EV Digest 4997
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: CVT transmission for EV - long, E Smarts
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Re Alltrax and e-tec and motor torque.
by "Stefan T. Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Electric jet boat?
by "Rodney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Setting up a Direct Drive
by Richard Bebbington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Electric jet boat?
by "Myles Twete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) RE: Motor control for direct drive setup
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) ATT: MODERATOR REMOVE ME
by Allan Alessio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: Setting up a Direct Drive
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Re Stefans motor question. Alltrax and e-tec and motor torque.
by jerry dycus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Setting up a Direct Drive
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11) I found some information on GE EV-1 Controller, but details lacking (long)
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12) Re: Open source EV community site
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: I can't locate an old posting that I found a few months ago
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Motor control for direct drive setup
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: An Electric Snowmobile rolling resistance
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: links on evproduction.org wiki
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: links on evproduction.org wiki
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) 50,000 electric miles, but baby needs a new pack...
by "David (Battery Boy) Hawkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: CVT transmission for EV - long
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: CVT transmission for EV - long
by "Marc Michon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: links on evproduction.org wiki
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Motor control for direct drive setup
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Seth and All,
Mini CVT's haven't been out long enough to get junk ones to
play with yet.
Most of the newer ones use metal link belts and are
getting more reliable.
Best ones now are from the high powered snowmobiles and a
good idea, especially with PM, Shunt motors. If one can vary the ratio manually
like the older Salsbury ones, you can use it with PM, Shunt as a speed control
instead of an E controller like the Sundancer did and one of Robert Q Riley's
designs did.
Wear does not seem to be much of a problem. Comet make a
good selection.
The first car that crossed the US, a Wilton I believe had
a CVT that was a flywheel that a rubber? wheel was pushed against and varied
from the center to the outer edge to vary the speed. Of all the things that
went wrong, it was not one of them.
On a Smart I would just go direct drive as it's fairly
light and series motors have the torque. I run 60 mph in the E woody on 48vdc
with a 100 amp, 36vdc GE motor from a Citi Car so a bigger 6.7" should do a
Smart fine for Pedro's.
With DD, it works just like an automatic so don't see where
his wife would care.
Pedro, are you selling Smart gliders or finished EV's?
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
Seth Rothenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has ANYONE used the CVT transmission out of the Mini or any other for that
> matter? This looks ideal for my smart car and would make the little woman
> more likely to use the car. So if anyone knows anything good or bad about
> this trans please reply on list.
Related to this, I would like to hear if anyone knows what
happened to a transmission I saw presented in
Popular {Mechanics|Science} twenty-odd years ago.
I recall that there were two cones back-to-back,
and they were held so the axis was tilted but
the opposing sides of the cones were horizontal.
The funny thing is, I can't recall precisecly
how they transferred power - I can think of
two ways to do it...
a) by bolting them together and varying where
on the side of the cone the input is delivered
(and output is one conelength away, on the sister cone)
OR
b) they are not connected, just on a common axis.
The input would turn one cone, a cylindrical
widget would surround both, contacting opposing
edges of the two cones, thus transmitting and "gearing",
and the second cone would drive the output.
The second method, with the cylinder rings a bell, but
the not-connected axle does not. I think it actually
was two rings connected by a framework, not a whole cylinder.
Also, another CVT idea....
The wikipedia for CVT has a link to Anderson CVT.
They use a belt to do the gearing/transfer mentioned,
from the narrow of one cone to the wide of the other.
There's a big thing about durability of belts.
I had this idea, do you think it is nuts?
What if you had the two cones, facing each other,
side-by-side...one is input, the other output, and
the transmission is just a rubber wheel that is
jammed between them...position right-or-left to
change ratio. i.e. the space between the
Input surface and the output surface is constant
from the (narrow input/wide output) to the
(wide input/narrow output) side.
The problem is wear....
but it seems to me that this is such a simple
design, it may be possible to simply stipulate
that the ball has to be changed every X miles.
The only issue is if that X will be in hundreds or
thousands or....
Is that nuts - or is it nuts and bolts and axles, etc.?
Also, there are a couple ways to deal with this wear issue
to extend the time of required maintenance.
Anyone want to help?
(of course, I might need to figure out if any patents
will apply...)
