EV Digest 5067
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) re: New to the group
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2) Re: New NEDRA rules coming soon
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Neg supply for E-meter
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Neg supply for E-meter
by Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: Geo Metro EV on a budget
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: False alarm! RE: battery advice.
by Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Why is it ramping back voltage before cutback point?
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Announcement: New NEDRA Class Rules
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget, comments.
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Breaking in ADC Motor
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: False alarm! RE: battery advice.
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: I want to build a PWM DC motor controller
by Cory Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Breaking in ADC Motor
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Breaking in ADC Motor, Comm Stones and stuff
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
by Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Federal EV tax credit (Russian Glider)
by Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) More on Tax Credit
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
19) Re: I want to build a PWM DC motor controller
by Stefan Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks Jimmy
I was junior back then and that's when I bought the infamous miltary surplus
aircraft generator! The generator sat around for years along with a fork lift
motor. Still have the fork lift motor - what a beast!
Now there is so much nice stuff out there to work with - nice controllers,
motors, battery chargers and stuff and much better access to information.
I just wish batteries could have evolved more since 1970.
Dana
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Jimmy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Welcome Dana,
> I was a sophomore in 1970 and was mentally "abducted"
> into the EV fold shortly thereafter. I physically got
> into it in 1993 and to this day can't shake the habit.
> We are rebuilding our 4th vehicle and it is still a
> lot of fun. Feel free to ask questions, there is a
> lot of help here for the asking.
> check out some old VWs:
> http://www.dm3electrics.com/
> Good Luck,
> Jimmy
>
> Forwarded Message
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: New to the group
> Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 00:08:16 +0000
>
> Plain Text Attachment [ Download File | Save to Yahoo!
> Briefcase ]
>
> Hi everyone -
>
> First time I joined a discussion group.
> About 3/4 of the way through a conversion and I'm
> having a great time.
> I forgot how much I loved to work on this stuff.
> I guess I'm working on what you would call a garden
> variety conversion
> -
> - a 9" ADC motor, 18 Pba's and a Zilla.
> The really creative part is pulling it all together.
> Oh, it's a 1998 New Beetle.
>
> The electric car thing goes back to 1970 when I was a
> junior in
> highschool.
> Gasp! 36 years ago! A couple of false starts, but I
> finally got around
> to it.
>
> Anyway, what the heck are the two small red wires for
> that are sticking
> out of the ADC motor?
> Temperature sensor or something?
>
> Dana
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
A slight correction, The NEDRA rules committee consisted of four people.
Bill accidentally omitted one very important individual who is not on the
board but who does race. He is our former president and founding member John
Wayland. John's input and rationality have been greatly appreciated. He
brought much to the table as all those who worked so hard on this project
did. There was no single author but a combined effort of team players
working together for a common goal, the advancement of NEDRA. I firmly
believe that 2006 will be a banner year for NEDRA.
Roderick Wilde
NEDRA President
----- Original Message -----
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 10:20 PM
Subject: New NEDRA rules coming soon
Listers,
A new set of rules for conversion classes (XS, MC, PS, and SC) are going
to go up on the NEDRA site (http://www.nedra.com) probably within the next
day or two. I strongly suggest you take the time to read these rules
carefully if you are a NEDRA member and are going to race a conversion as
a lot has changed. Also, if you were a record holder in SC or MC, you
should also read these new rules carefully.
Ken Trough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was the author of these detailed class
rules with the help of Roderick Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Brian
Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. So if you have any questions about how your
car will be classified, these are the guys to ask. They worked very hard
to get these rules written for this racing season.
Bill Dube'
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - Release Date: 1/5/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.15/223 - Release Date: 1/6/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have the 100v prescaler (same as EVparts No. 1N2533) which does not
mention anything about having a built in DC-DC.
From: "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Neg supply for E-meter
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 07:15:48 -0700
Hello Damon,
If you are using a Link-10, then there is a Prescaler 0-499 volts with
built in DC-DC-12V isolated 3 watt output. No. 1N2537 which I got from EV
Parts.
You can used a standard DC-DC converter off the main battery pack or from a
accessory battery which will input into this unit.
If you are using other than a Link-10, then contact that company that built
it to see if they have prescalers or separate unit for 12 volt isolation.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: damon henry<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 1:05 AM
Subject: Neg supply for E-meter
Thanks for all the responses on the No-No's of an emeter. Most of them
I
had seen before, but since I didn't have an e-meter I didn't collect
them
all.
