a range-extender.
(Warning! complete off-the-cuff approximations ahead)
Say it takes about 15HP to maintain speed at 55MPH on the flat... and
that equates to about 130A at 120VDC. If you could lower the HP the
electric system needs to provide in those conditions in half, say 8HP,
then your charge should last more than twice as long (peuket and all),
right? Well... there is a whole class of efficient, clean burning
4-stroke engines in the 5-20HP class that are power tuned to the
2000-4000RPM band and weight less than two batteries worth. How about
this configuration:
+----------+
| |
+--+ | 10HP ICE |
|\/| | | |
| | |=| |
|/\| | +----------+
##+--+
## \-- Centrifugal Clutch
##
## +------------+ || +--------
|\/| | | || | \ | |==| EV Motor |==||==|
Trans |=== -> Diff
|/\| | | || | /
+------------+ || +--------
The ICE remains off around town and disconnected from the drivetrain,
then when you get on the highway, the ICE is started and throttled
along with the elec motor (proportional bias). Or maybe this would be
a "cruise control" setup? The idea is to provide half the typical
cruise power with an ICE in it's ideal and most efficient mode:
cruising. It is basically just offsetting the extra HP needed at high
speed, which allows for a lower Amp draw on the batteries, which
allows for a longer drive...
This setup (if it works) would very much match my driving patterns
using a 50 mile battery capacity: around town during the weekdays
(10-20 miles/day - all electric), then out of town on the weekends
occasionally (20 - 80 miles round trip - 20% electric, 80%
electric+ICE). That would allow for the use of a 2-4 gallon gas tank,
which comes out to just around 2 batteries worth of total extra
weight, and once a month fill-ups of $10.
Is this particular configuration perhaps worth pursuing?
Now I know there are many who disapprove of hybrids of any sort, but
this is just a passing thought; a brain-storm if you will, so feel
free to bash away at will ;)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Monday 14 November 2005 09:51 am, Mark Hanson wrote:
> I drove the Bombardier SepEx 72V buggy this week-end... It draws 300 amps
> up to 20 mph and then tapers off to 100 amps at 40mph where the motor
> hits its limit.
>
> When I had my cheese wedge many moons ago with a similar size *series*
> wound motor, it would sustain the speed better and draw more current to do
> so. I thought that SepEx motors were just beefier fields (10x current for
> regen) and would hold speed as is characteristic of shunt type motors.
> It appears that in my experience the *series* wound motor has better
> performance and holds speed better. Is this this what others have found
> when comparing two similar size weight vehicles and motors?
Battery current (at a particular voltage) is basically telling you the
horsepower that the motor is producing. If the Bombardier draws 300 amps max
at 72v, that's 21600 watts in or 21.6 hp out max. Cruising at 100 amps at 72v
is 7200 watts in or about 7.2 hp out.
The old Citicars could easily draw 500 amps max at 48v peak; that's 24000
watts or 24 hp max. And they could cruise at 200 amps at 48v; that's 9600
watts or 9.6 hp. So yes; your old cheese wedge *did* produce more horsepower.
The Bombardier's limitation is probably not the motor. More likely, it's the
controller. They probably limited the current deliberately to keep from
murdering the batteries or more (both problems with the old Citicar contactor
controller).
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris Martens wrote:
> I am making an adapter plate for my Geo Metro conversion. Is 3/8 inch
> steel thick enough? Maybe 1/2 inch? The plate will only be 12"x14", and
> I'm not using a big motor.
3/8" steel or even aluminum, is *far* stronger than it needs to be. Strength
is not the issue; notice that the exisin ICE's bellhousing isn't nearly that
thick.
As others have noted, the reason for the thickness of the adapter plate is
mainly to act as a spacer of the desired thickness to properly position the
motor. I've seen adapter plates made out of hardboard.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi laptop2,
Based on your ICE plans for this car, and your Impala, I don't really
think that you will be satisfied with what a Curtis controller can do
for you.
You're definitely in the Zilla demographic.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of laptop2
Sent: Tuesday, 15 November 2005 11:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Ev convert, me and the car.
Ya sorry about the typo, it is a Straight 6.
Im so used to saying V8 when explaining my 600 hp impala that the V just
stuck with me.
http://ecahost.com/impala
About the carbs of the Z, i rebuilt them 3-4 times, replaced the
need/seats with some ball types and I think one is sticking open or
closed right now. Milage varies depending hot its running from day to
day, but the carbs need work they are falling apart and one has a crack
on top of the spring/oil resivour letting vaccume leak out. Its either
$300-500 to get all new carbs for it. Or $5000+ to convert it to EV.
