EV Digest 5173
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: C?
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go Lithium!!!
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: capacitor packs
by "Chris Brune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: capacitor packs
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: capacitor packs
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: What an EV filled day!
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Fwd: re: UHMW in heater core
by "David Roden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: capacitor packs
by "Arthur W. Matteson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Camry Hybrid/Ultracaps using nanotubes from MIT/EV's.
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Has anyone done research on mini/micro turbines to recharge a
battery pack?
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) RE: capacitor packs
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: C?
by Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go Lithium!!!
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Anyone else been spammmed RE: LiPo? New co. in China?
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Has anyone done research on mini/micro turbines to recharge a battery
pack?
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) KillaCycle history
by Brian Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Controlling ceramic heaters, was UHMW in heater core
by "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) looking for VW bug kit
by "charles w jarvis III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: What an EV filled day!
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
The consensus I've heard - you refer to C for 20hr rate even though
you're not going to discharge at that rate. Else no one knows
what charging rate expressed at "C"s people mean since charging
follows the same Peukert effect as discharging.
If I charge at 1C rate that C is 20 hr rate, while charging
at that rate may take less or more than 20 hours.
So if you charge *the same battery* at 2C, you run through it
exactly twice the amps that I'm putting through mine, even
though at our rates usable capacities of the battery are differ.
Else we can't compare, you wouldn't know by how much to increase
the charging current if mfr recommends to increase charging rate
from, say, 0.5 to 1C since capacity change may in general be not
very well defined.
I may be wrong, but this is how I interpret and use C number
so far (for Lithium) without ill effects - the rate I end up with
referring to 20 hrs (or whatever) rated capacity is match
amount of amps recommended specifically as well. If C would
change all over place, this would not match.
Victor
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
It's a sorta fuzzy term, but basically:
C or 1C means to drain the entire capacity of the battery in one hour.
10C is ten times the 1C current i.e. draining the battery in about 5-6
minutes.
C5 (notice number AFTER the letter) means to drain the capacity in 5
hours, or a current roughly 1/5 of C
The fuzzy bit comes in because batteries don't have the same total AHr
capacity at 10C as they do at C10. So does C mean 220 Amps if you have a
220 AHr battery (rated at the 20 hour rate) or does it mean the maximum
current you can actually get out of it continuously for one hour, perhaps
145 amps?
I've seen people use it both ways.
So to recap:
'number' before C means a current that equals that number times the AHr
capacity of the battery.
'number' after C means a current that equals the AHr capacity divided
by that number. I.e. draining the battery over 'number' hours.
Hi all,
Here's a noob sort of question, but I don't know much about batteries...
What does the C rating mean? For example, 30C or 100C for the A123's?
Thanks,
Mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
>> If it's just a fuse, what happens when one blows? If the fuse blew
>> as the result of a high current load (drag racing, etc.), the other
>> 99 have to carry slightly more current.
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> If I understand you correctly, I think each will carry exactly
> just 1% more in this case... This will certainly go totally
> unnoticeable.
The first fuse blew because you fused the cells for 1000 amps, and are
actually drawing 2000 amps. The first fuse blew because of the 200%
overload.
True, the remaining fuses' current is only 1% higher; but that's 202%
instead of 200%. They are going to blow, too; it's just a matter of
time. And not much time, either, depending on whether it's a slow-blow
or fast-blow type of fuse.
As Roger Stockton pointed out, they weren't really parallelling 100
cells. So take this as an example of the principle; not literally. The
key is that when everything is working fine, parallelling cells is fine.
But when something goes wrong, things can go VERY wrong fast! In this
case, lithium cells can burn and explode. The failure modes at high
power can be very scary!
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Matt,
Looks like your math is way off too me.
48 * 30uF = 1.44mF (0.00144 F)
If you are at 120V, you'll have a total storage of 10.4 joules (or watt -
seconds).
You'd be able to light a small light bulb for a little while, but not power
a car.
Regards,
Chris Brune
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Milliron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Due to a lucky dumpster dive I am the proud owner of 48 GE
> capacitors. I would like to make a cap pack. My math tells me that I
> should be able to get a little more than 8 Farads out of these. The
> only information I can cross check with is on the MetricMind site. I
> also want to run them in parrallel not series. I know that I am only
> looking at maybe 2 to 5 seconds of power, but heck they were free.
> What do yall think.
