EV Digest 5068
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: Breaking in ADC Motor
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
by "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: I want to build a PWM DC motor controller
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Neg supply for E-meter
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: I want to build a PWM DC motor controller
by Cory Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Mk3 Regs
by "Rich Rudman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: False alarm! RE: battery advice.
by Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: Making progress! RE: battery advice.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Federal EV tax credit
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Matt & Mike vs Mt. Hood
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: False alarm! RE: battery advice.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Ev glider and: Federal EV tax credit (Russian Glider)
by "jerryd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) RE: False alarm! RE: battery advice.
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: I want to build a PWM DC motor controller
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Thermal runaway
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: I want to build a PWM DC motor controller
by Cory Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) RE: Why is it ramping back voltage before cutback point?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: False alarm! RE: battery advice.
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks, Rush. How do I know when the brushes are "1/2 seated" and "fully
seated"?
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rush
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 10:04 AM
To: [email protected]
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.
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 ---
120V X 90A = 10,800 Watts
48V X 210A = 10,080 Watts
Is one moe efficient than the other ??
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 ---
Actually the other factor caused by PWM is skin effect. If we had a PWM
going from 60V to 72V, only the peak-to-peak current change would be
subject to skin effect. In the case of the normal PWM going from 120v
to 0v, the entire current value is subject to skin effect.
How significant skin effect is depends on the frequency of the current
and how thick the conductor you're trying to use is. The issue is if
the conductor is thicker than the skin depth, the current will not flow
through the center of the conductor so the AC current sees a wiring
resistance that is higher than the cable should have had since some of
the copper is not being used. That doesn't mean a thicker cable is a
problem, it means that the thicker cable sees reduced additional benefit
in terms of lower resistance. For DC currents resistance drops with the
square of the diameter, for skin effect it drops with the diameter
directly (we gain circumference instead of area). The ability of a
cable to cool itself of I*R heat depends on surface area which increases
linearly with diameter and this remains unchanged.
Actually this may be very significant. Skin effect at even 10KHz is
0.66mm. This would in fact seem to be quite significant in how
effective wire will be. 2/0 wire only having the outer 0.66mm used is
quite a waste.
Danny
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...
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: damon henry
> 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...
Correct! You can't power the E-meter directly from your 12v accessory power.
>The manual offers two options...
There is another option, which I prefer. Get a small switching power supply
that can run directly off your traction pack, and which has an isolated 12v
output to power the E-meter (and nothing else). The E-meter takes so little
power that this can be a "wall wart" or old laptop power brick. Just make
sure it is a SWITCHING power supply, not one with a 60hz transformer!
Almost all low-power switchers have "universal" inputs and work on AC or
DC, at anything from 90-300v. For example, I use an Astrodyne 15vdc
0.5amp switcher. It is rated for 90-264vac input, but actually works from
60-350vdc. It's a little potted "brick", and would even work underwater.
The advantage of this approach is that the little switcher is more efficient
than having to run the main DC/DC just to power a *second* DC/DC to get
the 25ma or so the E-meter needs. The Astrodyne I use draws 4-9ma from
my 132v propulsion pack, depending on whether the E-meter is asleep or in
full sunlight. A normal "full-size" DC/DC would draw over 20ma even with NO
load on its output.
--
Lee Hart
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Danny Miller wrote:
Actually the other factor caused by PWM is skin effect. If we had a
PWM going from 60V to 72V, only the peak-to-peak current change would
be subject to skin effect. In the case of the normal PWM going from
120v to 0v, the entire current value is subject to skin effect.
How significant skin effect is depends on the frequency of the current
and how thick the conductor you're trying to use is. The issue is if
the conductor is thicker than the skin depth, the current will not
flow through the center of the conductor so the AC current sees a
wiring resistance that is higher than the cable should have had since
some of the copper is not being used. That doesn't mean a thicker
cable is a problem, it means that the thicker cable sees reduced
additional benefit in terms of lower resistance. For DC currents
resistance drops with the square of the diameter, for skin effect it
drops with the diameter directly (we gain circumference instead of
area). The ability of a cable to cool itself of I*R heat depends on
surface area which increases linearly with diameter and this remains
unchanged.