I still have a couple more questions specific to my application. I
don't
currently have an accesory battery, just a DC-DC converter. The
negative
side of my DC-DC is connected to my frame. The E-meter manual states
that I
must connect pin one to both the negative side of my traction pack as
well
as the negative supply for the E-meter. This of course connects the
negative side of my traction pack to the negative side of my DC-DC and
my
frame. This sounds bad...
The manual offers two options. Use a seperate accesory battery and tie
the
negative post to the negative of the traction pack without making any
connections to the frame or use a seperate DC-DC converter. I have both
an
Aux battery I can throw in and a second DC-DC. The downside to using a
seperate battery is that I will need to charge it seperately, which is
not a
big deal and the way that I ran my bike for quite a while, but I would
rather not do it if possible. I don't think that using a second DC-DC
tied
to the traction pack is what the manual has in mind. It looks like they
are
connecting a DC-DC to the aux battery to provide isolation. It doesn't
seem
to me that I can run my second DC-DC off the traction pack and use it to
power the e-meter as this would mean that I would be tying the neg input
to
the neg output on the DC-DC.
If I don't want an aux battery do I need to have a second DC-DC off the
first to keep things isolated from the frame?
thanks
damon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
damon henry writes:
>
> If I don't want an aux battery do I need to have a second DC-DC off the
> first to keep things isolated from the frame?
Yes, it needs to be isolated. I have a small isolated DC/DC to power
the E-Meter. It's connected to unswitched 12v so the E-Meter always
has power. The DC/DC is about the size of an automotive relay and
tucks up into the dash nicely. I bought it from Innevations, but
they're no longer in business.
Ralph
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I charge my sealed batteries to 60vdc. Sounds right to me. LR..........
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: Geo Metro EV on a budget
I think 60 vdc is too high for a 48 volt pack. Adding the rectifiers drops
the voltage.
Tim
kluge wrote:
Bridge rectifiers in series? Why?
Jerry Halstead posted:
http://www.evconvert.com/article/yugo-greg
Greg converted his Yugo for $800. He bought pretty much everything
from Ebay and did his own machining work.
-------------------------------------------------------
On the website there's this explanation of how Greg built his battery
charger:
"I took a small Sears arc welder that puts out 48 volts when fitted with a
full wave bridge rectifier. It wouldn’t bring the pack up quick enough so
I added a 12 volt transformer and another full wave bridge rectifier on
the side of the original case. Now I get almost 60 volts and charges at 10
amps. Latest Update 8/26/05: I did have to add 2 bridge rectifiers in
series for EACH transformer but now it charges well."
Bridge rectifiers in series? Why?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob Bath writes:
>
> I ramped up the current throttle to max, set the
> voltage limit to 183V, and hit 178. Got WAAAAY
> excited, but before the blue LED came on indicating
> current limit, voltage started dropping again. This
> is what it's been doing all along. Why is it ramping
> back voltage before it hits current limit? Water
> levels are fine.
Bob,
There is no indication for current limit. You need to watch
your pack current meter to see how much current is flowing.
The blue LED indicates that the timer is running. It gets
triggered by voltage limit, regbus activity or hot reg,
depending on switch settings.
The LIMIT LED should come on if the pack hits the voltage
limit set by the trim pot. The blue LED should start blinking
at the same time if you have switch 1 set to ON. This is
when the charger will start cutting back on the current.
If your pack voltage peaks and then starts dropping before
hitting the charger's voltage setting, the charger will continue
pumping in the selected current into the pack. This may cause
thermal run away.
Maybe you need to set a lower limit, perhaps to account for a
bad battery?
Ralph
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Bob,
It should not starting to ramp back until it hits the voltage limit you
selected. I just tested my PFC voltage limit to 233 volts and it quickly went
to that in seconds at a 50 amp charge because the batteries were all ready
charge.
If the battery pack is discharge to 75 percent, it then takes 20 minutes to
charge at 50 amps to 225 volts which is normally set now for 65 degree
temperature. Then the currents starts to drop while holding that voltage.
Now is I charge the fully charge battery at 5 to 10 amperes, it will only get
to 210 volts and stay there.