>
>
> DIELEKTROL
> GE Capacitor
> 61L378
> 30uF
> 660VAC 60HZ
> PROTECTED P854
> D1000AFC
>
>
>
> Matt Milliron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 1981 Jet Electrica, Ford Escort
> My daughter named it, "Pikachu".
> It's yellow and black, electric and
> contains Japanese parts, so I went with it.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Your math is way off, 48 is 0.00144 Farad.
8F would require over a quarter million of these caps.
Danny
Hacker Joel-QA6240 wrote:
Due to a lucky dumpster dive I am the proud owner of 48 GE capacitors.
I would like to make a cap pack. My math tells me that I should be able
to get a little more than 8 Farads out of these.
DIELEKTROL
GE Capacitor
61L378
30uF
660VAC 60HZ
PROTECTED P854
D1000AFC
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Matt Milliron wrote:
> Due to a lucky dumpster dive I am the proud owner of 48 GE
> capacitors. I would like to make a cap pack.
These aren't really good for energy storage; not enough farads per
pound. But they would be great for building chargers, or for the input
filter capacitors to a PWM controller.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 13 Feb 2006 at 17:37, John Westlund wrote:
> What I'd like even more to get ahold of is the Goodyear
> Invicta GLR, size 175/70R13. Haven't been able to find them,
> either.
These haven't been manufactured in many years. They are extraordinarily low
in RR, but you pay for it in other ways. I had a set some years back and
was not happy with the traction. They were also by far the noisiest tires
I've ever had on a car.
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 ---
On 13 Feb 2006 at 12:31, Chris Robison wrote:
> I'd wanted to
> control output via PWM; I may have to drop that plan as well.
PWM the blower speed?
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 ---
I think they'd store DC just fine...no difference, really...but one
would only get a little more than 0.001 Farads.
Ceramic does lower its capacitance with a DC bias - quite badly in fact
- but these are almost certainly film. These may be useful for other
projects; keep them or find a new proud owner.
- Arthur
On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 23:59 -0500, Hacker Joel-QA6240 wrote:
> uF is microFarard, or:
>
> 1 Farad / 1,000,000
>
> Also, it looks like you got ahold of non-polarized
> AC Motor Capacitors (for correcting Inductive Loading
> In Motors)...they won't store DC too well being
> Non-polarized and rated at 600V.
>
> Better luck is to raid computer power supplies
> And other industrial rectifier circuits (before
> They went to switching power).
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Matt Milliron
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:54 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: capacitor packs
>
>
> Due to a lucky dumpster dive I am the proud owner of 48 GE capacitors.
> I would like to make a cap pack. My math tells me that I should be able
> to get a little more than 8 Farads out of these. The only information I
> can cross check with is on the MetricMind site. I also want to run them
> in parrallel not series. I know that I am only looking at maybe 2 to 5
> seconds of power, but heck they were free.
> What do yall think.
>
>
> DIELEKTROL
> GE Capacitor
> 61L378
> 30uF
> 660VAC 60HZ
> PROTECTED P854
> D1000AFC
>
>
>
> Matt Milliron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 1981 Jet Electrica, Ford Escort
> My daughter named it, "Pikachu".
> It's yellow and black, electric and
> contains Japanese parts, so I went with it.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Remy Chevalier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Toyota Camry Hybrid - Buick from another planet
From:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1139526651206&call_pageid=970599119419
Toyota Camry Hybrid - Buick from another planet
Toyota steers radical technology into mainstream
By Dan Neil
Automotive critic for the Los Angeles Times.
It's a lot like a regular Camry - subversively so
Feb. 11, 2006
By certain standards, the 2007 Camry Hybrid is not particularly
revolutionary. Here we have a nicely equipped, 1,650 kg, five-passenger
sedan with 192 horsepower at a reasonable cost (yet to be confirmed).
Styling reminds me of the old Merle Travis song: So round, so firm, so fully
packed. The ride and handling are straight-up Pink Floyd: comfortably numb.
But, ladies and gentlemen, what we have here is the Buick from another
planet. Beneath the almost laughably stately sheet metal is a
still-slightly-radical, state-of-the-art, gas-electric powertrain allowing
the sedan to post estimated fuel economy numbers of 5.5 L/100 km city, 6.4
L/100 km highway and 5.9 L/100 km combined driving.