Actually this may be very significant. Skin effect at even 10KHz is
0.66mm. This would in fact seem to be quite significant in how
effective wire will be. 2/0 wire only having the outer 0.66mm used is
quite a waste.
Isn't that why we use stranded cable?
Cory Cross
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Listers...
Thursday night we had a successful test of the proto type MK3 Rudman
regulators.
Bruce Sherry of the SEVA and EV tech list did the programming with a ATmega 8
chip. With some timely help from John Pullen
So we now have a intelligent Reg system. Or parts of it.
The Basic Feature set is:
Operates as a Rudman MK2B reg... as it's main operation goal.
It dissipates at a preset voltage point.
These first versions will be "LoadLess" only. You will have to
supply your own load resistor and heat sink. The onboard chip is a 50A 60 volt
Mosfet. So you can make some 250 watt loads if you need to.
Lights a Green LED when actually dissipating power.
Lights a Yellow led if a Low batt event is in progress
Light and latches a RED led if a Low batt event occurs, and stays
latched until a over voltage Reg events occurs.
The added Goodies are
You can program the voltage setpoint for Regulation
You can program the low voltage setpoint
You can read back the current voltage
you can read back the Reg status
You can read back the local temperature.
The current command structure supports 99 regs in series.
Runs on Windows Terminal software
has a long list of commands.. that I need to review and become failure with.
2400 baud RS-232 N81 I think.
I think our operating window is from 7 to 18 volts.
This is like the 4th year or this project, I now have what I wanted..
We really wanted to keep the price below $50, but... I am tired of not making a
dime with the Mk2B Regs. They are a LOT of work to setup and test. I have been
doing this for over a decade. Sigh!!!!
I think the only prudent price mark is $75 each, and we will adjust that, as my
greed or Guilt battles for our hearts and minds.... It's going to take a couple
of Grand of capital to get these made tested and
available in volume.
The development path is Through Hole for now. Since I have the wave soldering
machine and grunts that stuff Boards in every week. I have a production team
that has some track time. But I see this product becoming SMT.. Because Bruce
does SMT... and REAL productions need to be SMT now days. So I have a
Dilemma... Big and easy to build, small and it all has to be contracted out.
Right now the PCB is the same length as a MK2B reg 4.500 , and I think it's 4
inches wide. So it's bigger than a MK2B reg. I think we can drop quite a few
components. If I demand my ideas... But I wish to stay
on the good side of Bruce's wishes.
The system has to have a single Regs that acts as a RS-232 to Evil buss
converter, then N number of regs out to 99. So you need to order at least 2
regs, one is the "Bridge Reg" I am hoping to get the Bridge reg to play Reg1
also. We will see about that. Right now You need both. You will need a PC that
talks Serial ASCII.
The current flavor sucks 15 Ma of standby current... Sorry... you might want to
use the Auto restart on our chargers.
The production plans are about 25 to 50 in through hole with some cleaned up
PCB area, maybe a better chip flavor for much lower power consumption, and a
couple other "Better ideas" that Bruce talked about that I did not write down.
I will be evaluating these on the 75Kw charger system, and have clients that
wish to use them in all sorts of things. After the 50 are made and tested.. and
should we have reasonable success, Then we will decide on SMT or through hole
and 500 to 1000 board sets.
I think a LOT of listers Would want these Even if a few of our points are not
solved. Perfection is NOT possible.. just as long as we try... you all get
equipment. and I get to make it better every time.
We will make a MK3 Subpage on the WWW.ManzanitaMicro.com site, and publish the
commands and basic procedures, the Source code... is not going to be freely
distributed, You will have to deal with Bruce Sherry on that point. I don't see
why we need to protect the code, and there good reasons to let better minds
help advance the product. So if you are into hacking the code and hardware, we
will support chosen Beta members. I have watched some pretty capable friends
try and fail to make this simple product. It's by no means a finished
product....Respect is due to those that made it happen.