You either need more current to get it to raise or contact Rich Rudman to see
why you cannot reach the voltage limit on the PFC-20.
Roland
Its ether that you batteries all full charge and you are using a too low ampere
charge or
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Bath<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 8:22 AM
Subject: Why is it ramping back voltage before cutback point?
And as near as I can tell, the SG is going _down_, not
up. I took the lowest-voltage battery (reading 9.73,
instead of 10.01), and it now has greyish electrolyte
in all of the cells, and SG readings of between 2.50 &
2.65.
I just wanna' hit 185 volts like the good-old days!
--- Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> I ramped up the current throttle to max, set the
> voltage limit to 183V, and hit 178. Got WAAAAY
> excited, but before the blue LED came on indicating
> current limit, voltage started dropping again. This
> is what it's been doing all along. Why is it
> ramping
> back voltage before it hits current limit? Water
> levels are fine.
> Thanks,
>
> --- Roland Wiench <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> > Hello Bob,
> >
> > All you have to do is turn up the voltage limit to
> > 180 volts which is 10 volts per battery and turn
> the
> > ampere to as much as you can, so you do not blow
> the
> > breaker.
> >
> > The maximum you should charge a battery is 20
> > percent of the ampere-hour rating for a very long
> > life, but you can charge more if you want. This
> > will hold at that current until the battery gets
> to
> > 80 percent which than the PFC will starting
> dropping
> > the ampere.
> >
> > I been charging this way for the last 30 years and
> > nothing has blow up yet. Your 10 volts is the
> same
> > as 7.5 volts on my 6 volt batteries which is a
> > maximum of 52 ampere charge on a 260 ah battery.
> A
> > equalization charge on my 6 volts is 7.76 volts or
> > would be equal 10.35 volts or about 186.4 volts
> for
> > you battery pack.
> >
> > The Smart charger, I talk about, will at times
> take
> > a 8 volt battery to 11 volts which stays at that
> > rate for about 30 seconds before dropping to 9.66
> > volts and than back up to 10.33 volts. On a very
> > old battery, this will keep repeating trying to
> > desulfating it until its charge or it will say to
> > replace it.
> >
> > Roland
> >
> > My first set of batteries lasted just over 10
> years
> > and
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Bob Bath<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> > To:
> >
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 7:16 AM
> > Subject: Making progress! RE: battery advice.
> >
> >
> > > The C/10 recommendation is typically a
> *minimum*
> > > initial charge rate.
> > Okay, so now I've throttled up the current to
> max,
> > and
> > voltage is rising again! WAHOO!
> > > Until the batteries reach about 80%SOC you can
> > > typically charge as hard
> > > as you want. At about 80%SOC the charger
> > typically
> > > goes into constant
> > > voltage mode so that the battery draws only as
> > much
> > > current as it wants
> > > (and the current tapers off as the battery
> fills
> > > up).
> > Knew that.
> > >
> > > > Soooo, I ramped down the current, and the
> > > batteries
> > > > have never seen 189V since. Thus, my
> > conclusion
> > > that
> > > > the batteries were sulfated.
> > >
> > > > What I'm hearing from you is that I _can_
> see
> > > 189V,
> > >
> > > Perhaps, but are you sure you want to? 189V
> is
> > > 2.625V/cell for your 72
> > > cell (144V pack), not the 2.875V/cell you have
> > > calculated. This voltage
> > > is appropriate for a battery temperature of
> > ~18C,
> > > per USBMC
> > > recommendations.
> > >
> > USB rec'd 2.583 VPC. It's been 40 F lately, and
> > the
> > adjustment is like, .028VPC for every 10F below
> > 80F.
> > I have 72 cells x 4 x .028, so that's another 8V
> > to
> > add. 185 + 8V should be 193 for recent temps.
> >
> > > I wonder if you really mean that you can't get
> > the
> > > charger into *voltage
> > > limit*? That is, you can bubble the batteries
> > all
> > > day and the voltage
> > > won't budge.
> > Yes, this is accurate. Will see in a few hours
> if
> > I
> > can hit a voltage limit mode of around 185 or
> > better.
> >
> > Again, in this case, you can certainly
> > > *lower* the voltage
> > > limit until the charger indicates it is in
> > constant
> > > voltage/voltage-limited operation.
