EV Digest 4913
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Please IGNORE Neon John (was: Re: Just Joshin' Electric-car
driver ...)
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Range extending
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Traction Control with DC??
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Response from A123
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Range extending
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Traction Control with DC??
by "Rodney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Range extending
by "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: Traction Control with DC??
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: CalCars Visit to Seattle a Resounding Success
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Traction Control with DC??
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Range extending
by Chris Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Range extending
by "Stefan T. Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) warp 9 rpm
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Low rolling resistance tires
by Chris Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) RE: Traction Control with DC??
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Traction Control with DC??
by Chris Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Low rolling resistance tires
by Edward Ang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Monster Garage Show Looking for Ampheads
by "John Westlund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Solar Wind Tower
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Low rolling resistance tires
by "Phil Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Range extending
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Range extending
by Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Range extending
by Chris Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: Traction Control with DC??
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
25) Re: Range extending
by Chris Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26) Re: Range extending
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27) Re: Monster Garage Show Looking for Ampheads
by Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
The thing is, Neon John is not a troll.
He's a guy that knows his technical stuff and has contributed a lot of
useful information.
I don't think he's going to go away because he is genuinely interested
in the discussion that goes on here.
He also has an abrasive sense of humour and loves a good argument (or
even a bad one :-).
Unfortunately, this has put him at odds with the list admin amongst
others.
So to slightly modify Peter's advice - Just try to ignore NJ's posts
that gets up your nose.
And to NJ (from one guy that has gotten in trouble saying inappropriate
stuff to another)
Write it - laugh at it - then hit delete, not send.
Mark
(No matter how funny it may seem at the time, it is not a good career
move to suggest to your boss that his wife may like to sample the local
male prostitutes while holidaying in the Mediterranean)
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter VanDerWal
Sent: Thursday, 17 November 2005 10:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Please IGNORE Neon John (was: Re: Just Joshin' Electric-car
driver ...)
Other message boards I've been on have a phrase for this:
DFTT (Don't Feed The Trolls).
Just like wild bears, if you don't feed him (i.e. respond to his posts),
he'll get bored and wander off.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 17 Nov 2005 at 12:48, Chris Martens wrote:
> I saw a 2000KW
> generator on sale for $180. It's rated to run at 50% load for 9 hours on 1.35
> gallons of gas.
> That sounds pretty efficient.
It will also make your car a gross polluter. These gensets are not required
to provide anything like the level of emissions required of cars already in
the 1970s.
Please don't drive anywhere near where I live with that range extender
operating.
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EV List Assistant Administrator
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Want to unsubscribe, stop the EV list mail while you're on vacation,
or switch to digest mode? See how: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to the "from" address above may not reach me. To
send me a private message, please use evdl at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just to clarify, by traction control, do you actually mean regen brakes?
The t-zero car made by AC Propulsion does have traction control, but AC
systems in general don't (thought they do usually have regen, whereas DC
systems usually don't)
Traction control requires speed sensors on the wheels and a computer to
monitor it all.
The computer responds when one wheel is spinning faster than the other
by applying the brake and/or reducing the power from the motor.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rodney
Sent: Friday, 18 November 2005 8:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Traction Control with DC??
Just wondering if anyone has any ideas about how to get traction control
working on a DC system? AC systems have these in built, but I would love
to
get this working on a DC setup. Any ideas would be appreciated!
Cheers
Rod
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi all,
I sent a request to A123 Systems, asking for info about EV sized
batteries.
Here is their response.
------------------------------
Hello,
Thank you for you interest in A123Systems' exciting new battery
technology.
We are currently reviewing the many potential applications and
opportunities for our high power lithium ion technology. Unfortunately,
we are not currently in a position to support all of the inquiries we
have received.
We will put you in our data base and will get you more information as we
are in a position to support your request.
Again, thank you for your interest.
A123Systems, Inc.
Arsenal on the Charles
One Kingsbury Ave
Watertown, MA 02472
Tel: 617.778.5575
Fax: 617.778.5749
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I'm sorry but those specs are wrong. Getting 9 megawatt-hrs on 1.35 gal
of gas defies the laws of physics!