Thanks
Seth
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
jerry dycus wrote:
Hi John, Keith and All,
Neon John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:08:44 -0800
(PST), keith vansickle
wrote:
What are the absolute highest limits (volts amps) for
the E-tec with an alltrax 7245
anyone with firsthand experiance???
I called and asked. 90 volt max peak, not to exceed ever.
I believe John is talking about the Altrax.
You sould keep the E tek within it's rating of 330 max amps and
150 cont amps and 48vdc cont. Though you may for a short time bring the voltage
higher to force more amps at top rpm, I don't reccomend it.
So you can get by with a much less expensive controller at 48vdc
if you are not racing.
For commuting stick within the motors specs if you want long life.
You can get away with over amping a series motor but PM's are not
as forgiving having burned up my E tek. Yet I replaced it with a series motor
of 1/3 it's rating and it's still doing fine for several yrs since..
Stefan, series motors have much more torque, about 3x's, than any
other type including Shunt, PM, BLDC and AC and the only way to go, especially
if you want direct drive without very high costs. You can make the other work
by throwing money at it.
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
Whaza? ...how did my name get entangled in this motor biz? I simply
commented on the Alltrax -> PDA thing.
--
Stefan T. Peters
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey everyone
Before attempting my first road going EV, I thought I might get some
practise by building a small jet boat. Using the same principles as the
conventional ICE boats, but using batteries and a small motor and
controller. Not sure what controller to use (since its not going to be all
that powerful to get a good speed up), but I am wondering about the water
issue. While I will try to waterproof the motor/controller and batteries as
much as possible, does anyone have any ideas about how water could be REALLY
bad for them? Any specific things to look out for or design for?
Cheers
Rod
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Someone suggested this as DC/AC system once before. Use series DC for
its great starting torque, then switch to AC for its higher efficiency/
top RPM. You would need some way to decouple the DC motor from the
driveline to avoid overreving it. The added complexity of two different
drive system is probably not worth the gains, but it might be fun to
build for an exotic project.
I know I brought up a similar idea a few months back -
- I have a low(er) torque hi-revving Siemens system here,
and am leaning towards doing a Supra conversion
( heavy car! the pack's gonna be expensive! )
I have thought of using a Netgain 9 incher with the Siemens
motor attached to the comm end, so I'd have high torque
for "traffic-light drag-racing" ;-) and regen, but as has been
pointed out you end up with two drive systems. So it's bloomin
expensive, and complicated.
Also, since I've found a buyer for the Siemens system
( there's gonna be another shiny electric Fiat 500 soon! )
I think I'll just buy a Z2K and twin Netgain motors, and start
breaking Toyota drivetrains!
It is an interesting idea though - but you'd need to make sure
that your high-revving motor doesn't over-rev its big
torque-monster partner!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Subject: Electric jet boat?
Rod, you might want to try your E-boating questions on the ElectricBoats
Yahoo list:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/electricboats/
-Myles Twete (moderator: ElectricBoats Yahoo Group)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Great, Unit police. :-( Sorry officer Phil, it was a typo, I do know my
units; maybe I should of said approoraite units anyway. This WAS an
oversimplified example for illustration. LOL as luck would have it I
got a real ticket yesturday on my way to my last final.
Phil is absolutly correct.
I run all my equations thru with units first, then I add the numbers. I
was an engineering student once myself. :-)
Phil said
This would require, for example, a 300 volt pack at 2000 amps (
assuming a sag to 150 volts at the motor at that current). In practice,
you will generally have less torque ( and traction force) available at
high speeds than at low speeds ( since power is often the limit in effect).
It's a goal :-) got the stiff 300V pack need another zilla.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
ATT MODERATOR, NUKE THIS ACCOUNT PLEASE.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
AC/DC setup.
Before I would go with a dual drivetrain, I would look into a "wound
rotor Induction Motor"
This motor has 3 phase(usually) slip rings on a 3 phase wound armature.
There are brushes, but no "bars" in the comm so there is very little
arcing and high rpm is not as much of a problem. The Stator is a typical
AC motor polyphase winding.
In operation, the slip rings allow you to dissipate the extra energy in
the rotor elsewhere.(keeps it from melting) Originally used in things
like rock crushers that need to be able to run under full load at 50%
rpm without damage and start at 10x torque while pulling 1/10 amps
Variable speed drives mostly eliminates the need by reducing the energy
induced into the rotor, but does it at a cost of reducing stator power.