Clearly we will be adding features and updates as we go along. The PCBs will
support the ATmel 6 pin programming port, and code updates will be available
One way or the other. So this little widget is a fantastic play toy That we
will keep as flexible as possible, Who knows where it's really going, but this
is sure a darn fine start.
I will entertain orders and volume numbers at this time.
Clearly volume orders and commitments will allow me to drop the per Reg price.
I had a nice demo, but even I can't run them yet, so until I get some track
time my self, support is going to be pretty hard to do.
Look for stuff on the Website.. soon.
Rich Rudman
Manzanita MIcro
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob,
I recommend trying it again, and this time watch the current meter
when the pack voltage starts to drop. If the current isn't also
dropping, the charger is not the cause of the voltage drop.
As a double-check, temporarily lower the charger's voltage setting
and rerun the test. You should see the LIMIT LED come on when the
pack reaches the voltage setting and the blue LED should start
blinking, and the current should start dropping. This tells you
the charger is working.
Then put the voltage setting back to what you expect and start the
charger. Manually monitor each battery voltage to see if you can
find one or more battery voltages that are dropping. This might
help find the bad battery.
Ralph
Bob Bath writes:
>
> 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 ---
Bob Bath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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.
2.583V/cell * 72 cells = 185.976V
Like the majority of the world, I work in metric, so use a compensation
of 0.005V/cell/degree C from 26.7C.
This works out to +0.1115V/cell for a battery temp of 4.4C (40F), so
2.6945V/cell * 72 cells = 194V.
Your values are certainly close enough.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 7 Jan 2006 at 4:46, Don B. Davidson III wrote:
> Last fall I "inherited" from my father's estate two EV's ...
> What, if any, tax incentives might I look for with
> these vehicles?
I can't see any, and (without wanting to sound preachy) I don't see why you
should get any. These tax incentives are intended to help make EVs more
cost-competitive with ICEs by offsetting part of the purchase price. I
can't imagine that congress intended them to apply to vehicles obtained more
or less for free.
Of course intent and result are not always the same. Some years ago,
Arizona initiated a similar scheme to encourage EV sales. It was a laudable
goal, but the legislation was a textbook example of a carelessly written law
with unintended consequences. They allowed purchasers to claim half the
EV's cost or $10,000 ^whichever was greater^ (!) as a tax credit.
They were expecting people to buy road EVs. And in fact brokers ("dealers")
were offering to sell vaporware Solectria Forces for thousands of dollars
over list. But what really backfired was the "whichever is greater" clause
and the failure to exempt NEVs. People were getting $10k to drive home in
$8k NEVs and let them sit in the garage. For a while, dealers couldn't keep
NEVs in stock.
The same state also had a program to encourage alt-fuel vehicle sales. I
don't recall the details now - maybe someone else does - but again the tax
credits (or maybe rebates) were calculated on the total cost of the vehicle.
Thousands of people bought big Ford trucks that could run on gasoline or
ethanol, and collected thousands of dollars from the AZ government (read:
taxpayers) even though they never put anything but gasoline in those trucks.
The cost of the program nearly bankrupted the state.
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that any time people find ways to take unfair
advantage of laws like this, it ruins things for everyone else and gives
both incentive programs and alt-fuel advocates a bad name. These things can
be tempting, but we need to be careful how we handle them.
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 "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not reach me.
To send a private message, please use evadm at drmm period net.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
I had a fun lunch with Jim Husted, Matt, and his brother Mike this past
week, when the four of us met up in Jim's hometown of Redmond at the
local DQ for burgers, fries, and EV stories...great fun! Matt and Mike
were holiday vacationing in the central Oregon area, and we were able to
mesh their return-to-the-Portland airport run with my trip to
Redmond-Prineville-Bend run.
Hey Matt, how was your trip through the mountain pass? Must have been
the complete opposite of sunny, warm, Florida, huh? Hope it wasn't too
dicey. Just for the record, what you had to drive through was a picnic
compared to some of my work drives where several feet of fresh snow and
icy conditions made piloting the Isuzu cab-over box service truck
through the pass quite a challenge!
Matthew D. Graham wrote:
Sweet!