Of course, reasonable minds can and do disagree about the real-world cost
advantages of hybrid technology, how it may stack up against advanced diesel
systems or how perishable hybrid batteries might be. But the Camry Hybrid
inarguably tosses this alien technology in the laps of Mr. or Ms Average.
After all, this isn't some refugee from Steven Spielberg's Minority Report,
like the Prius, or a $50,000-plus luxury SUV, like the Lexus RX 400h. It's
one of the most popular cars out there., the heart of the market - in the
U.S., it has been the best-selling car seven out of the last eight years.
And so the Camry Hybrid is deeply subversive, undercutting the
automotive-identity politics that have separated hybrid technology from
bien-pensant citizens who might otherwise think it's all a plot reeking of
patchouli and macrobiotic ice cream.
You could not ask for a more conventional, non-threatening, more American
sedan than this. (North American-market Camrys are built in Kentucky.) The
new car, the same overall length as the 2006 model (480.6 cm), sits on a
wheelbase stretched 5.6 cm. Overall width is up 2.5 cm. But because of the
new, high-shouldered, bluffly horizontal styling, the car has much greater
visual draft and displacement than the measurements suggest.
There's nothing rakish or aggressive about the car's new styling, no trick
graphics or plunging hood lines. What the Camry is on the inside - safe,
reliable, sturdy, bourgeois - it is on the outside. This car is the radon of
mid-size exurban transportation: odourless, colourless, invisible.
How does it drive? Quintessentially Camry-like. Unlike the spanking-quick
Honda Accord Hybrid, which uses the hybrid power to boost the performance of
its V6 powerplant, the Camry moves at a deliberate and unhurried pace -
which is to say, it's kind of slow. Although it has enough asphalt savvy for
ordinary driving, it's rather yacht-like in its cornering and steering
responses.
Which makes the fuel economy all the more remarkable. Compared to the fuel
economy of the 2.4-litre, automatic-equipped LE model (9.8 L/100 km city,
7.1 highway), the Hybrid offers about 30 per cent better fuel economy than
the four-cylinder, even though it is heavier (by 160 kg) and more powerful
(by 34 horsepower).
As such, it's the perfect delivery system for Toyota's hybrid marketing
strategy, which may be called the mainstreaming of hybrids. Commercials for
the Toyota Camry Hybrid debuted during the Super Bowl.
Industry watchers have to push their fedoras back on their heads and let out
a low whistle. Toyota has played this game exactly right. The company
invested heavily in its Hybrid Synergy Drive, won over early adopters with
the Prius and is now amortizing the technology across its product line, all
the while welding a bond in the consumer's mind between Toyota and high-tech
fuel economy.
Honda - which makes excellent hybrids of its own - is running a distant
second in hybrid sales, and other manufacturers are dithering at the
starting line.
This is the sixth generation of the Camry, which was introduced in the U.S.
in 1983. Since then it has moved inexorably upmarket until it has reached
the near-luxury position it's in now. In addition to the Hybrid, the 2007
Camry line offers four trim levels with two conventional gas engines - a
2.4-litre, 158-horsepower inline four paired with either a five-speed manual
or five-speed automatic; or a 3.5-litre, 268-hp V6 paired with a six-speed
automatic with manual shift mode.
Cynics have argued that people who buy hybrids merely want to advertise
their progressive, Earth-friendly values, and that hybridizing conventional
cars - Camry, Honda Accord and Civic, Toyota Lexus RX400 - doesn't offer
them a green flag to wave. I think this notion underestimates the
satisfactions of self-knowledge, as well the fun of saving money. In any
event, the Camry Hybrid has a few distinguishing traits: some discrete
"Hybrid'' badging, LED tail lights and blue-tinted headlight reflectors.
These same cynics may argue that the hybrid premium isn't worth the savings
in gas. I disagree. In my week of rather lead-footed driving, I got 7.7
L/100 km in mixed driving - outstanding for a big, heavy sedan but certainly
nothing like the 5.9 L/100 km indicated by the U.S. government's
soon-to-be-revised fuel economy tests.
Even so, in a lifespan of 240,000 km, a Camry Hybrid (driven by people like
me and Don Prudhomme) would save about 5,700 litres of gas compared to a
conventionally powered Camry - remember 30 per cent better fuel economy? -
or over $5,000, assuming gas at 90 cents per litre, and we should be so
lucky. Assuming its ``premium'' cost, the hybrid option would more than pay
for itself, albeit slowly.