I think combineing a wound rotor motor with a variable frequency drive
that has some extra control and a regenerative slip energy recovery
circuit, would make a drag race competitive AC setup. With the added
benifit of being able to inject voltage into the rotor and have it lock
into syncronous operation for highest cruise eff.
This slip energy control could be manual accross resistor banks for a
drag racer. I often wondered if a simplification of the inverter could
be achieved with slip control.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Stefan and All
"Stefan T. Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Part of a
previous post I wrote,
> Stefan, series motors have much more torque, about 3x's, than any other type
> including Shunt, PM, BLDC and AC and the only way to go, especially if you
> want direct drive without very high costs. You can make the other work by
> throwing money at it.
> HTH's,
> Jerry Dycus
>
>
Stefan wrote
Whaza? ...how did my name get entangled in this motor biz? I simply
commented on the Alltrax -> PDA thing.
To Quote Stefan,,
>
>
I see. I thought all electric motors made great torque at low speed,
even the ones designed for high RPM? I'm missing something here. :(
/ /
Stefan T. Peters
Short memory Stefan? It was a post of yours today.
Admitally it's from a different post but I see no reason to make
too many posts for such a short message as we have way too many already and the
subjects complimented each other. Others would be good to do it to so to keep
the number of posts down.
For instance many of your posts are just a line or 2 and you will do
3-5 in a row that way. Better maybe to just do several in one post?. That's
what cut and paste is for, isn't it?
So I answered at the top of the this post, your question.
It's also something a broad group of new people would like, need to
know as I write for the group, not just a single person.
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
--
Stefan T. Peters
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
<<<This motor has 3 phase(usually) slip rings on a 3 phase wound armature.
There are brushes, but no "bars" in the comm so there is very little
arcing and high rpm is not as much of a problem. The Stator is a typical
AC motor polyphase winding.>>>
Are these brushes the same as those in DC motors, and do they ever wear out?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The references date back to 1999. Some excerpts are below. Essentially,
what I am trying to do is up the amp rating of the controller, and it looks
like
I may also need to add caps to smooth out the ripples so I don't kill the
batteries. Has anyone successfully done this - increase the power rating and
improve battery life. I don't want to reinvent the wheel or burn up a bunch of
old controllers if someone has already figured this out and made it work.
Remember, I am not a EE, so I need a pretty basic straightforward explanation
that a Mechanical Engineer can understand. Something like parallel the SCRs
and add X number of Y rated caps between these terminals. Hopefully, it is
that easy. But if it isn't, I'll try to follow the explanation. FYI. I did
have one of these in one of my old cars that pulled more than 500 A on
acceleration ... not sure how it was done though.
Exerts from 1999 below.
Thanks,
Steve
Ev Archive for October 1999
1670 messages, last added Wed Aug 08 18:46:38 2001
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
[Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: EV-1 SCR controller question
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: EV-1 SCR controller question
From: Glubrecht Dale D <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 08:15:56 -0500
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
I have run the regular EV-1 controller and my monster EV-1 controller on a
80uH, 12", 12 brush, <0.016 resistance at stall, motor. The motor would hit
3000A on a 48V forktruck battery. I had current zero crossings and huge peak
currents when this controller and motor combination ran at a duty cycle. The
little EV-1(standard) would undervoltage cutout on a small hill after a few
thousand feet of road passed under the car. The big 1000 amp monster took
7-14 miles with the same 95A.H. bats. I figured that the little one didn't
like the voltage ripple. I did not put any filter caps on it because I did
not have that many caps even at $.50/ripple amp. IF the controller was on
for 2ms at stall the current would come near 2000A every cycle. The battery
plates would howl at the PWM freq. while the big nasty motor would be near
silent. These controllers were not meant to be nice to batteries. A big load
inductance helps as does a highly capacitive source.
If I could drive that car in full on mode (65 in second gear) I would have
gotten much better range then 14 miles. That was the whole problem, the high
current peaks sucked the batteries at a very ugly rate. Part throttle
operation was bad for range. When I just changed to my IGBT 15kHz controller
it doubled the range.
They are a very reliable controller, they have to be. This particular
controller ran in a aluminum smelting plant (Kaiser AL in Spokane WA) and
ran for a full life. It did not seem like any parts blew until I ran it in
my car. It locked on full power and I had a wonderful ride. (1600A when
shifting.) This is their death mode. They just do not commutate off. A Big
contactor is a must or one just hits the clutch and a short time later drops
the contactor. Somebody may want to correct me but all of the components on
the power board are long life. When you add lytic's things go down hill.