I think EV would be fun, im always into projects. Im looking to
converting it to EV mostly because I originally bought this car to hold
a high power V8 but I already got a high power V8 impala even if its
alot heavier. And if I keep the Z with a gas motor much longer thats a
serious chance im gonna go crazy and start ordering parts for turbo v8
which is just gonna cost my thousands in gas.
An EV would probably be cheaper in the very end.
I im not sure i want to do a dual electric motor as thats just more cost
for batterys, motor, and motor controler.
I kinda have a rough estimate in my head that I would like to use the
144v curtis 500(550?)amp controler, and a 8-9" motor keeping the trans
if Im gonna need the 1st gear for hill climbing. I do know how to shift
without using a clutch if thats nessasary even though its particularly
difficult with the Z's 5speed, but that could just be due to how rough
the motor runs.
I'd also like to stick with 10-12 batteries. 6-8 in the back over the
gas tank, and 4 or so under the huge hood these things have if I can fit
it in. I plan to do as much work myself as I can. I can weld, wire
anything, and fabricate a little as long as it doesn't require the
precision down to thousands :) .
I'd like to start out cheap, and then add things as I get more funds
like extra safety futures and switches etc, but to start I'd like to
only have maybe a bit-red-cutoff switch a large fuse near the batteries.
Adding rev limiters and other safety contacts later if this is possable?
/end long windedness
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2005-11-14, Lee Hart wrote:
>
> Battery current (at a particular voltage) is basically telling you the
> horsepower that the motor is producing. If the Bombardier draws 300 amps max
> at 72v, that's 21600 watts in or 21.6 hp out max.
Uh, I think somehow you mean 21.6 kW (about 16 hp).
-----sharks
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Good advice about knowing what you're talking about. "Let's don't
play with firecrackers, kids, because this might happen:"
http://www.zvis.com/nuclear/dimg.php3?annie,upkannie
Great example.
I know math confuses things but let's do a little.
We know from high school chemistry that a mole of a gas occupies 22.4
liters at STP.
We know that the density of water is 1 and that a mole of water is 18
grams.
A mole of hydrogen is 2 and of oxygen, 32. (remember boys and girls,
diatomic molecules)
Let's say a charge cycle electrolyzes 100 grams (and CCs) of water.
That's a huge amount of water but just for grins, let's go with that.
Skipping the tedious stuff, we know that 100 grams of water yields
about 89 grams of oxygen and 11 grams of hydrogen. Converting to
moles, we have 11/2 - 5.5 moles of hydrogen and 89/32 = 2.8 moles of
oxygen. Converting to volume, 5.5 * 22.4 = 123 liters of hydrogen and
2.8 * 22.4 = 62.7 liters of oxygen for a total gas production of about
186 liters.
What does that mean? Well, consider the volume of a one car garage,
say, 10X20X8 feet. That's 1,600 cu ft. Converting to liters, 45,307
liters. Does anyone really have a garage that small?
We produced 123 liters of hydrogen. That quickly mixes with the
45,307 liters of air to produce a concentration of 123/45307 *100 =
0.27% concentration of hydrogen in air, assuming NO air changes in the
room - a silly assumption but play along.
>From here:
http://www-safety.deas.harvard.edu/services/hydrogen.html#flam
We find that the flammability (NOT explosive range which is smaller)
is from 4% to 74% in air. At 0.27% concentration, we're over an order
of magnitude below the lower limit of flammability.
Let's say our charger went haywire and we electrolyzed a whole liter
of water in the process of frying our pack. That would raise the
hydrogen concentration 10X from that above or 2.7%. We still at about
half the hydrogen necessary to reach the lower limit of flammability -
where the hydrogen flame just sorta whisps around.
That might not seem like a huge safety margin but consider the
assumptions. First, I chose a huge amount of water to electrolyze.
You can figure your own per-charge consumption by dividing the total
water you add during a rewatering by the number of charge cycles since
the last watering. I imagine it to be a few CC total.
Second, I assumed no air changes in the room. Unless this is a
submarine battery room with the water-tight doors chocked, that is
impossible. ASHRAE says to assume at least 2 air changes per hour for
a tightly sealed energy efficient room. More like 10 per hour for a
garage.
Over, say, a 4 hour charge interval, the air will have changed out 40
times or more. One might argue that the gas will be produced at the
end of the charge cycle. True, if the charger is equalizing or
mis-adjusted. Even if it only happens during the last 30 minutes,
there will be 4-5 air changes. Hydrogen has no chance to build up.