We may agonize over the dollar-per-dollar benefits of hybrids, but I suspect
most people attracted to this technology are motivated by something deeper,
something grander. We haven't always been a squandering, gluttonous society.
In fact, thrift, economy and modesty are intertwined with Americans' Puritan
DNA.
This abstemious streak is still part of our makeup, waiting to be aroused.
Perhaps it is the part that will save us.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:20:30 -0500
From: Remy Chevalier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The Ultra Battery developed at MIT
From:
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/wtr_16326,303,p1.html
via: Lee Dekker heprv@ yahoo.com
Monday, February 13, 2006
The Ultra Battery
A new type of ultracapacitor could eventually have you throwing out your
conventional batteries.
By Kevin Bullis
A breakthrough technology is holding forth the promise of charging
electronic gadgets in minutes, never having to replace a battery again, and
dropping the cost of hybrid cars. Indeed, the technology has the potential
to provide an energy storage device ten times more powerful than even the
latest batteries in hybrid cars -- while outliving the vehicle itself.
The new technology, developed at MIT's Laboratory for Electromagnetic and
Electronic Systems, should improve ultracapacitors, by swapping in carbon
nanotubes, thereby greatly increasing the surface area of electrodes and the
ability to store energy.
Ultracapacitors, a souped-up version of the capacitors widely used in
electronics, have been around for decades. They're well-known for being
powerful, that is, able to quickly absorb and release electricity. But they
can't store much energy, so their stored electricity is depleted in a matter
of seconds. As a result, they've been limited to niche applications, such as
providing quick bursts of power in some hybrid transit buses.
Now researchers at MIT have found what they believe is a way to improve the
endurance of ultracapacitors several-fold -- allowing the devices to retain
the power and longevity advantages, while storing about as much energy as
the batteries used in hybrids.
The amount of energy ultracapacitors can hold is related to the surface area
and conductivity of their electrodes. The researchers have increased surface
area by "more than an order of magnitude" by using carbon nanotubes, says
Joel Schindall, professor of electrical engineering at MIT and one of the
researchers on the project. One square centimeter of conductive plate, when
coated with the nanotubes, has a surface area of about 50,000 square
centimeters, compared with 2,000 square centimeters using the carbon in a
commercial ultracapacitor today. The highly pure carbon nanotubes are also
extremely conductive, which should increase power output over existing
ultracapacitors, the researchers say.
The technology may find applications beyond hybrids, too. Ultracapacitors
could allow laptops and cell phones to be charged in a minute. And, unlike
laptop batteries, which start losing their ability to hold a charge after a
year or two, they could still be going strong long after the device is
obsolete. "Theoretically, there's no process that would cause the
[ultracapacitor] to need to be replaced," says professor John Kassakian,
another of the researchers.
The main hurdle the new technology is likely to face is not technical but
economic. "The nanomaterials are probably a hundred or a thousand times more
expensive, today, than the materials that we use," says Michael Sund,
spokesperson at Maxwell Technologies, San Diego, CA, a maker of commercial
ultracapacitors. "The markets that we serve are price-enabled. If our
product stored a hundred times more energy, but cost a hundred times more,
there might not be any market for it."
However, the MIT researchers hope that, over time, and with help from
economies of scale, nanotube ultracapacitors can be made for the same cost
as batteries.
The next step is to measure the performance of a device using the carbon
nanotubes and to grow the nanomaterials on a flexible substrate that can be
rolled into a large-scale ultracapacitor.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 17:45:33 -0500
From: RemyC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Electric Vehicles for Transportation :: East Hartford Public
Library :: Feb25
From:
Krishnan Raman
ramank0@ yahoo.com
Solar Energy Association of Connecticut
(860) 233-5684
The Solar Energy Association of Connecticut invites you to
A Seminar and Discussion Meeting
on
" Electric Vehicles for Transportation "
on
Saturday, February 25, 2006
(2 PM)
at the
East Hartford Public Library
840 Main Street, East Hartford, Connecticut
featuring presentations by
Bob Rice, William Glickman, Joe Weber
[ Experienced Specialists in Electric Vehicle Technology and Operation ]
It is open to all interested persons, free of charge.