They are also a very efficient controller because they all have the bypass
contactor outputs built in. I would think that one could use a foot bypass
switch instead of the built in bypass circuit. The built in circuit will not
let the motor exceed the preset current. I doubt that you will harm the
freewheel diode even with stall current that one gets when engaging bypass
at a stop and go light.
Enjoy your EV-1 controller but keep your foot on or near the clutch when
waiting at a crosswalk.
*****************************
Dale Glubrecht
My Porsche Would Be Zero Emission
But My Tires Keep Smoking...
John Deere WC&CE div.
(919) 567-6587
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*****************************
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Chang [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 7:32 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: EV-1 SCR controller question
>
> Hi Roger. It is not guaranteed that there is a series inductor. The
> block diagram of the GE EV-1 controller that I have does not have a series
> inductor. If you look inside the box, you will see inductors, but these
> are resonant inductors that shut off the secondary SCR which charges the
> turn-off capacitor. This is from the diagram in the Jet Electrica manual.
> By the way, this diagram is also slightly flawed. It will not commutate
> off. The correct version is shown in the Motorola Thyristor manual.
>
> Another good circuit diagram is in "Convert Your Car to Electric", which I
> already mentioned in a post. There is a detailed diagram, with no series
> inductor (only a resonant turn-off inductor). This circuit looks like it
> will work.
>
> Be careful.
>
> Eric
> --
>
> On 20 Oct 1999 14:20:00 -070 Roger Stockton wrote:
> >Hi Lee,
> >
> ...
> >the EV-1 controller, so assumed the worst. Are you fairly certain
> >about the ballpark value of the inductor? (The example in Brant's
> >book resulted in a value of a few hundred mH - unless he slipped
> >a few decimal places - and his example seems to be based around
> >a GE controller, though not necessarily the EV-1. I suppose I can
> ...
> > -----Original Message-----
> >From: [email protected] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 12:46 PM
> >To: [email protected]
> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: EV-1 SCR controller question
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >SCR controllers have another inductor inside the controller; total
> >inductance is more like a few hundred uH. This helps. The frequency
> >isn't fixed; it varies with load in a way that also helps.
> >
> ...
> >Lee A. Hart Ring the bells that you can ring
> >4209 France Ave. N. Forget the perfect offering
> >Robbinsdale, MN 55422 USA There is a crack in everything
> >(612) 533-3226 That's how the light gets in!
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Leonard Cohen
> >
> >
>
>
> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Ev Archive for October 1999
1670 messages, last added Wed Aug 08 18:46:39 2001
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
[Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: EV-1 SCR controller question
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: EV-1 SCR controller question
From: Glubrecht Dale D <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 07:34:16 -0500
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Go down to the local Hyster fork truck dealer/service outlet with your
controller in tow. They may recognize it and sell you the book on it.
I got the book for my 48 V EV-1 version and put the 144V EV-1
control box on top. That made a 1000A @120V controller. It caused the
batteries to hum instead of the motor. (needed Caps) I gave the controller
to my Father for his EV. I have heard rumors of these controllers blowing at
144V. The SCRs are rated for 200V as I remember. These controllers are
notorious for blowing full on. Have an emergency disconnect or use the
clutch pedal. Sometimes the failure will weld contacts when you try to break
the circuit so do not depend on the contactor or drop the contactor when the
motor is wound out.
*****************************
Dale Glubrecht
My Porsche Would Be Zero Emission
But My Tires Keep Smoking...
John Deere WC&CE div.
(919) 567-6587
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*****************************
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Stockton [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 1999 7:52 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: EV-1 SCR controller question
>
> Hi Perry,
>
> The EV-1 controller in my car has a sticker on the side that says it'll
> take 84 to 144V nominal. As I understand, the EV-1 is rated for 450 motor
> amps, and one guy I know who upgraded to a 400A Curtis 1221 reports that
> he has noticed the reduction in power with the Curtis.
>
> If at all possible, verify that the system works before disconnecting
> anything; even if the batteries in the car are completely shot, you may be
> able to get them over 84V immediately after charging, and can then verify
> that when you turn the key the main contactor pulls in and when you step
> on
> the accelerator the controller growls and the motor turns. Then carefully
> label all wires so that everything can be reinstalled identically when the
> time comes.