I'm guessing you're looking at an inverter generator like the EU2000i,
which puts out 2000W, not 2000KW. Actually they are 4-strokes, very
expertly designed, and quite clean for a generator. I think
California's strict emissions requirements drive them. The benefit of
having an "inverter" is that engine RPM is not linked to output freq so
it can throttle the engine to the most efficient and quiet RPM. I
would not be surprised if its emissions per hp-hr are better than many
vehicles, but 2kw is not enough to extend your range very much.
Oh wait- nobody sells an EU2000i for anything like $180. OK, yeah, it's
some kind of 2-stroke beast crap.
Danny
David Roden wrote:
On 17 Nov 2005 at 12:48, Chris Martens wrote:
I saw a 2000KW
generator on sale for $180. It's rated to run at 50% load for 9 hours on 1.35
gallons of gas.
That sounds pretty efficient.
It will also make your car a gross polluter. These gensets are not required
to provide anything like the level of emissions required of cars already in
the 1970s.
Please don't drive anywhere near where I live with that range extender
operating.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Mark
I meant traction control on the wheels. I have seen several AC systems with
it built in (yes, AC prop is one) but I havent seen anyone do it with a DC
system.
Regen is another thing, of course I would love that too, but from what I
read it just isnt feasible or reliable on a high power DC system.
Any comments much appreciated.
Cheers
Rod
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I saw a 2000KW
> generator on sale for $180. It's rated to run at 50% load for 9 hours
> on 1.35
> gallons of gas.
> That sounds pretty efficient.
Not really, that's less than 7kwh per gallon. With the average small car
conversion, that's roughly 25 mpg.
Of course it would also produce approx 200 times as much pollution as a
modern car does.
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rodney,
Traction control isn't really reliant on the type of controller at all.
It has more to do with your braking system. The same sensors detect a
wheel spinning too slowly (or locked) for ABS as for a wheel spinning
too fast for traction control.
So, if you want ABS and traction control you'd probably need to talk to
a third-party supplier.
The first one I found through google was http://www.racetronics.net/
(no idea if these are actually any good - just found this as an example)
Getting a system like this to override the throttle signal to an
electric speed controller is probably much simpler than overriding an
ICE throttle.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rodney
Sent: Friday, 18 November 2005 9:34 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Traction Control with DC??
Hi Mark
I meant traction control on the wheels. I have seen several AC systems
with
it built in (yes, AC prop is one) but I havent seen anyone do it with a
DC
system.
Regen is another thing, of course I would love that too, but from what I
read it just isnt feasible or reliable on a high power DC system.
Any comments much appreciated.
Cheers
Rod
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hmmm, I was involved in the Toyota "First on the Road"
Focus group in '97 in Orange County, CA. I wonder if
I can locate some of the people we worked with an get
such a questionnaire sent. It's quite a legitimate
question!
Sincerely,
--- Steven Lough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rodric:
> The Folks from CalCars HAVE contacted Toyota from
> time to time. They
> said that TOYOTA used to say (about PHEV's) "No Way
> !" but now, NOW
> they are saying..."Lets take another look"
>
> The THING I would like to see CalCars or some one
> do, is to have a
> large data-base type questionare sent out to as Many
> Toyota Prius Owners
> as they could afford, Where the Following Questions
> would be Asked:
> -----------
> If you could have bought your Toyota Prius which
> would PLUG IN,thereby
> giveing you TWO energy input sources, and average
> OVER 100 mpg on a
> weekly basis, would you have paid ??
> A: $7500. extra
> b. $5000. extra
> c. $2500. extra
> d. only if it were no extra.
> ------------
>
> Then with 10 or 20 thousand responses IN HAND, Turn
> the DATA over to
> TOYOTA ( And of course all News Outlets
> Possible....)
>
> I think THAT would make Toyota Stand UP and take
> notice.
> --
> Steven S. Lough, Pres.
> Seattle EV Association
> 6021 32nd Ave. N.E.
> Seattle, WA 98115-7230
> Day: 206 850-8535
> Eve: 206 524-1351
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web: http://www.seattleeva.org
>
>
'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?
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Several thoughts:
A limit slip differential is a good first line of defense against
wheel spin. Note not all AWD or 4WD cars have limited slip!
Once you are above current limit, as the motor speeds up it loses
torque, so you have a natural form of weak traction control. Probably
not too valuable on ice, but good for racing.