Please register for this event by calling one of the following:
(860) 233-5684 or
(860) 489-9555 or
(203) 613-4363 or
(845) 669-8341
For more details and directions, please go to the Web Page
http://www.SolarEnergyOfCT.org
K. Raman; 43 Alderwood Drive; West Hartford CT 06117.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
ET List
http://www.electrifyingtimes.com
To view ET List message archive go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ETList/messages
If you want to contribute to the ET List, you must register with Yahoo
Groups and get a User Name and ID.
To unsubscribe from this group, just send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ETList/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
Vegetable Oil Car.
415-821-3519
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The capstone microturbine is not THAT efficient. On Natural gas, the
exhaust temp is 900 degrees F.
In stationary applications that is great, like 1 capstone for 4 houses
provides all the electricity and hot water and hotwater needed for
heating for all 4 houses. Excess heat can even be used to cool.
Now if we can just figure out how to "co-generate" on the fly. Some kind
of heat battery; a sterling generator or thermoeletric or peltier
generator to cool the exhaust.
IF we think about it, and consider a otto cycle engine at 25% eff, that
is still 75% of energy given off as heat. If we could convert 30% of
that to electricity, we could get as much energy as goes into
accelerating AND driving the car, Way more than regen braking is capable
of. On a small scale for a generator trailer, this would also have the
benefit of continuing to charge as engine sits and cools down.
how about modifing one of these?
http://www.microjeteng.com/overview.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Matt,
Make sure you don't trash them,
I bought a couple of them on Ebay for about $10 a piece.
As Lee already indicated, they can be used for chargers
(either capacitive "Badboy" with voltage multiplication
or a regular charger, using these as filter caps).
The original use is to run them on 3-phase motors, there
are many people that have single phase service and need to
run 3-phase motors. These capacitors can make that happen.
(Rotary phase converter, the caps are the static phase
conversion part)
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Matt Milliron
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 7:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: capacitor packs
Due to a lucky dumpster dive I am the proud owner of 48 GE
capacitors. I would like to make a cap pack. My math tells me that I
should be able to get a little more than 8 Farads out of these. The
only information I can cross check with is on the MetricMind site. I
also want to run them in parrallel not series. I know that I am only
looking at maybe 2 to 5 seconds of power, but heck they were free.
What do yall think.
DIELEKTROL
GE Capacitor
61L378
30uF
660VAC 60HZ
PROTECTED P854
D1000AFC
Matt Milliron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1981 Jet Electrica, Ford Escort
My daughter named it, "Pikachu".
It's yellow and black, electric and
contains Japanese parts, so I went with it.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor,
I am afraid you are confusing things.
The *capacity* C is MEASURED at the C/20 discharge rate,
in other words: if you discharge a battery with a current
1/20 of its rated capacity then it's able to hold that
current for 20 hours long.
Example: 100Ah battery can deliver 5A for 20 Hours.
Now the charging/discharging *current* is specified with reference
to the previous defined capacity C over a 1-hour period of time.
You see this on slow chargers (continuous/non-shut-off Nicad)
that they will put 1/10 C in the batteries and charge time is
typical 14-16 hours.
If you have a 100Ah battery (capacity measured at C/20) and you are
charging it at "C" then you are not putting 5A in it for 20+ hours,
but instead you are trying to charge it in 1 hour using 100A.
So, the 100C is extremely impressive, because this means that you
are charging a battery in 36 seconds (plus some time for the losses)
This means that a 2.3Ah call is being charged with 230A!
As I have written before, it is an impractical amount of energy
if you want to recharge an 80Ah pack at 100C at home, as you need a
whopping 8,000A into the pack, but if you have a dedicated dump-pack
or local generator (central charging station), it may be possible.
For floodeds it would give a whole new meaning to the term 'gas'-station.
Regards,
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Victor Tikhonov
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: C?
The consensus I've heard - you refer to C for 20hr rate even though
you're not going to discharge at that rate. Else no one knows
what charging rate expressed at "C"s people mean since charging
follows the same Peukert effect as discharging.
If I charge at 1C rate that C is 20 hr rate, while charging
at that rate may take less or more than 20 hours.
So if you charge *the same battery* at 2C, you run through it
exactly twice the amps that I'm putting through mine, even
though at our rates usable capacities of the battery are differ.
Else we can't compare, you wouldn't know by how much to increase
the charging current if mfr recommends to increase charging rate
from, say, 0.5 to 1C since capacity change may in general be not
very well defined.
I may be wrong, but this is how I interpret and use C number
so far (for Lithium) without ill effects - the rate I end up with
referring to 20 hrs (or whatever) rated capacity is match
amount of amps recommended specifically as well. If C would
change all over place, this would not match.