>
> The wiring in my car sounds similar to yours (i.e. most of the wires
> running
> to/from the controller are the same [grey] colour). At least in my case,
> it
> looks worse than it really is: several wires simply run from one side of
> the
> controller to the other and the rest basically run either to the main
> contactor
> or to the throttle pot/relay assembly.
>
> I'm also considering "recycling" my controller to postpone the cost of
> purchasing a modern controller; it will be fed from a 144V string of YTs.
> Other than the funky "pedestrian-warning" alert at low speeds (an
> advantage),
> the main disadvantage of using this controller appears to be its lower
> efficiency relative to modern controllers.
>
> What do you have in mind for yours?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 1999 1:31 PM
> To: Eric Chang
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: EV-1 SCR controller question
>
> no im just rying to figure out what its capable of, and if it will suit
> my needs. im toying with different voltage battery packs, and i need to
> decide first of all if i want to or need to spend the money for a new
> controller....plus the original builder wired the whole car really
> poorly, ran cables next to sharp edges, used one color wire throught the
> whole car, etc...and since i have to restore the car the controller is
> getting taken out and i want to make sure i have a wiring diagram of how
> it gets hooked up, etc...its the one part of an EV that i dont know
> enough about and id like to do some more reading about this model.
>
> im 95 percent sure its working, it was when it wsa parked last time 4-6
> yrs ago...but if it wont fulfill the prupose i need its useless to me.
>
> Perry Ellington
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Stefan wrote:
> The *available* bandwith is actually around 3Mb/s, but given that that
> is costing us just over $200/Mb a month (wholesale), we want to be sure
> this "catches on" before dedicating any more to this particular server.
> Stefan T. Peters
Who are the 'us'? I'm not sure I understand your above statement about the
cost. Could you please elaborate a little more? Who is actually paying for the
site?
Thanks
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
www.TEVA2.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In my search I came across a post - don't remember what year
> or by who. It was about modifying the EV-1 controller for
> higher current. Maybe putting in a second SCR. Really I
> have no idea how the modification was done, but I know
> I recently found the info in the archive.
I think the answer is in one of Dale Glubrecht's messages, which you
quoted. He built a 1000A 120V EV-1 by placing a 144V control card on
top of a 1000A 48V EV-1 power stage ("panel", in EV-1 speak).
You have built your 84V EV-1 by taking a 48V EV-1 and placing an 84V
control card on it; are you sure your 48V power stage was only rated
400A?
I would suggest trying your 84V controller and monitor the motor loop
current to see what it really limits at, and what you can adjust it to
using the current limit trim pot. You may already be very close to your
600A target.
If you don't have a shunt and meter to monitor the motor loop, one of
the terminals on the control card outputs a voltage signal proportional
to motor loop current that you can monitor directly with a DMM. Sorry,
I don't recall which terminal offhand; if you don't have literature that
identifies it for you, let me know and I'll look it up for you.
I believe there is a caution in some of my EV-1 literature warning that
you must watch the peak voltage on the commutating capacitors (the large
metal cans at the left rear corner of the power stage if you have the
row of power terminals facing you) and not allow it to exceed 200V. The
current limit setting also affects this voltage, so don't blindly crank
the current limit wide open unless you are confident that your emergency
disconnect is up to the challenge. ;^>
> I'm looking to produce an 84 V, 600 A controller from the parts in
> those two EV-1B controllers.
Rather than buying another 84V controller of unknown current rating, I
would suggest looking for a 48V 500-1000A controller and using its power
stage with the higher voltage control card, just a Dale did. You might
want to crank the current limit down a bit based on his howling battery
experiences ;^>
Or, look for a used EV-1 out of a Jet 007 that has been upgraded to a
more modern controller. This EV-1 will be capable of 120V and 450-550A.
120V @ 500A is more power than 84V @ 600A...
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Philippe Borges wrote:
>> I respectfully disagree; OEM EV's are massively DC! Forklift/industrial
>> ones AND on-road ones. Most produced/driven road EV all around the world
>> are French EV cars and they use DC separately excited motors.
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Look at the trends for the fork lift industry - Toyota is good example.
> Don't quote the systems just because they have been produced for years
> and OEMs are too comfortable with profits to make change...
> I was referring to EV1, RAV4, S10, Ranger EV, Altra - normal by US
> standards cars.