Another thought is to just monitor motor rpm. If it rises too
quickly, it must be because the wheels are slipping, so you can cut
back on power.
If the car has a braking-based traction control, you might be able to
just use that even with a conversion.
Finally, compare the speed of the front wheels to the rear wheels,
and if too much mismatch cut back until they match.
The Tzero video (and a video of a McLaren Mercedes) that I have seen
have awesome examples of traction control. You hear the tires doing
micro-chirps several times a second! The system is able to hold the
tires right on the ragged edge of max traction. This is one of the
reasons the Tzero is able to accelerate so fast.
--- Rodney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone has any ideas about how to get traction
> control
> working on a DC system? AC systems have these in built, but I would
> love to
> get this working on a DC setup. Any ideas would be appreciated!
__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well, I'm very curious what the emissions would be like. If I was to go that
route, I intended to hook the exhaust through the original system. I'd move the
cat up much closer to keep it hot, and it would take care of any unburnt fuel.
If I build it, I'll roll up to an emissions station and take the test to compare
it to the Geo specs, stiff competition as the original engine was pretty clean.
Even if the car has higher emissions as I build it, theoretically the engine
could be tuned properly and emissions reduced. After all I'm putting a 80cc
motor where a 993cc one was.
And yes, I meant 2000W, not KW. And yes, it is 4 stroke, just a very good deal
(re-manufactured?). At that meager amp output, I can't run solely on it, but I
could maintain stop and go driving, as well as country road driving, charging
downhill, discharging uphill, charging at red lights, discharging on green.
The reason I don't want to go 100% electric, is this car is intended to be
shared
by several households in a community. I want to charge it, but with the
projected use, even an EV with a long range won't be able to cope. Most of the
days it would see light use and electric would be enough, but there will be
non-technical people driving it, and I don't want to strand anyone. I doubt in
the long run I'll be able to save any big bucks over the original gas sipping
engine, but if I can push our fuel usage lower this way, then I think it's worth
a try.
Chris
--- Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sorry but those specs are wrong. Getting 9 megawatt-hrs on 1.35 gal
> of gas defies the laws of physics!
>
> I'm guessing you're looking at an inverter generator like the EU2000i,
> which puts out 2000W, not 2000KW. Actually they are 4-strokes, very
> expertly designed, and quite clean for a generator. I think
> California's strict emissions requirements drive them. The benefit of
> having an "inverter" is that engine RPM is not linked to output freq so
> it can throttle the engine to the most efficient and quiet RPM. I
> would not be surprised if its emissions per hp-hr are better than many
> vehicles, but 2kw is not enough to extend your range very much.
>
> Oh wait- nobody sells an EU2000i for anything like $180. OK, yeah, it's
> some kind of 2-stroke beast crap.
>
> Danny
>
> David Roden wrote:
>
> >On 17 Nov 2005 at 12:48, Chris Martens wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>I saw a 2000KW
> >>generator on sale for $180. It's rated to run at 50% load for 9 hours on
> 1.35
> >>gallons of gas.
> >> That sounds pretty efficient.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >It will also make your car a gross polluter. These gensets are not required
> >to provide anything like the level of emissions required of cars already in
> >the 1970s.
> >
> >Please don't drive anywhere near where I live with that range extender
> >operating.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[stefan] Yup, those are the figures I'm using. So for a 2,000lbs vehicle, that
means 6HP from the ICE, 6HP from the electric motor.
[jerry] Not going to work !! EV hp is much more powerful than ICE hp as the series EV motor makes 5x the rated hp and 9x the rated >torque. And 12 hp cont will barely get you 60 mph on the flat, no wind and take minutes to get there. What I meant was the hp >driving the generator. The EV will have at least 24 rated hp, thus much more for acceleration which the ICE can't do, not even >close. My EV, sometimes hybrid, weighs about 1500 lbs complete.
You misunderstand me. The electric motor is a standard 8", 60HP peak unit. ALL acceleration will be done with electricity. ICE is just to lower AMP draw during cruise by supplying additional power. I won't even be turning the ICE on most days around town.
[jerry] Fairly complicated, hassle, very low power output, much more expensive as
much larger, heavier motor, transmission required > and must stop and charge
batts after 2 hrs in your case..