> > Yes, but I don't want voltage limit to kick in
> at
> > 174V!
> > >
> > > When the output is over about 174V, how much
> > current
> > > are you delivering
> > > to the pack? If you are not in current limit,
> > then
> > > as you adjust the
> > > current limit up or down you should see the
> > current
> > > increase or decrease
> > > accordingly. If you turn up the current limit
> > and
> > > the output current
> > > does *not* increase, then the charger is in
> > voltage
> > > limit: increase the
> > > voltage limit and you should see the output
> > current
> > > rise.
> > >
> > > Of course, remember that eventually you will
> run
> > > into the PFCxx's
> > > limits. Could it be that you are feeding the
> > > charger from 110VAC and
> > > are bumping into its input current limit?
> > Nope: always 220V. So the big issue seems to
> have
> > been turning down my current to C/10, when I
> > really
> > should give it as much as I can, unless I'm
> > charging
> > off a 110outlet, in which case I have to drop
> the
> > current to keep from tripping the breaker.
> >
> > Thanks so much!!!
> >
> > '92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD
> > available)!
> >
> >
>
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html<http://www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html<http://www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html<http://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! DSL - Something to write home about.
> > Just $16.99/mo. or less.
> > dsl.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>
>
> '92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD
> available)!
>
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html<http://www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html>
> ____
> __/__|__\ __
> =D-------/ - - \
> 'O'-----'O'-'
>
=== message truncated ===
'92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD available)!
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html<http://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! DSL - Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi All,
Roderick Wilde here from NEDRA, the National Electric Drag Racing
Association. We have been toiling tirelessly on a new set of class rules
since late September (yes over three months), and we are now ready to
announce the new class definitions.
This effort came about as a direct result of discussions on this list of
the vagueness of our very brief class descriptions (hey, they worked for
much longer than I thought they would). NEDRA has adopted the NHRA
(National Hot Rod Association) rules and we try to follow the guidelines and
examples they set. If you take a look at the NHRA rules you'll see that
they are quite long and very detailed. Our new NEDRA class definitions,
though far more detailed than in the past, are still much simpler and
briefer than the NHRA's. This was an intentional decision to keep the
class descriptions very easy to understand and the requirements easy to
comply with.
The really good news is that we have created two entirely new classes! Our
original "Street Conversion" class encompassed many different types of
cars, yet it has been dominated by professional racers (such as Plasma Boy
for instance), so we decided to subdivide the class into two new ones.
We formed a new class called "Pro Street Conversion" for the "hopped up"
type cars. This reopens the original "Street Conversion" class back up for
the average "daily driver" type cars. This will open up the availability
for daily drivers to set new World Records during the exciting and
expanded 2006 racing season. Former "Street Conversion" record holders
that no longer fit in the new criteria of "Street Conversion" will be
moved up to "Pro Street".
IMPORTANT NOTE: No one loses any World Records! Your record may simply be
reclassified to a different class. We hope that does not hurt too many
people's feelings out there.
The other new class is on the other end of the spectrum and is called
"Extreme Street" (XS) for excessive of course. This is basically an
"anything goes within NHRA regulations" class designed for street bodied,
ground up, purpose built race cars with plastic/carbon/fiberglass bodies
and a custom chassis. This is basically the "funny car" class. John and I
first discussed the formation of this class over six years ago
Please note the "Spirit of the Class" definitions listed before each
class. This is a plain English paragraph describing what the class is all
about and was included to assist you in understanding our intent for the
class and categorizing your vehicle within the new class structure.
Check all the new NEDRA class rules here:
http://www.nedra.com/class_rules.html
Feel free to contact the rules committee with your comments. The rules
committee consisted of::
Brian Hall, John Wayland, Ken Trough, and Roderick Wilde.
I thank all of the rules committee members for their tireless work on what
sometimes seemed to be an endless nightmare!
Roderick Wilde
NEDRA President
-------------------------------------------------
*The Spirit of the Street Conversion Class*
The Street Conversion (SC) class is for basic street legal and licensed
conversions that have not been modified for racing. "Conversions" are
vehicles that have been mass-produced but were NOT originally
manufactured as electric vehicles. This is the class for the "daily
driver" and DOT tires are required.