Victor, I know you love AC systems, and that is what you sell. But, AC is
still very much a new and evolving technology. All the cars you mentioned
were experimental prototypes, and not available to purchase. The motors and
inverters for on-the-road AC systems are expensive and virtually handmade.
As Philippe says, the vast majority of EVs actually being produced, and on the
road already use DC motors and controllers. Manufacturers are experimenting
with AC drives on some of their products, but they are still a minority of
sales.
> We were discussing freeway capable vehicle in terms of AC covering
> entire speed range on a single gear. I don't believe any of DC equipped
> vehicles you mentioned can cover up to about 85mph (136km/h) on a
> single gear... Of course we have DC Sparrows and Tangos, but I'm talking
> about normal vehicle capable of carrying 2-4 passengers most conventional
> people actually wanted to buy and drive here.
Your definition of "freeway capable vehicle" seems to be carefully written to
allow all the AC vehicles you like, and to exclude all the DC vehicles you
don't like. For instance, you allow the 2-seat AC EV1, but exclude the 2-seat
DC Tango.
The data points we have for "freeway capable vehicles" are all special cases,
since none of them are actually in production. They only illustrate what
*can* be done; they don't prove anything about the "best" solution. If we had
an example of the same vehicle with both an AC and a DC drive, perhaps you
could draw some conclusion; but we don't have this information.
Almost all freeway-capable EVs are conversions, which already came with a
transmission; thus it was retained. Since it was there anyway, it gets used
to allow a smaller/cheaper motor and controller with a narrower speed range.
This has nothing to do with AC vs. DC.
When a vehicle is designed from scratch to be an EV, it almost never uses a
transmission, regardless of whether it is AC or DC. Diesel-electric
locomotives and buses have used single-speed DC motors for over 50 years, and
they certainly have no trouble with 85 mph top speeds.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Joe Smalley wrote:
> The point of this is; someone out there knows how to reduce the rolling
> resistance of a snowmobile. It can be done. I have seen it myself.
Someone on the EV list posted the results for his electric snowmobile last
winter, I think. It worked out pretty well as I recall.
When I was in college in 1972, a friend had a 1965 Arctic Cat snowmobile. They
weren't *anything* like a modern snowmobile! It had an all-metal track (no
rubber), which was basically two chains running on pulleys, with corrugated
metal plates bolted between them. The skis were about 4 times the area of
today's machines, they had wheels for rolling on pavement, and were turned up
at both ends (since it had reverse). The engine was an 8 HP Kohler 4-cycle
garden tractor type engine, with a centrifugal clutch and transmission.
Much like the machine Joe described, this snowmobile was *easy* to push. One
person could push it as easily as a sled, and it rolled down hills nearly as
fast as a toboggan. My friend also said it got remarkable gas mileage; he
could go many times further on a tank than any of his friends.
So, it *can* be done! :-)
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Interesting. So why EV oddballs and nuts still did not form a league
> just as ham [nuts] did ARRL or aircraft nuts did EAA? People themselves
> I'm sure are no different. Is it just not enough critical mass yet, or
> unlike other two nuts groups, EVers step on the toes of OEM industry?
The ARRL and EAA both formed when the federal government sought to pass laws
to essentially outlaw all amateur radios (ARRL) and all private aircraft
(EAA). In each case, the hobbyists were the ones that created these fields in
the first place, and were responsible for most of the technical innovations.
They were understandably outraged at being crowded out by commercial
interests with lots of money to spend on lobbyists.
So, the the ARRL and EAA were formed to fight back! They recruited members,
collected dues, and hired lawyers and lobbyists of their own, to advertise
and educate congress and the general public on the benefits to society. Thus,
they won the legal right to continue to pursue their hobby.
Sooner or later, that's what it will come to with hobby automobiles!
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> Everyone is welcome to hack a controller together. The hour of truth
>> comes, when Siemens, GE or anybody else pulls their patent portfolios
>> to squelch any grasroots development they might not like.
> Well that will be a risk that will be very difficult to deal with.
> How do you think we can mitigate it?
As a practical matter, EVs have been around for so long that all the patents
have expired on all the basic ideas. You might be able to patent some tiny
enhancement to a controller, but all the basic topologies have been around
for decades.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
All,
Having done an EV interview this morning for a story that will hopefully be
in both a local and Iowa newspaper, I just did the mathematics and realized
that we have put a combined total of 50,000 miles on the electric truck and
car as of today:
RX-7 18,229 miles since 9/99 (but only got 10,000 miles out of first pack!)