Yup, there is going to be a tranny in this car no matter what... I like to shift, alot ;)
I guess the difference is that you are trying to make a new kind of car, while I'm just
looking to enhance a traditional EV conversion. The whole "charge batts" thing
is kinda what I'm going for here; an EV conversion that simply allows for longer range
without a ton of money or weight.
This is hopefully only going to be costing me $600 (New ICE) + $200 (clutch and
stuff) + my own time. Which is actually even when compared to the now 7 12v
versus 14 6v batts I was planning on getting originally - so that I could drive
this conversion to work everyday plus some errands.
7 12v will get me back and forth to work but not much farther. 14 6v would get
me around town as well, but not very far out it.
I still wouldn't trust hundreds of $$ worth of batteries to my index finger and forgetful
memory, but the "full manual" idea of system control will certainly make for
some engaging driving... I'm sure you'll have plenty of fun.
[stefan] So, anyone with alternative clutch ideas?
[jerry] Centrifical, variable pully, electric, manual ect.
Any actual makes/models/places I can go buy some of those? I thought a bit
about a manual clutch, but both hands and feet are already accounted for ;)
Plus I'm shooting for a bolt-on/slip-on standalone setup for that clutch.
[jerry] You, like many others here just want gadgets, KIS.
Actually, I'm building my only car, my primary source of transportation, my daily driver,
my grocery-getter, my weekday commuter, and my weekend cruiser, and my dream car... ever
since seeing that silver one in the Nissan "Dream Garage" commercial during the
1996 Olympics and months later in Time magazine:
http://www.datsun.org/roadster/literature/dreamgarage/672000reprint.html
I have a 2 liter inline 4 all ready to rebuild, but when I went over the next years budget, it occurred to me that at this point, the cost between continuing this rebuild with a ICE is the about the same as switching to electric ($900 timing kits, $500 stock piston sets, and $400 gasket kits will do that to ya). I have always admired electric cars, especially conversions of OLDER cars. If I wanted a gadget, I'd go buy a car less then 15 years old (which I have never actually done) and have gadgets-a-plenty.
Please don't speak to others' motivations, that can be a very slippery slope.
[jerry] You only need the average power with a series hybrid vs 4-8x's as much
for a parallel one. Your choice.
See, that's what I'm suggesting... a way NOT to have a big honking ICE engine
in a parallel setup. I think series setups are great, just not interested in
building one myself.
[jerry] What is it's weight that way? you'll need 50 to 100% of the cars weight
without batts, in batts for 50 to 100 mile range. The 2000 isn't very aero so
maybe more if you want range at speed. A good aero hardtop would help along
with other mods.
I did say 1580lbs. Yes, I have a nice complete hardtop for it (being the Seattle area, it will likely be on most of the time).
I'm not MAKING an EV, I'm doing an EV conversion of a half-restored car, so my various options can be limited at times. You kinda have an apples-oranges thing going on here.
Anyways, I didn't intend this to bring up the different merits of various setups... If I did I would of said
"Which should I build?", or "Which do you think is better?". Probably would of added a
"Vs." somewhere in the subject line as well :P
Well, thanks at least for the chatter. Discussion of any sort usually helps to
refine an idea in your head, ya know?
--
Stefan T. Peters
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
about 3500lb vehicle
freshly charged pack of orbitals at 288Volts nominal
2nd gear max throttle shifting to 3rd, i complted the shift but throttle
hesitated during shift
2nd gear is 1.902 and FD is 3.700 = 7.037:1
about 50-60mph(no speedo) and 24 od tire for 840 rpm or 4926-5911 rpm
before pressing the clutch.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does anyone have experience in the gain realized by using low rolling resistance
tires? I have a Geo and the other day I was pushing it around the street
(currently has nada under the hood). It seemed a lot harder than it should be,
and I was thinking it was the tires. They are no doubt under inflated, and
fatter than stock, which doesn't help.
I was just wondering if anyone had switched to tires with less rolling
resistance
and had any real numbers of how much of a range increase they got.
Chris
--- Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The thing is, Neon John is not a troll.
> He's a guy that knows his technical stuff and has contributed a lot of
> useful information.
> I don't think he's going to go away because he is genuinely interested
> in the discussion that goes on here.