*The Spirit of the Pro Street Class*
The Pro Street Conversion class (PS) is for street legal and licensed
conversions that have been modified for racing use while still
maintaining their street appearance and drivability. "Conversions" are
vehicles that have been mass-produced but were NOT originally
manufactured as electric vehicles. Racing slicks are allowed.
*The Spirit of the Modified Conversion Class*
Class MC: (Modified Street Conversion) The intent of this class is for
street bodied and chassised vehicles that are heavily modified for
racing. This class does not require vehicles to be licensed for street
use and racing slicks are allowed.
*The Spirit of the Xtreme Street Class*
Class XS: (Xtreme Street) The intent of this class is for street bodied
vehicles that are built as all out race vehicles and differ from SC, PS
and MC classes, all of which require stock production bodies and frames.
This is the class for custom tube chassis or other highly modified
chassis vehicles. This class does not require vehicles to be licensed
for street use and racing slicks are allowed.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.15/223 - Release Date: 1/6/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "bruce bogusz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 3:25 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8026763125
>
> Here's a 1990 geo begging to be made electric.
> Hi all;
Not so Fast! No title, beat body, yada yada, Don't start with a piece of
shit car, as you will be spending all yuor time fixing it up!It isn't a
bargain, but I MIGHT have been interested in it myself for parts for the
Metro that I have a dead Solectria, Kids worked it over in their lot, busted
windows, dented up doors, same color. Damn parts that aren't as beat as the
ones I have arent easy to find in CT. May as well be a Zil, Red Flag or
Trabant as for finding parts!
My two ohms worth.
Seeya at BBB
Bob
> If I didnt have an EV already I'd probably convert this baby.
>
> torich1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well he could start with the adapter plate here..$145
> http://www.e-volks.com/catalog.0.html.0.html
> And he can buy the motor here for 179$
>
http://www.surpluscenter.com/item.asp?UID=2005121701433549&item=6-936&catname=electric
> I am sure a controller can be had for $300 OR MAYBE A LOT LESS...
> Thats $625 add 6 heavy dudy 12 volt batterys for about $360 and you are
> almost there with some help from you guys ..sounds possiable to
me....$1000
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Photos
> Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands
ASAP.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry. 120v system. That's the problem with low voltage systems. High amp
draw at speed. However if you keep your speed down low voltage systems can
be quite useful. The 72vdc system would also draw less amps. LR.........
----- Original Message -----
From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
"90 amps or less" With how many volts ?
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Pretty good for 48vdc but notice on the flats I'd be drawing
90amps or less.
Less volts more amps to do the same work. Ohm's Law. Lawrence
Rhodes.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
> So I got the Metro going ....
>
>
> APPROX. - 43mph ....4th gear 210amps on the flat.....48 volts
>
> Is this in the ball park ??
>
> Only have a digital multi meter. 53.4 volts starting (is that a
full
> charge ?)
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Bill,
I broke in my Warp-9 motor, which is a back up motor for my GE which is in
maintenance, using a deep cycle 12 volt 130 AH battery. Install a standard 12
volt amp meter in series and a 15 amp fuse.
I can run the motor for about 30 minutes at 10 amps before the battery gets
below 10.5 volts. I than connected up a charger set a little higher than the
ampere is used to the battery and I was able to run continuous for about 8
hours. The RPM was less than 1000 rpm.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Dennis<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 8:01 AM
Subject: Breaking in ADC Motor
I've attached a 8-inch ADC motor (new) attached to the transmission, and I'd
like to break in the motor by running it at low voltage for 24 hours. I've
got a 600 watt power supply at 13.2V. Is the power draw from the ADC low
enough that if I hooked the power supply to a 12V battery, then hooked the
battery to the motor, things would run for 24 hours without draining the
battery?
Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I should've said "voltage threshold, thus starting
current cutback."
I do believe the potential for a bad battery. But
Interstate load tested the worst, and indicated that
it was fine! I'm confused!
Yes, I know about the voltage trimpot triggering the
timer, etc. Most of what I read indicates that
thermal runaway won't occur with floodies. Is this
not correct?
--- Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob Bath writes:
> >
> > I ramped up the current throttle to max, set the
> > voltage limit to 183V, and hit 178. Got WAAAAY
> > excited, but before the blue LED came on
> indicating
> > current limit, voltage started dropping again.