Victor
Peter VanDerWal wrote:
> It's a sorta fuzzy term, but basically:
>
> C or 1C means to drain the entire capacity of the battery in one hour.
> 10C is ten times the 1C current i.e. draining the battery in about 5-6
> minutes.
> C5 (notice number AFTER the letter) means to drain the capacity in 5
> hours, or a current roughly 1/5 of C
>
> The fuzzy bit comes in because batteries don't have the same total AHr
> capacity at 10C as they do at C10. So does C mean 220 Amps if you have a
> 220 AHr battery (rated at the 20 hour rate) or does it mean the maximum
> current you can actually get out of it continuously for one hour, perhaps
> 145 amps?
>
> I've seen people use it both ways.
>
> So to recap:
> 'number' before C means a current that equals that number times the AHr
> capacity of the battery.
> 'number' after C means a current that equals the AHr capacity divided
> by that number. I.e. draining the battery over 'number' hours.
>
>
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Here's a noob sort of question, but I don't know much about batteries...
>>
>>What does the C rating mean? For example, 30C or 100C for the A123's?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Lee Hart wrote:
The first fuse blew because you fused the cells for 1000 amps, and are
actually drawing 2000 amps. The first fuse blew because of the 200%
overload.
Why in the world anyone would fuse the cells for half of the
possible current drawn from them?
Perhaps I missed some info in the beginning of the thread...
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bob Bath wrote:
c) I don't generally do business with totalitarian
regimes, even if they do provide health care for their
citizens. And I don't generally do business where
laws are in the development stage.
Bob, you do indirectly since 90% of what you buy today
is made by countries with these regimes anyway.
But a company with genuine good intentions (and good people
trying to make difference) which happen to be located in
such country cannot be responsible for regimes of their
governments. Yes, may be we don't do business with them,
but whom do we punish, these businesses or their gov't?
I see nothing wrong with any company making batteries
anywhere as long as they don't exploit child labor
in sweat shops, and I would support such companies.
That isn't the same as supporting regimes of their
gov'ts. How bad regime is, say, battery manufacturer's
fault? Workers just work to make living.
With all respect for your position (NOT trying to change it),
My 2 mm.
Victor
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Feb 13, 2006, at 3:12 PM, Danny Miller wrote:
I believe the Prius is often misunderstood. Its mpg gains didn't come
from adding batteries and a motor. It came from using an Atkinson
cycle piston engine (never before used in an automobile I believe)
that was probably highly tuned over an impractically small RPM range.
The hybrid motor picks up the slack making the Atkinson cycle
practical for the general public. Also it is made very light and has
an exceptionally good drag coefficient (these features would benefit a
non-hybrid equally well) and regerative braking.
Some truth here. Not on the light part though, its a 2700 lb. car. The
city gains are the most significant - no idling helps, no full throttle
power circuit too (= enrichment = forget smog and mileage.) But these
things would make for a dead slow car - its only got (1st gen.) 70HP!
The atkinson cycle is also noted for a loss of low end torque,
especially not welcome when lacking power. The batteries and motors
allow idle stop, they cover up the lack of low end torque and general
lack of ICE power. They also allow the very low power requirements of
certain city driving (like steady speeds below 35mph) to avoid the
inefficient ICE range by cycling the engine. On the freeway the system
can level loads and allow the engine to have its fuel cut when its not
needed without excessive drag (even at 60 mph plenty of the
off-throttle deceleration is regen.)
Of course the second generation has gone even further. I like the idea
of tossing the fan belt (Toyota has already tossed the timing belt.)
These things help raise the bar on leaving the hood closed (along with
100k miles spark plugs, 7500 mile oil changes and 30k mile air filters.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> > Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 13:03:42 -0700
> To: [email protected]
> From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: KillaCycle history (was: Votes..) Long and
> perhaps boring to
> most.
>
> At 07:41 PM 2/11/2006, you wrote:
> >Looks like Bill posted the original Killa Cycle?
>
> Not exactly the "original." The bike
> evolves constantly, as I have
> said.
>
> The picture is of the bike on the exact day
> it set the 9.45 @ 152
> MPH record...