>
> He also has an abrasive sense of humour and loves a good argument (or
> even a bad one :-).
> Unfortunately, this has put him at odds with the list admin amongst
> others.
>
> So to slightly modify Peter's advice - Just try to ignore NJ's posts
> that gets up your nose.
>
> And to NJ (from one guy that has gotten in trouble saying inappropriate
> stuff to another)
> Write it - laugh at it - then hit delete, not send.
>
> Mark
> (No matter how funny it may seem at the time, it is not a good career
> move to suggest to your boss that his wife may like to sample the local
> male prostitutes while holidaying in the Mediterranean)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Peter VanDerWal
> Sent: Thursday, 17 November 2005 10:12 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Please IGNORE Neon John (was: Re: Just Joshin' Electric-car
> driver ...)
>
>
> Other message boards I've been on have a phrase for this:
> DFTT (Don't Feed The Trolls).
>
> Just like wild bears, if you don't feed him (i.e. respond to his posts),
> he'll get bored and wander off.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Assuming a zilla;
What if the original wheel sensors were brought into a board that scaled
the pulses by some factor depending the amount 1 is faster than the
average.
if they are within 2% of each other, or some % to allow turning, the
output = avg output
if 1 wheel is 125% of avg then output is 200% average (this would need
to be tuned, even multiplied for gear ratios).
The point of this would be to "OR" this into the RPM sensor and trick
the zilla into thinking there is an over rpm event thereby reducing PWM.
Actually, if the micro's have another PWM capture, perhaps Otmar can add
inputs for wheel sensors and the code to do this?
This is not really traction control because other wheels don't get power
they otherwise could.
Isn't traction control also using the brakes to shift load to the other
wheel?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A traction control package in a modern production vehicle is a pretty impressive
piece of work. What exactly you get for your money varies greatly if you buy a
Chevy or a Mercedes. Not only does it essentially control your break pedal (oh,
lets hope nothing goes wrong...), it needs a bunch of software engineers too
(and
we know how reliable the software guys are...). Few if any systems actually
limit the power delivered to the wheels, they just stop it when it gets there.
Loosing control on ice is stopped by reducing break power, power slides are
avoided by breaking on the skidding wheels. Throw in a couple of computer
controlled transmission bells and whistles and you have your average SUV.
By convenient coincidence it seems, a AC control system has a kind of 'build in'
traction control. Because you are 'limiting' power, not applying breaks, it's
intrinsically much safer/simpler then ICE traction control.
Chris
--- Rodney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone has any ideas about how to get traction control
> working on a DC system? AC systems have these in built, but I would love to
> get this working on a DC setup. Any ideas would be appreciated!
>
> Cheers
>
> Rod
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On my last set of tires, the shop ran out of the
Potenza RE92 P175/65R14 XL (those on the first
generation Prius). The manager sold me a set of
regular supposedly hard-side-wall tires. He said I
could try them out and return them if I don't like
them. So, I tried them for a week.
They are much quieter than the RE92, but my power
usage jump from a regular 1.1Ah/mile to about
1.3Ah/mile (on a 192V pack) despite the fact that I
increased the tire pressure. So, this translates to
.2/1.1*100 = 18%. We did not keep them long enough to
take some detailed data.
However, the RE92 only lasted 20,000 miles partly
because the alignment was not quite right. This time,
we switched to use the tires on the Insight and get a
life time alignment for a little extra.
But, two weeks later, we had the accident. Sigh!
Still in the process of getting the claim. Luckily,
the other driver admitted to be at fault. Will keep
you guys updated when it is over.
Ed Ang
--- Chris Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone have experience in the gain realized by
> using low rolling resistance
> tires? I have a Geo and the other day I was pushing
> it around the street
> (currently has nada under the hood). It seemed a
> lot harder than it should be,
> and I was thinking it was the tires. They are no
> doubt under inflated, and
> fatter than stock, which doesn't help.
>
> I was just wondering if anyone had switched to tires
> with less rolling resistance
> and had any real numbers of how much of a range
> increase they got.
>
> Chris
>
>
> --- Mark Fowler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The thing is, Neon John is not a troll.
> > He's a guy that knows his technical stuff and has
> contributed a lot of
> > useful information.