I'm so glad I went back to look over the hundreds of posts from the last
couple weeks while I was away.
So, my brow-beating had an effect?
Joule Injected's first run ever
puts it in the top 50 list of 240SX times, and I'm hoping to move it up a
spot or ten over the next two weeks!
First, just in case I didn't make it clear this last time we ate burgers
together....that's a killer EV name!
Joule Injected...how cool is that? Second, yes, your car is rising
through the voting ranks. It now looks like we can have three EVs in a
row as 'Featured Drag Racing Timeslips' of the month...translated...'Car
of the Month'. If White Zombie is the one that gets to be the February
car, I'll make sure to send in a better, more aggressive tire-burn or
wheel lofting shot.
Matt....you better have all your buddies line up with video cams, but
more importantly for this subject, digital cameras to capture Joule
Injected with its new racing tires lit up, smoke rolling off their
virgin tread, to get an awesome picture at the Battery Beach Burnout
races, for the March car of the month! Got the line lock installed yet?
I also noticed that there were many people stoking the voting fire during
that time period. That is really fantastic--thanks guys!
Yeah, the response from this great EVDL has been overwhelming. It's been
a real common ground for all of us to show, that even through
differences in pinions on this and that, we are united in the EV cause!
In addition to all the votes coming in from the EVDL, I have a great
support group going on that is not EVDL related. I've got my sister in
law at her work situation where she is surrounded by techy geek guys in
the FAA, slamming in 15-18 votes each day. These guys were not even hip
to my EV before this DragTimes thing got started. She tells me that
several of them are now talking about building a hi pro EV after seeing
Matt's, Rod's, and my car. My brother votes, and the guys in the
forklift work office send in their votes, too. Several of my customer
friends, many who are into hi pro cars, are also voting for all three
EVs when they get home at night after work.
I believe these examples will help to improve the
general public's perception of electric vehicles. If nothing else, it will
serve as a talking point, just to get people to consider an alternative to
driving a gas car every day.
Ditto!
See Ya......John Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob Bath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I do believe the potential for a bad battery. But
> Interstate load tested the worst, and indicated that
> it was fine! I'm confused!
Quit fretting over the voltage that your batteries are getting to!
As batteries are used and age, the voltage they will achieve *drops*.
USBMC's spec of 2.583V/cell (+/- temp comp) may be fine for a newish,
healthy battery but just a bit too high for your set now that they have
1.3years of use under their belts.
The voltage you want to take the batteries to is the gassing point; that
is charge at full current until the batteries begin gassing, then hold
that voltage until the current tapers to some lowish value (about 3-4A
for a healthy battery) or stops dropping. If your batteries won't hit
the voltage you think they should, then monitor them as the voltage
rises and note what the voltage is when all batteries have started
gassing; use this as your voltage setpoint.
Confirm that the current tapers to a reasonable level at the end of
charge, and confirm that the s.g. indicates that the batteries are
getting fully charged.
If you continue to try to force the batteries to a higher voltage than
they are capable of achieving you will murder at least some of them.
> Most of what I read indicates that
> thermal runaway won't occur with floodies. Is this
> not correct?
Absolutely not! Where did you read this?
Thermal runaway applies to all lead acid batteries. It is due to the
terminal voltage of a lead acid battery *decreasing* as the battery
warms up. If your charger is maintaining a constant voltage, then the
current into the battery is largely determined by the difference between
the voltage at the charger end of the wire and the voltage at the
battery end of the wire. If the battery voltage drops, then the current
increases. Since increased current results in increased heating, the
battery heats up more, and its voltage drops more, so the current
increases more, etc.: thermal runaway. This cycle will continue until
the charger hits its current limit, at which point the current cannot
increase any further even if the battery continues to heat up and reduce
its voltage.
Basically, if you monitor the pack voltage and find that it is
*decreasing* during charge, then you can be fairly certain that the
batteries are heating up. Likewise, if you monitor the charge current
and find that it is *increasing*, then you can be fairly certain that
the batteries are heating up.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Doug and All,
While that's correct for federal level, in
many states you could buy one without motor and put your EV
drive in and then register it as a reg road EV, kitcar,
under state DOT.