<truncated>
> Bill Dube'
Hi Bill,
Maybe the rest of the motorcycling world will be
catching up to your bikes' performances.
http://www.gizmag.com/go/4083/
Someone in France, inspired by American ev's has been
converting a motorcycle to electric, for racing:
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/ExtremaEvProject.html
I've been bewildered for years about the record times
for your bikes & which bikes set which records. I'm
shell-shocked enough with the mixing of specs & times
& pics that some uncertainty remains about the
dragtimes pic of Scott & the yellow faired bike. Is
the record bike in that pic in the same configuration
it had during the record run that day?
http://web.archive.org/web/20001205221400/www.killacycle.com/pictures.html
I'm probably most in awe of the unfaired blue
Kawasaki, taped headlight and all. Sure would like to
see it posted to dragtimes. It was such a "sleeper."
http://www.electroairbike.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=6
A costly & high-tech French effort produced the JC2,
la Jamais contente 2, that resulted in 4 FIM world
records in 1996. The machine reached just over 87km/h
in the 1/4 mile drag. Note, the FIM speeds are in
km/h.
http://www.fim.ch/fr/rules/records/2005/05worldrecords_listing_cati_divb_electricalvehicles.pdf
Sadly, Bruno Bonhuil, who set those 1996 FIM speed
records, lost his life during a race practice just
last November.
http://www.worldendurance.co.uk/news/news05112100.html
Max Biaggi is another top rate motorcycle rider who
set FIM electric motorcycle records. His race career
is in transition.
http://www.sportnetwork.net/main/s180/st89735.htm
-brian
might not have been the bike that set the record. I'd
prefer to see shots taken of vehicles during the the
runs posted on dragtimes, when available. I do expect
to see pics and specs of a machine as it set the
record. The posted pic is a good shot of the bike &
driver.
Was this the bike (I don't dare say exact bike!),
yellow fairing and all, that set the record that exact
day? The posting of the record time with bikes that
didn't set the record has bothered me for a long time;
I had been thinking it might have been the unfaired
blue bike that set the record. 152mph record.
I sure like to see the data correct for the bike that
did the damage to the record. The pic on the dragtimes
site weirded me as I didn't connect it with the record
bike.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, February 13, 2006 1:43 pm, Lee Hart said:
> Examples of things that can go wrong:
>
> - Something stops the fan or blocks the airflow. If there aren't
> - Your control circuit fails, leaving the elements powered all
> - Water, leaves, bugs, or dirt get sucked into the air intake and
> - An element cracks or breaks, due to age, shock, vibration,
> - One element of a series pair shorts, doubling the voltage on the
> - Something strikes an arc across an element (it only takes a tiny
Would you consider an appropriately rated thermal fuse (to handle overheat
situations) plus standard fuses (to handle shorts, arcs, etc) to provide
an acceptable way to deal with these risks? It would be nice to not have
to redesign or use a different material, if I could apply measures to
insure that the elements never go over 220F or so.
> PWM works, but not very well. For example, suppose your PWM is 100% on;
> the heater is at 180 deg.F and drawing 10 amps. You change the PWM to
> 50% on, hoping to get half the heat. The heater cools off to 170 deg.F,
> which makes its resistance drop almost 2:1. Now it's drawing 19 amps
> during the PWM on-time, and 0 amps during the off-time. You've barely
> decreased your heat, and made the switching current twice as high.
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but what about varying the input voltage
and controlling for power? I guess what I'm getting at is adding
inductance to the load and/or capacitance across the PWM output, to handle
the peak current problem. Then I'm thinking you'd handle the resistance
instability over varying temperatures by adjusting the input->output
curve. So, perhaps if you want 10% power you'd be at 1% duty cycle, 50%
power might be at 8% duty cycle, 80% would be 30%, 95% would be 65% duty
cycle and so on (making these numbers up, I know I'd have to figure them
out in testing). I'm sure if it were as easy as just filtering the output
and calibrating the user input, you'd have suggested it, so I guess I'm
asking why it wouldn't work.
> You're better off turning off some of the elements completely to limit
> heat. Or, control heat production via fan speed.
I'll probably be using the former option; I like the idea of having
airflow and heating independently settable. I do have 12 rows of elements
total, so if I'm ambitious I could make it seem like there's fairly
continuous output control. That's a lot of transistors though, and mainly
it seems like a messy hack.