> > I don't think he's going to go away because he is
> genuinely interested
> > in the discussion that goes on here.
> >
> > He also has an abrasive sense of humour and loves
> a good argument (or
> > even a bad one :-).
> > Unfortunately, this has put him at odds with the
> list admin amongst
> > others.
> >
> > So to slightly modify Peter's advice - Just try to
> ignore NJ's posts
> > that gets up your nose.
> >
> > And to NJ (from one guy that has gotten in trouble
> saying inappropriate
> > stuff to another)
> > Write it - laugh at it - then hit delete, not
> send.
> >
> > Mark
> > (No matter how funny it may seem at the time, it
> is not a good career
> > move to suggest to your boss that his wife may
> like to sample the local
> > male prostitutes while holidaying in the
> Mediterranean)
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Peter VanDerWal
> > Sent: Thursday, 17 November 2005 10:12 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Please IGNORE Neon John (was: Re:
> Just Joshin' Electric-car
> > driver ...)
> >
> >
> > Other message boards I've been on have a phrase
> for this:
> > DFTT (Don't Feed The Trolls).
> >
> > Just like wild bears, if you don't feed him (i.e.
> respond to his posts),
> > he'll get bored and wander off.
> >
> >
>
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John Wayland wrote:
>So far, it appears they want a hi pro type EV build, so
>I'm all ears! I'm hoping that if they peruse the Maniac
>Mazda and Plasma Boy webpages, the concept of
>electric performance will hit them like a sledge hammer,
>right between the eyes!
If you ever get the opportunity, show whoever is putting the
cncept together my post on EV performance in order to give
them ideas.
Monster Garage typically does things on a small budget, so
if the budget is sufficiently small(< $5,000), Dave Cloud's
Geo Metro EV may be a good starting point to draw
inspiration from if the high pro type EV is what is sought.
If the budget is more like $20k, then it's time to take a
bigger look at Maniac Mazda or White Zombie. Perhaps twin
WarP 8s, Zilla 2k, 300V of Orbitals on a custom or kit
chassis, or perhaps a rare car like a Lotus Europa. Another
good possibility would be the conversion of a Dodge Charger
Daytona, with its .28 drag coeficient, if an electric
musclecar is desired.
Maybe a buggy might be built. Imagine how fast a 1500-1800
pound vehicle could be through the 1/4 mile with twin 9s,
Zilla 2k, and 300V pack of Orbitals with big, sticky tires.
So many possibilities. Can't wait to see what happens.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Got this from another newsgroup...
It is a very neat concept based upon a very old idea. It is in Australia, those
aussies are doing some pretty neat stuff...
www.enviromission.com.au/project/video/video.htm
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Edward Ang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On my last set of tires, the shop ran out of the
Potenza RE92 P175/65R14 XL (those on the first
generation Prius). The manager sold me a set of
regular supposedly hard-side-wall tires. He said I
could try them out and return them if I don't like
them. So, I tried them for a week.
They are much quieter than the RE92, but my power
usage jump from a regular 1.1Ah/mile to about
1.3Ah/mile (on a 192V pack) despite the fact that I
increased the tire pressure. So, this translates to
.2/1.1*100 = 18%. We did not keep them long enough to
take some detailed data.
LRR tires do not have "hard" sidewalls. The opposite is true. The store
manager was either clueless, or just wanted to sell you those tires.
The way to reduce rolling resistance it to make the tire very flexible ( and
with very low internal damping). You want as much weight as possible
supported by the tire air pressure, ( no damping in air) and as little
weight as possible supported by the sidewall stiffness ( where the energy is
lost).
Another way to increase the air pressure-supported weight, and reduce the
sidewall-supported weight (and thereby decrease rolling resistance) is to
increase the tire air pressure.
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 ---
Provide a link to your generator.
I don't think you've got a correct picture of the scale here. Provided
you could load the generator "perfectly" without overloading it, you get
2.68 hp. Subtract a chunk of that for charging circuit inefficiency and
battery cycle inefficiency and you're looking at under 2.5hp. A
chainsaw, on the other hand, is typically 2-5 hp.