S10 31,773 miles since 3/02 (but only got 11,000 miles out of first pack!)
I believe the previous RX-7 owner had put between 5,000 and 7,000 electric
miles on it before I rebuilt the beasty, so 23,000 or more since being
converted.
I also discovered I now have over 20,000 miles (and just over two years) on
the truck's pack of T-145 floodies, and although I now consider it used up,
I'm going to try and squeeze a few more miles out of it by monitoring the
voltage of the worst battery while driving (under load). Having just
replaced the expensive AGM's in the RX-7 for the teenager, the truck will
have to wait! I say the truck's pack is considered used up (by a normal
person!), because I recently did a load test after a discharge, and I had a
0.13 voltage variation between the best and worst battery (with the heater
on), and a specific gravity variation of 0.040 (1.24 to 1.28). As I've
posted before, at 20,000 miles this puts the "fuel costs" for the truck at
$0.14 per mile (battery pack cost at $0.10 per mile and electricity at
$0.04 per mile), so when gasoline is $2.80 per gallon, that's the break
even point (at the equivalent 20 miles per gallon). Now the RX-7 fuel costs
(with batteries) are, well, you have to pay more for tire smoking fun...
Motor on,
Dave (B.B.) Hawkins
Member of the Denver Electric Vehicle Council:
http://www.devc.org/
Card carrying member and former racer with The National Electric Drag
Racing Association:
http://www.nedra.com/
Lyons, CO
1979 Mazda RX-7 EV (192V of Orbs for the teenagers)
1989 GM (General Murderers of the EV-1!) S10 (144V of floodies, for Pa only!)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> Has ANYONE used the CVT transmission out of the Mini or any other for
> that matter? This looks ideal for my smart car and would make the little
> woman more likely to use the car. So if anyone knows anything good or bad
> about this trans please reply on list.
I seem to recall that Bill Glickman invented a CVT and installed one in an
Enfield EV. His CVT had no slip or torque limitations to speak of. Basically,
it had a pair of one-way clutches and cranks. He put some tiny motor in it,
drove it up a steep hill, and was able to stop halfway up, and resume
climbing up it.
--
Lee A. Hart 814 8th Ave N Sartell MN 56377 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Comet makes several and racing CVT's
all snowmobiles have CVT's
up to like 900cc kawsakis
i rode many very hard, left some at 12,000 foot sonora pass
had to come back when snow melted
no problems with belts last just fine
more problems with those old fassioned gas motors
UC davis has done much work with Nissan CVT imporved it
http://www.team-fate.net/ hybrid UC Davis,CA
i'm sure they would be glad to help
Marco
----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Rothenberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: CVT transmission for EV - long
> > Has ANYONE used the CVT transmission out of the Mini or any other for
that
> > matter? This looks ideal for my smart car and would make the little
woman
> > more likely to use the car. So if anyone knows anything good or bad
about
> > this trans please reply on list.
>
> Related to this, I would like to hear if anyone knows what
> happened to a transmission I saw presented in
> Popular {Mechanics|Science} twenty-odd years ago.
> I recall that there were two cones back-to-back,
> and they were held so the axis was tilted but
> the opposing sides of the cones were horizontal.
>
> The funny thing is, I can't recall precisecly
> how they transferred power - I can think of
> two ways to do it...
> a) by bolting them together and varying where
> on the side of the cone the input is delivered
> (and output is one conelength away, on the sister cone)
> OR
> b) they are not connected, just on a common axis.
> The input would turn one cone, a cylindrical
> widget would surround both, contacting opposing
> edges of the two cones, thus transmitting and "gearing",
> and the second cone would drive the output.
>
> The second method, with the cylinder rings a bell, but
> the not-connected axle does not. I think it actually
> was two rings connected by a framework, not a whole cylinder.
>
>
> Also, another CVT idea....
> The wikipedia for CVT has a link to Anderson CVT.
> They use a belt to do the gearing/transfer mentioned,
> from the narrow of one cone to the wide of the other.
>
> There's a big thing about durability of belts.
>
>
> I had this idea, do you think it is nuts?