> This
> > is what it's been doing all along. Why is it
> ramping
> > back voltage before it hits current limit? Water
> > levels are fine.
>
> Bob,
>
> There is no indication for current limit. You need
> to watch
> your pack current meter to see how much current is
> flowing.
>
> The blue LED indicates that the timer is running.
> It gets
> triggered by voltage limit, regbus activity or hot
> reg,
> depending on switch settings.
>
> The LIMIT LED should come on if the pack hits the
> voltage
> limit set by the trim pot. The blue LED should
> start blinking
> at the same time if you have switch 1 set to ON.
> This is
> when the charger will start cutting back on the
> current.
>
> If your pack voltage peaks and then starts dropping
> before
> hitting the charger's voltage setting, the charger
> will continue
> pumping in the selected current into the pack. This
> may cause
> thermal run away.
>
> Maybe you need to set a lower limit, perhaps to
> account for a
> bad battery?
>
> Ralph
>
>
'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! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello everyone,
Stefan Peters wrote:
Roger Stockton wrote:
In any event, we may debate the exact mechanism at work, but the
undebatable end result is already well-established by EVers in the 70's
and 80's: a low-frequency controller that subjects the batteries to high
current discharge pulses results in greatly reduced capacity (precisely
as predicted by Peukert) and reduced cycle life compared to a
high-frequency controller (with bus caps) that subjects the batteries to
the average current instead.
Sounds like the peak repetitive current seen over a period of time is
a major factor in determining the usable capacity of a lead-acid
battery. But it may be more accurate to leave out the frequency part,
since high frequency switching simply allows for the use of smaller
smoothing caps (and the higher frequency does work better given the
inductance value of most DC motors? I don't know,
Yes. If the period of modulation is larger than the LR constant,
than motor current drops to zero, which then causes you to get I2R
heating at the higher current values, rather than the average current.
At 50% modulation, you'll get 2x the loss, at 10%, 10x!
A similar thing happens with battery wiring and the controller
capacitors. At high frequencies, a smoother current wave is seen in the
wiring. When the controller turns on, the current ramps up (because
current cannot change instantly in an inductor -- the wiring). When it
turns off, the current keeps coming, boosting up the voltage on the
capacitors, which is then drawn down next time the controller turns on.
But, I think you know this...
I suppose you could use enough capacitance to solve the problem on
the battery end, but you'll need to add more inductance or resistance to
the motor. Being that more resistance is bad, you'll have to add quite
an inductor that can take full motor current -- probably will be larger
than the motor itself!
I'm asking). The available capacity of capacitors simply was not
adequate in the 70's and 80's (even 90's) to effectively smooth the
current draw at low frequencies. This is one area of technology that
has advanced quite quickly while we spent all our time at arcades...
...
But I do agree that the whole peak current draw/average current draw
issue is a major consideration to keep in mind. Wouldn't want to go
murdering any batteries. One of the main points of such a setup is to
increase how long you can use your individual batteries (since you are
effectively discharging each one individually, and don't have to
replace the whole pack at the same time).
But, when you use all batteries, all the time, Peukert's effect is
minimized. That's why it is bad to have two packs and switch between the
two, because you will be discharging each of them at higher rates,
leading to less usable capacity. You are doing something like this, but
on a finer scale. Maybe you can do a comparison between the losses in
your system and the losses due to using a rheostat to change field
strength? Your system is an attempt to be one step up from field
weakening, one step below curtis controllers, no?
Cory Cross
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I did more or less the same thing... but mine was out of the car on a work
bench.
I have a 9" ADC motor and some older T-105's, so I ganged 2 of the T-105's
together, hooked a 12 v charger up to them and then hooked that up to the 9'
ADC. I also hooked up a Vmeter to see the voltage. It would run for about 1/2
hr until the v showed about 10.5 v. I unhooked the motor, charged the T-105's
for about 4 hrs and hooked up the motor, let it run for about 1/2 hr and then
did the whole thing over again. The routine went on for about 4 days, the
brushes got about 1/2 seated and I stopped the process.
I should start it again to get them fully seated.