One might argue against my assuming good mixing and argue that the
hydrogen would "puddle" against the ceiling. That doesn't happen for
several reasons. First, the hydrogen is emitted from the battery
mixed with oxygen. The hydrogen, being a light molecule, diffuses
very rapidly in all directions. If you have access to an explosive
gas meter you can see that easily by probing around the vent of a
battery that is gassing.
Second, hydrogen rises very rapidly when emitted into air. This only
lasts for a few inches, as the turbulence created rapidly mixes it
with the air.
A classic example of where this "hydrogen rises" assumption fooled
many people and caused a minor panic was at Three Mile Island after
the accident. The hot Zircalloy fuel cladding reacted with steam to
produce copious quantities of hydrogen. Radiolysis of water by the
intense radiation produced more hydrogen. It was feared that the
hydrogen would collect in the top of the containment where it might
become explosive.
It didn't. It mixed with the air in the containment and several days
after an explosive mix was predicted, the overall concentration
reached the lower flammability limit. Something ignited a burn,
probably a spark from some electrical equipment. Rather than an
explosion, the burn was like a wil-o-wisp or swamp gas combustion,
with a flame front working all over the containment over a several
minute period. When we later entered we could see the wispy burn
marks as the flame impinged onto painted surfaces, chair upholstery,
etc.
Here's another example. I have a Group 29 deep cycle battery under
the sofa of my dinette in my motorhome. I've had people frothing at
the mouth with fear over the Hydrogen Menace. Being of the practical
"show-me" type, I decided to test. I punched my 60 amp PD
Intellicharge on "equalize" which overcharged the battery enough that
a standing mist of electrolyte droplets could be seen above each cell
with the caps off.
I put the sofa seat back on and stuck the tube of an explosive gas
meter into the spaces. I sampled like a bulb-pumpin' fool! The
needle never even budged off zero. This was a small volume (approx 3
ft X 20 inches X 18 inches) space that had no obvious vents. Only the
in- and exfiltration around the joints and gaps. I have a video of
that test around here somewhere but it's probably not worth looking
for since all it shows is an apparently inert meter reading zero.
Here's another example. The vital battery system at the Sequoyah
nuclear plant. 250 volts at something like 250,000 amp-hours. A
battery room the size of a basketball court with cell jars large
enough to curl up and sleep in stacked 3 layers deep. The room is
hermetic, with no windows, 9 ft thick concrete walls and floors and
water-tight submarine-type doors. Ventilation is provided by one
each, 6" diameter fan blowing through 2 motorized gate valves and a 6"
diameter intake equipped with two more valves. These valves provide
redundant room isolation in the event of a flood, tornado, etc.
This battery had to be able to power a Vital Bus for the 2 weeks it
would take to bring the plant to cold shutdown after a total loss of
off-site power.
It was calculated during the design phase that the room could be
isolated for something like 3 weeks with the batteries at their
maximum permissible discharge rate before the H2 concentration would
reach the lower flammability limit. Each room (there were 4 redundant
batteries) was equipped with multiple hydrogen detectors, of course.
During my tenure as the responsible engineer for that system, I never
saw the needle even budge off zero except for periodic calibrations.
Those batteries were heavily equalized about 4 times a year until each
cell's SG was within a certain percentage of spec or else the cell was
replaced. This resulted in vigorous gassing. Part of my
responsibilities was to review all the strip charts from the hydrogen
monitoring system to make sure there were no excursions. There never
were.
If you don't like my assumptions, you can run the numbers with
whatever water consumption and room volume you like but the bottom
line is the same - ain't no credible way that charging EV batteries is
going to make an explosive mixture in even a 1 car garage. It will
never get even close. Not even within an order of magnitude.
If a battery box is fairly tightly sealed then it is possible that an
explosive atmosphere can develop inside the box but room venting won't
affect that either way.
Everyone can, of course, do what they want but worrying about hydrogen
buildup in my shop during charging is the very last thing I'll ever
worry about.
John
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:37:27 -0500, "Phil Marino"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:56:07 -0800
>>
>>I don't think so, Bill - others may differ, but the gas produced by
>>charging
>>is not very flammable or explosive, and is in such small quantities that is
>>is not a potential problem.
>>
>
>No - flooded lead acid batteries give off hydrogen ( and oxygen) gas when
>charging, particularly when equalizing. This is not a matter of personal
>opinion.
>
>Hydrogen IS very flammable and explosive ( if constrained when ignited)
>
>
> Check out this site to see what can happen when hydrogen from charging .
>batteries ignites:
>
>http://www.detrick.army.mil/bulletin/safety/work/batteryexplosion.cfm
>
>
>PLEASE, everyone. When posting about safety-related issues, be sure you
>know that your claims are really true. Don't guess.
>
>Phil
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
--- End Message ---