So you'll need something like a 5:1-10:1 ratio of charging time to
driving time. Stoplights/coasting won't do it. And for a fixed drive
it looks like leaving it running full power will only give you another
10%-20% of range. Given, those numbers are completely of pulled out of
my ass, but the point is this is simply not enough power to
significantly extend the EV range.
The fact that you're using a lot of gasoline and probably producing a
lot of emissions is another valid question. "Tuning" can do little to
improve the generator's emissions over its initial specs. Real
improvements come from computer regulated fuel injection, a catalytic
converter, and a great deal of study on what does what to the emissions.
Danny
Chris Martens wrote:
Well, I'm very curious what the emissions would be like. If I was to go that
route, I intended to hook the exhaust through the original system. I'd move the
cat up much closer to keep it hot, and it would take care of any unburnt fuel.
If I build it, I'll roll up to an emissions station and take the test to compare
it to the Geo specs, stiff competition as the original engine was pretty clean.
Even if the car has higher emissions as I build it, theoretically the engine
could be tuned properly and emissions reduced. After all I'm putting a 80cc
motor where a 993cc one was.
And yes, I meant 2000W, not KW. And yes, it is 4 stroke, just a very good deal
(re-manufactured?). At that meager amp output, I can't run solely on it, but I
could maintain stop and go driving, as well as country road driving, charging
downhill, discharging uphill, charging at red lights, discharging on green.
The reason I don't want to go 100% electric, is this car is intended to be
shared
by several households in a community. I want to charge it, but with the
projected use, even an EV with a long range won't be able to cope. Most of the
days it would see light use and electric would be enough, but there will be
non-technical people driving it, and I don't want to strand anyone. I doubt in
the long run I'll be able to save any big bucks over the original gas sipping
engine, but if I can push our fuel usage lower this way, then I think it's worth
a try.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Regarding range extension:
Driving my Prizm at 60mph or so (cruise) I pull about 60amps*300 volts
from my pack. Or 18kw. Therefore in order to cruise at this speed
forever, I would need a magical source that could put out 18kw of
energy. Since I have regen, I can pretty much balance out hills and the
like.
Now, a 2kw system is 1/9th of an 18kw system. Thus I would be running a
defecit from my battery pack of 8/9ths of the power to keep the car
running. Eventually my batteries would discharge and I would stop.
Thus a 2kw system would extend my range by about 1/9th. Or on a 30
minute ride (about what I would drive the Prizm) another 3 minutes or
so. That's not too much. In fact I could get a lot more by simply
dragging more batteries behind me.
In solar terms, I have a 2kw solar array on the roof of my house. It's
about 20 feet by 7 feet or so. You can't fit this on a car. An 18kw
generator is a big thing.
The only way I can really see this sort of thing working is using an AC
drive system and a pusher trailer. In this case you can have the front
of a VW diesel (70hp) or a VW Bug (40-50hp) pushing your car along. Your
beautiful AC drive will act as a 50kw generator when you can soak up the
extra cruise power into your pack and have an additional 50kw (~70hp) of
power when you want to climb a mountain.
Just as long as the mountain is not over 15 minutes in size :-)
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> So you'll need something like a 5:1-10:1 ratio of
> charging time to driving time.
Yes, but that's full throttle. I don't know about where you live, but on the
country roads and mainstreets here, I am rarely stepping on the gas. If I could
use the lower portion of your estimation at 5:1 charging to driving(wide open),
that'll do it.
> lot of emissions is another valid question. "Tuning" can do little to
> improve the generator's emissions over its initial specs. Real
> improvements come from computer regulated fuel injection, a catalytic
> converter, and a great deal of study on what does what to the emissions.
What I'll loose in emissions, I'll make up in conservation (I hope). But if a
well funded research team warmed up to the idea, the much lower cc engine would
be bound to emit less pollutants. A production type model would have the same
kind of emission reducing technology that current production cars do.
2000W:
http://www.builderdepot.com/browse.ihtml?pid=206448&step=5&prodstoreid=1682
4000W:
http://www.builderdepot.com/browse.ihtml?pid=206449&step=5&prodstoreid=1682
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 11/17/2005 5:52:33 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Few if any systems actually
limit the power delivered to the wheels, they just stop it when it gets
there. >>
Many do, by retarding timing, backing off the throttle, altering cam timing
and manifold tuning in addition to cycling the appropriate brake.