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 8:01 AM
Subject: Breaking in ADC Motor
> I've attached a 8-inch ADC motor (new) attached to the transmission, and I'd
> like to break in the motor by running it at low voltage for 24 hours. I've
> got a 600 watt power supply at 13.2V. Is the power draw from the ADC low
> enough that if I hooked the power supply to a 12V battery, then hooked the
> battery to the motor, things would run for 24 hours without draining the
> battery?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bill Dennis
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: Breaking in ADC Motor
> I did more or less the same thing... but mine was out of the car on a work
bench.
>
> I have a 9" ADC motor and some older T-105's, so I ganged 2 of the T-105's
together, hooked a 12 v charger up to them and then hooked that up to the 9'
ADC. I also hooked up a Vmeter to see the voltage. It would run for about
1/2 hr until the v showed about 10.5 v. I unhooked the motor, charged the
T-105's for about 4 hrs and hooked up the motor, let it run for about 1/2 hr
and then did the whole thing over again. The routine went on for about 4
days, the brushes got about 1/2 seated and I stopped the process.
>
> I should start it again to get them fully seated.
> Hi All;
Well you can do this for DAYS! Howbout a "Comm Stone" as we used to call
them on the RR? You used this soft stone like bar to grind onto the comm, it
was very abrasive, but would wear down the brushes quickly Jim Husted would
be able to tell ya more about their use, I'm sure?But I havent seen or heard
of EV guys using them nowadaze, like WHERE would ya get one today?I would
say go ahead and drive, but no heavy current draws til the brushes seat. I
remember the brush wine on locomotives just out of the shop. Nobody ever
said " Go Easy" on a lokie's motors when they came out of the shop. Of
course the banks of brushes in an RR TM probably made the loads on each
brush a lot less?
My two brushes worth.
Sreeya
Bob
> Rush
> Tucson AZ
> www.ironandwood.org
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 8:01 AM
> Subject: Breaking in ADC Motor
>
>
> > I've attached a 8-inch ADC motor (new) attached to the transmission, and
I'd
> > like to break in the motor by running it at low voltage for 24 hours.
I've
> > got a 600 watt power supply at 13.2V. Is the power draw from the ADC
low
> > enough that if I hooked the power supply to a 12V battery, then hooked
the
> > battery to the motor, things would run for 24 hours without draining the
> > battery?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Bill Dennis
> >
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
It looks like the 48 volt system is more efficient @43mph. (48v x 210a =
10,080 watts vs. 120v x 90a = 10,800 watts)
Efficiency is the key, and comparing total input power @ a given speed
or watt hours per mile gets us to compare apples to apples.
I believe the two above cars could still reduce their consumptions by an
additional 10 - 20%. Have all their fluids been replaced with
synthetics? (i don't care which brands) Low rolling resistance tires
installed? Alignment done? Verify no brake drag?
Idea...is there a public spreadsheet or equivalent that would allow
everyone to input there pack volts, pack amps, at a preset speed, or
watt hours per mile at a preset speed, so we all can compare
efficiencies between cars? Kind of like what http://www.dragtimes.com
does with times but we all would be comparing efficiency.
Tim
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
Sorry. 120v system. That's the problem with low voltage systems.
High amp draw at speed. However if you keep your speed down low
voltage systems can be quite useful. The 72vdc system would also draw
less amps. LR.........
----- Original Message ----- From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
"90 amps or less" With how many volts ?
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Pretty good for 48vdc but notice on the flats I'd be drawing
90amps or less.
Less volts more amps to do the same work. Ohm's Law. Lawrence
Rhodes.....
----- Original Message ----- From: "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
> So I got the Metro going ....
>
>
> APPROX. - 43mph ....4th gear 210amps on the flat.....48 volts
>
> Is this in the ball park ??
>
> Only have a digital multi meter. 53.4 volts starting (is that a
full
> charge ?)
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Certified as a NEV only...
http://www.okaauto.com/okanev.htm
"OKA NEV KIT is DOT compliant and certified to the FMVSS #500 for Low Speed
Vehicle"
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "mike golub" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 12:52 AM
Subject: RE: Federal EV tax credit (Russian Glider)
> OKA Gliders available for about $5K from
> http://www.okaauto.com/
>
> and he's got plenty of spare parts...
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
As far as the federal credit goes, I found the 2005 form as follows:
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8834.pdf
Form 8834 - Line 5. I understand that to be 10% for 2005 and 2.5% for 2006.