> What if you had the two cones, facing each other,
> side-by-side...one is input, the other output, and
> the transmission is just a rubber wheel that is
> jammed between them...position right-or-left to
> change ratio. i.e. the space between the
> Input surface and the output surface is constant
> from the (narrow input/wide output) to the
> (wide input/narrow output) side.
>
> The problem is wear....
>
> but it seems to me that this is such a simple
> design, it may be possible to simply stipulate
> that the ball has to be changed every X miles.
> The only issue is if that X will be in hundreds or
> thousands or....
>
> Is that nuts - or is it nuts and bolts and axles, etc.?
>
> Also, there are a couple ways to deal with this wear issue
> to extend the time of required maintenance.
> Anyone want to help?
> (of course, I might need to figure out if any patents
> will apply...)
>
> Thanks
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Michaela Merz wrote:
...
Because we don't have the lobby to do that. As a matter of fact, this
would open unbelievable new markets, new jobs in new companies and a lot
of innovation - not only in the EV environment.
Michaela
Naturally, question then becomes why don't we have lobby
as ARRL or especially EAA does. What's the fundamental difference
between EV and Aircraft?
Perhaps, partly because amateur built cars share the road with
others and subject them to "unregulated" (so dangerous
in the eyes of authorities) vehicles, possibly public complaints,
etc. With an aircraft your failure is your only own problem
(unless you crash into a residential area, but the available
space for flying is regulated as well).
Other reasons?..
Victor
Victor wrote:
Interesting. So why EV oddballs and nuts still did not form a league
just as ham [nuts] did ARRL or aircraft nuts did EAA? People themselves
I'm sure are no different. Is it just not enough critical mass yet, or
unlike other two nuts groups, EVers step on the toes of OEM industry?
Victor
Lee Hart wrote:
The best examples I know of are the ham radio operator's ARRL (American
Radio
Relay League) and the "other" EAA (the Experimental Aircraft
Association).
...
Until the EV world gets something similar going, we are
just a bunch of powerless individuals who can be easily ignored as
oddballs
and nuts.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
Look at the trends for the fork lift industry - Toyota is good example.
Don't quote the systems just because they have been produced for years
and OEMs are too comfortable with profits to make change...
I was referring to EV1, RAV4, S10, Ranger EV, Altra - normal by US
standards cars.
Victor, I know you love AC systems, and that is what you sell. But, AC is
still very much a new and evolving technology. All the cars you mentioned
were experimental prototypes, and not available to purchase. The motors and
inverters for on-the-road AC systems are expensive and virtually handmade.
As Philippe says, the vast majority of EVs actually being produced, and on the
road already use DC motors and controllers. Manufacturers are experimenting
with AC drives on some of their products, but they are still a minority of
sales.
Lee, this has nothing to do with what I sell, and I don't want to
start yet another AC/DC debate. I do sell AC *because* compelling
advantages of it, not that I come up with advantages list
because I happen to sell it. I could easily set up sales for
DC systems as well, couldn't I?
According to you if manufacturers are so comfortable with cheap and
reliable DC systems produced for years, why in the world to bother
with exotic expensive AC ones?
I suppose for it's advantages, so they have got to be there.
Why don't you list them? I know you like to be devil advocate :-),
preference is to be a balanced one.
I wasn't talking about what available to you and me for purchase,
this isn't technical question. We discuss technical cons and pros,
do we?
I was talking about fundamental advantage for such an application
as *single speed* freeway capable vehicle, which was discussed,
where hi speed advantage of AC setup becomes too important to tip
the scale.
You can come up with many reasons against AC as well as for them.
Regardless, they do perform *in this circumstances* e.g. single
gear 0-80...90mph speeds (+ regen) better than DC. Again, for other
applications this may not be (and is not) the case, but I don't
build tractors or fork lifts or milk floats, and I believe
majority of people on this list thinks about replacing conventional
transportation with electric one keeping as much of capabilities
of conventional (e.g. speed) as possible. In some respects
(acceleration) EV already excel.
I'm not excluding Tango as capable of achieving freeway speeds.
I'm also not hiding the fact that I wouldn't drive Tango even if
I get one for free - I see it as a half car, this is personal
taste opinion where there is no right or wrong in liking or
disliking its concept. Since you worked on Tango, you may not
like my opinion, but again this opinion is more about aesthetics than
engineering. Let's leave it at that.
As an engineer though, I very much do appreciate Tango's guts
and would love to participate in a design of one if circumstances
are right.
Victor
--- End Message ---