Ben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Driving my Prizm at 60mph or so (cruise) I pull about 60amps*300 volts
> from my pack. Or 18kw.....
60mph or so is faster then I'll be driving. You would be drawing much less
amperage if you measured it at 45. Also, you are tugging around a heavy rack of
batteries, farther increasing your amperage draw. I was hoping to draw an
-average- of 4KW in my rig, making it much more feasible.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chris Martens wrote:
So you'll need something like a 5:1-10:1 ratio of
charging time to driving time.
Yes, but that's full throttle. I don't know about where you live, but on the
country roads and mainstreets here, I am rarely stepping on the gas. If I could
use the lower portion of your estimation at 5:1 charging to driving(wide open),
that'll do it.
Actually my WAG was based on average current to drive around, not the
peak the motor can take. The bottom line remains that 2kw is not enough
energy to help in any useful sense. Range would be better if the weight
of the generator and fuel were replaced by an equivalent weight of battery.
What I'll loose in emissions, I'll make up in conservation (I hope). But if a
well funded research team warmed up to the idea, the much lower cc engine would
be bound to emit less pollutants. A production type model would have the same
kind of emission reducing technology that current production cars do.
Won't happen. We're talking about pollutants produced per hp-hr. A
smaller engine is not necessarily lower pollutants per hp-hr. And David
was right. These gens are the worst in pollutants per hp-hr. Not only
do they lack a catalytic converter and EFI, the timing, valves,
combustion chamber shape, and cooling system were simply never designed
with emissions in mind at all. It's many times more pollutants per
hp-hr than even an 80's car. I would not be surprised at all if that 2
hp marginal charging current produces more total emissions than many
late model sedans emit in normal driving.
There are "well funded teams" working on this for hybrid vehicles, it's
hardly an overlooked possibility.
Danny
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John Westlund wrote:
> Monster Garage typically does things on a small budget, ($5,000),
If Wayland can get the batteries for free (Hawkers or Orbitals..), and
someone could donate a motor, controller, and charger for the
"cause"... (or sell it at a discounted price..) could have all the
good stuff(the best?) with that budget.
>Dave Cloud's Geo Metro EV may be a good starting point
How about take a performance car and make the electric version
outperform the original version(or even a modified version)(preferably
by a wide margin!)?
It would be neat to make the Metro smoke performance ICE cars but it's
got the transmission and CV joints going against it. There is a
transmission option though($$$).
http://www.g-forcetransmissions.com/tran_gt-50.asp
Even then, you've got the front wheel drive issue of it not being the
most ideal choice for traction when compared to rear wheel drive(must
have slicks and wheelie bar like the fastest FWD's all have). Then
you've still got the axle issue. Although some tougher ones can be
had.
Could a Focus be converted to electric AND rear wheel drive in 4
days("the first day they "design")?
http://www.ford-v8-focus.com/
The front, rear, and transmission cross members all bolt in. The
spare tire and transmission tunnel each get trimmed.
Whatever it is, it will have to be really, really fast and most of
all, reliable(bullet proof).
Have those batteries fully charged ahead of time. Big motor. Big
controller. Big charger. Mount the bats.. Bring a (reliable!)12V
DC/DC with you..(and a spare!x2) (no waiting on parts, eats up too
much time). Be sure the person who is in charge of materials has all
the metal needed to mount the batteries.
Rock hard, no traction DOT's are fine for making smoke and showing
off(good for first impressions and makes for good TV). Put DOT
slicks(or all out slicks) on it when raced, else disappointing ET's
from wheel spin.
Things to remember. Stock axles will fail. Stock drive shaft might
very well too. Stock transmission will fail.
The biggest hurdle will be the adapter plate or coupler(often
overlooked). Could go direct drive.. Will still need to immediately
mount it and couple it.
Too bad the 13" is still yet unproven. The 11" is too in that regard.
What's the fastest (single) 8" and 9"? Shame about the AC situation.
If you go multi motors cobbled together with belts and chains... Well
I wouldn't considering the belts and chains are always the weak links.
Best of luck and I hope this goes well. Could spark a large interest
in EV's if successful.
Make it impress, and make it look so easy anyone could do it. "Just
mount this and wire this and your done!"
--- End Message ---