Please correct me if I am not understanding this right. Looks like this only
applies to new - previously unregistered vehcles. Good luck finding one of
those. As far as I know, there is no one selling production EVs any more.
States vary, and I can only speak for GA. They still have a 10% credit for
conversions up to a total credit of $2500. I just checked the form last week.
They also have a credit for new cars, previously unregistered. I tried to
get credit for the 1979 ETV-1 in 2004, which was built, track tested,
displayed,
and stored for 25 years before I got it. They denied me the credit stating
that the car was used because it had >3000 miles on it and had been used by the
US government and they don't require registration. It is a fine line, so be
careful trying to get it. I didn't have much luck, but I do know that some
people (in the past) have got credits from both the IRS and state government.
I
was never successful though, with any of my 3 cars.
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Cory Cross wrote:
Yes. If the period of modulation is larger than the LR constant,
than motor current drops to zero, which then causes you to get I2R
heating at the higher current values, rather than the average current.
At 50% modulation, you'll get 2x the loss, at 10%, 10x!
A similar thing happens with battery wiring and the controller
capacitors. At high frequencies, a smoother current wave is seen in
the wiring. When the controller turns on, the current ramps up
(because current cannot change instantly in an inductor -- the
wiring). When it turns off, the current keeps coming, boosting up the
voltage on the capacitors, which is then drawn down next time the
controller turns on. But, I think you know this...
Yeah, I saw mention of this a couple of times while researching parts.
How would this apply to a 90% duty-cycle waveform? In the original
BatPack, he always kept some current flowing, never switching all of
them off. But it meant that at lower constant speed operation (seen
often in a open-road car, rarely on a race car), it would suck certain
batteries way more then others. For street use I was *hoping* to remove
this critical downside without overly complicating the switching
algorithm by "cheating" and using PAM instead of stepped DC. But I can
use stepped DC, if that is what will work more efficiently and be easier
on the components. Just more code, that's all.
I suppose you could use enough capacitance to solve the problem on
the battery end, but you'll need to add more inductance or resistance
to the motor. Being that more resistance is bad, you'll have to add
quite an inductor that can take full motor current -- probably will be
larger than the motor itself!
I am hoping for a solution that doesn't require more hardware. I'm
already at over half the cost of a Curtis (but one third the cost of a
Curtis and a BMS combined, and this is one-off costs :D ).
But, when you use all batteries, all the time, Peukert's effect is
minimized. That's why it is bad to have two packs and switch between
the two, because you will be discharging each of them at higher rates,
leading to less usable capacity. You are doing something like this,
but on a finer scale.
Hence the Subnet Switch. It's the key to making the system even mildly
competitive with modern ($$$) PWM controllers. You can run any number of
Power Subnets (strings), and the Speed Controller will use them however
it can to reduce battery stress. Two stings would be a minimum for good
range/battery life.
The Power Modules are to perform voltage adjustments within each string
(for initial movement/fine control, and so you can mix battery
chemistries/capacities), to allow for an integrated BMS (which I think
is very important, but many cannot afford in addition to a $800+
controller), and best of all super reliability. Bad/dead battery? Just
keep driving without harming anything. Hopefully, with a good setup, you
will be running most of the time with a "locked" pack, where all the
switches are on (no bypass diode loss, only a nice low Rds with no
switching losses). If you can do that, you will hopefully see the
highest efficiency and the lowest per bat current draw possible.
Maybe you can do a comparison between the losses in your system and
the losses due to using a rheostat to change field strength? Your
system is an attempt to be one step up from field weakening, one step
below curtis controllers, no?
Actually, it's an attempt to be one step up from a contactor controller,
one step *sidewise* from a curtis. It's my effort to create a modern
equivalent of a contactor controller with it's own unique set of
advantages. In other words, simple (build/modify and fix it yourself),
inexpensive, and completely upgradeable/scalable so you only need to buy
what you need, when you need it.
BTW, I don't think you can use a rheostat with a two-terminal motor (one
direction series - pump motor, or PM motor), which means I can't test
that alternative. I would have to work with someone else and set up
identical test conditions so as to compare the two, once it is in the
vehicle. The bench wouldn't be a good test, since I'm attempting to make
a "tunable" system that you would set (or would compensate itself) to
your driving patterns.
--- End Message ---