I feel like heater control is something for which a solid state solution
should exist, which gives equal or superior capability compared with a ICE
heater core, and that solution shouldn't have to require the use of a
nichrome wire heater. I like the PTC elements, I think their self-limiting
characteristic is usually an advantage, they're cheap and easy to work
with, and their large surface area means they don't have to get red hot to
dissipate an acceptable amount of heat. But providing a truly
continuously-variable output is looking like something they just can't do
well, and that's a disadvantage compared to heat from a gas engine. Sure,
I also think it's a cheap hack of a solution to vary heat by varying how
much air passes through the ICE heater core, but most people don't know or
care; they just know that they are getting exactly the vent temperature
they ask for. So, because it meets the need it's effective.
For me personally, it does make a difference. As I get older I seem to be
becoming more sensitive to temperatures and sometimes I'm really
particular about what temperature the air is, coming from the vents. In
the winter I often take advantage of being able to precisely set the vent
temperature and do so independently of airflow, even if it's just with a
simple mixture control. I don't want to give that up. I'd like for my EV
to have that same capability as well, using electric heat.
And as Wayland would appreciate on the subject of EV heaters and
elsewhere, I want to be able to say it's better because it's electric, and
leave no room for rebuttal. :o)
--chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey folks. Long time lurker, "coming out" (of lurk that is) just long enough to
look around for anyone with spare EV parts or kits for a 74 VW bug. I already
have a sep-ex controller, (GE 72v 350amp) so I'm in need of a sep-ex motor,
adapter plate and coupler.
Before the flood of advice comes in.........YES, I know this will make for a
pitiful performer. But hey....Im broke and on a shoestring budget! and It's
mostly for just around town anyway. Mostly back roads and 45 mph tops! (most in
town is 35). if anyone does have any of these needed parts. Please contact me
off list as I am currently two full months behind on reading here! ugh.
For you those that must know.... My name is Charles. nick-name being Sir
Charles. I'm out in the sticks of central Wisconsin. Ive got an electric
scooter won on Ebay from out near Milwaukee. not too shaby and it does hual my
fat butt around good on flat and level. My first conversion was my "little red
rider" mower a few years back. I had an older Yardman "Lawnbird" with a deck
that was shot and wanted to make a "go-cart" for the kids someday. I used a 96
volt Ametek motor and a BUNCH of 12ah scooter batteries. Only had a simple
on-off for speed control and the 3speed. Starting in 2nd or 3rd would pull the
front wheels off the ground! Lots of fun, but no match for the "HMGT"! looking
for a good 24/36 volt motor for it and a pwm controller big enough to let me
continue to pull trailers around the yard with it.
My next two "conversions" were abandoned power wheel trucks for the kids. (two
of em, 6 and 8) picked both up along side the steet and fixed with minor work.
mostly just use them 12ah scooter batts to get em going again. cheap fun for
the kids. was great to see their first EV Grins! even put 12volt smart chargers
inside the trucks so all the kids got to do is back up to an outlet and plug in!
anyway, running on empty here as its 3am now. going back into "lurk" mode
again. Thanks for all the great info here. The EVDL has kept me in "dream mode"
for the last two years. hoping to get out of "dream mode" and into real world
EV'ing!
Thanks for listening to me ramble. I tend to do that when tired. :-)
Sir Charles
___
/ \
(o\!/o)
[] []
(the above art looks right in my out going email here...hope it turns out ok on
the list. it's suposed to be the front of a VW Beetle)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
John Westlund wrote:
>> What I'd like even more to get ahold of is the Goodyear
>> Invicta GLR, size 175/70R13.
David Roden wrote:
> These haven't been manufactured in many years. They are extraordinarily
> low in RR, but you pay for it in other ways. I had a set some years
> back and was not happy with the traction. They were also by far the
> noisiest tires I've ever had on a car.
I agree. Great for low rolling resistance, but poor traction and noisy.
I had a set on my 1994 Plymouth minivan, and it got 30 mpg. Of course,
the 4-cyl engine and manual transmission helped. But it dropped 2-3 mpg
when I had to replace the tires.
With tires, everything is a tradeoff. The Bridgestone Potenzas that came
on our 2001 Prius were low rolling resistance, and were also quiet. But
they wore out in just 25,000 miles. The replacement Potenzas (paid for
by Toyota, bless their hearts) aren't as low a rolling resistance, but
are lasting longer.
--
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget the perfect offering
There is a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in -- Leonard Cohen
--
Lee A. Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, leeahart_at_earthlink.net
--- End Message ---