In many states you just need lights, brakes,
ability to go 40-45 mph and reciepts and you can register it
as a homebuilt car. It can be done in Fla, other places
check your local state DOT. Don't mention it was a Fed NEV
which as it has no motor, it isn't, just new kit car parts
you made it from. No different from any kitcar that you just
plop the motor, trns into.
To get tax credit you can do conversions by
using the car as parts for a new titled vehicle and adding
new motors, batts, VIN, ect makes it a new car. If you
convert it on the old title, VIN, you can't.
Almost all hot rods are done this way using
old parts to make a new car and getting a new Assembled From
Parts, title. While it's more paperwork to do it this way,
the extra tax breaks can be worth it.
In Fla you don't have to pay sales tax on
EV's.
HTH's,
Jerry Dycus
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: Doug Weathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Federal EV tax credit (Russian Glider)
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 00:38:27 -0800
>On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:52 PM, mike golub wrote:
>
>> OKA Gliders available for about $5K from
>> http://www.okaauto.com/
>>
>> and he's got plenty of spare parts...
>
>Interesting. The glider is called the OKA KIT, and the
>site says it's only legal for turning into a NEV or LSV.
>It starts at $4995, with a full interior but no
>transmission or engine.
>
>As near as I can tell, they're not yet selling US-roadable
>cars. The only ones I can find with a price are the OKA
>RACE, which is aimed at rally and autocross, and the OKA
>KIT.
>
>No crash testing yet?
>
>
>--
>Doug Weathers
>Bend, OR, USA
><http://learn-something.blogsite.org/>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ralph Merwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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.
This is a common misperception: the charger does *not* cut back on the
current; once in constant voltage mode the charge current is defined by
the battery, not the charger. This is why thermal runaway can occur; if
the battery voltage drops, the battery demands more current from the
charger, and the charger happily supplies it. If the charger were truly
cutting back the current, then the current would not increase as the
battery heats up, instead the voltage would drop as the charger holds
the current constant (or indeed, forces it to continue decreasing).
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don't go by what I said. Listen to Mr. Ohm. I just threw out a number.
High volt systems will do better on the road. LR.......
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Geo Metro EV on a budget
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 ---
Danny Miller wrote:
Actually this may be very significant. Skin effect at even 10KHz is
0.66mm. This would in fact seem to be quite significant in how
effective wire will be. 2/0 wire only having the outer 0.66mm used is
quite a waste.
Danny
Danny, please re-read about skin effect - at 10 kHz you hardly
notice *any* (aside MUCH higher harmonics if this 10kHz isn't
close to a sine wave).
To have only outer 0.66mm of 2/0 cable conducting
(e.g. having equal conductivity of a hollow copper tube
with 0.66mm thick walls) will take tens if not hundreds
of MHz.
If 10 kHz would cause such a noticeable skin effect,
no one would be able to connect remote speakers to an audio
amplifier without great losses; in fact no one would make
bulk copper speaker wires.
Skin Depth is defined as the distance below the surface where the
current density has fallen to 1/e or 37% of its value at the surface.
I don't want to start throwing formulas here, but at 10 kHz total
resistance of the 2/0 cable will increase by less than 1%. Trust me.
Victor
--
'91 ACRX - something different
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Certainly my batteries are heating up as the voltage
drops. The limit LED is not coming on. But the
batteries are performing fine, at least for now. I'm
at a huge loss as to what is going on. SGs look good;
maybe it is a battery in the back of the car that has
a cruddy cell I'm just missing. I didn't think one
cell could screw things up this significantly...
What (chemically) occurs in thermal runaway? Is that
why I'm seeing darker (greyish) electrolyte at higher
currents after a long charge?
--- Ralph Merwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> I recommend trying it again, and this time watch the
> current meter
> when the pack voltage starts to drop. If the
> current isn't also
> dropping, the charger is not the cause of the
> voltage drop.
>
> As a double-check, temporarily lower the charger's
> voltage setting
> and rerun the test. You should see the LIMIT LED
> come on when the
> pack reaches the voltage setting and the blue LED
> should start
> blinking, and the current should start dropping.
> This tells you
> the charger is working.
>
> Then put the voltage setting back to what you expect
> and start the
> charger. Manually monitor each battery voltage to
> see if you can
> find one or more battery voltages that are dropping.
> This might
> help find the bad battery.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> Bob Bath writes:
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>
'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 ---
Stefan Peters wrote:
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.
The increase in loss for something that doesn't maintain constant
current is 1 over the duty cycle. 90% modulation would only be 10% (1.1x
loss) worse. Stepped DC would have a lower voltage swing, resulting in
less loss. You could PWM only one battery of the substring and get the
best of stepped & PWM.
I'm not sure what you mean by "PAM".
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.
There'll still be some times when it isn't perfect, but you are
aware, so that is fine. Perfect is the enemy of good, so, continue!
However, it would be simpler if you used only the "subnet switch" (to do
series/parallel shifting of the batteries), and a rheostat+field
weakening setup for fine-adjustments of the speed. Dirt cheap and
proven, but that isn't what you are going for ;).
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.
Why complicate it with MOSFETs and diodes? The system I mentioned
above would be a great product/project, I don't see anything like it
offered as a package.
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.
You could use the rheostat to bypass current around the field coils,
weakening the field, though you would need a 4-terminal series motor.
Most car ones appear to be 4-terminal.
Cory Cross
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob Bath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] asks:
"Why is it ramping back voltage before cutback point?"
There are two possibilities:
1) the charger is misbehaving. To eliminate this possibility, you need
to set your voltage limit *lower* than what you know the batteries will
reach so that you can confirm that the charger transitions to constant
voltage mode and that the current tapers off. You noted that you were
able to get the batteries to 178V, so I would suggest dropping the
voltage limit to something a bit below this (perhaps 175V) and verify
that the charger goes to constant voltage mode properly.
2) the batteries are heating up and the charger is already giving all
the current it can. If the charge current is constant at either the
limit you have set, or the charger's maximum and the voltage is
dropping, then it suggests the batteries are heating up and the charger
is having to reduce its voltage to keep the current from increasing as
the battery voltage drops. I expect this to be the situation. I think
you are trying to take the batteries to a voltage that they simply are
no longer capable of reaching, and in the process are holding them
at/above their gassing voltage at full current such that they are
heating up. Note that battery life decreases *exponentially* at
elevated temperatures and that holding batteries at elevated voltages
increases the rate of grid corrosion so you *are* (or *will* be)
murdering your batteries by continuing to do this.
Note that if you charge a lead acid battery at a constant current, its
voltage will increase gradually until it nears the gassing point, then
it will increase rapidly until it peaks. It will hold that peak level
for a while and then start to decrease as the battery is now fully
charged and the energy you are forcing into it is causing it to heat up.
This is the rationale behind dv/dt type termination criteria: when the
voltage stops increasing as the current is held constat, the battery is
fully charged. If you continue to charge until/while the voltage drops,
you are abusing the battery and will cause it to fail prematurely.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
(see bottom)
--- Roger Stockton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ralph Merwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> This is a common misperception: the charger does
> *not* cut back on the
> current; once in constant voltage mode the charge
> current is defined by
> the battery, not the charger. This is why thermal
> runaway can occur; if
> the battery voltage drops, the battery demands more
> current from the
> charger, and the charger happily supplies it. If
> the charger were truly
> cutting back the current, then the current would not
> increase as the
> battery heats up, instead the voltage would drop as
> the charger holds
> the current constant (or indeed, forces it to
> continue decreasing).
>
But this is what happens: at 173V, limit LED and timer
go on for awhile, then go off!
Or, they will turn on, and I try to raise the voltage
cut-off point, and it never gets there.
This is why I'd drawn the conclusion that there were
some sulfated, or otherwise damaged batteries.
I've been scrutinizing (SG of) the ones with the
lowest voltages. Is there a way for a damaged battery
to have normal SGs, and low voltages, but still be
acting like a resistor?
'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 ---
