EV Digest 5189
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go
Lithium!!!)
by "John Luck Home" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Dragtimes Vote
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: Dragtimes Vote
by "Myles Twete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: Dragtimes Vote
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Has anyone tried switching thru series strings of small AGMs to maximize
range?
by Mark Freidberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go Lithium!!!
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go
Lithium!!!)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) RE: Why not more AC conversions vs DC conversions...
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: Free snowblower
by "M.G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go
Lithium!!!)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Battracide
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) RE: Why not more AC conversions vs DC conversions...
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go
Lithium!!!)
by "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Volumetric energy density of Lithium battery
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Dragtimes Vote
by "STEVE CLUNN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) A123 Delivers on Nanotechnology Promise by Bill Moore
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
But what do they cost ?? There does not seem to be a massive weight saving
over an equivalent Pb battery maybe 1/3rd weight improvement over an AGM
for the same amount of W/h but if they are 20 times the cost, they are not
really useable in EV's.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "lyle sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 1:52 PM
Subject: RE: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go
Lithium!!!)
If you have questions about what can happen to a
Lithium battery and how it performs when it shorts
watch the Valence Battery video.
http://www.valence.com/SafetyVideo.asp
Now think about the high voltage that some vehicles
require and how little it takes for a spark to jump
and start a fire. Internal temperature sensors are
not going to help after a car accident. The plates in
the cells could be damaged and a catastrophic meltdown
can occur. Better batteries are the safer option.
--- Myles Twete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I had asked:
> 1) Has anyone ever seen or heard of a Lithium
battery
> actually shorting?
No comments yet, so I did a web search...okay, these
things do short
sometimes.
But the consensus out there is that the
manufacturers are supposed to (and
do) put mechanisms in place to prevent INTERNAL
shorts from leading to any
catastrophic destruction. Typically their approach
is to create an internal
polymer fusing link. Nevertheless, there are
documented cases of alleged
internal shorts leading to fires or worse:
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2005/HZB0501.pdf
However, the primary vulnerability to short circuit
is externally generated
shorts. Further, even external circuit shorts
aren't supposed to lead to
fire or explosion due to the mechanisms the
manufacturer is supposed to put
in place.
The biggest vulnerability to internal short is due
to externally-penetrating
objects. I'd guess the Kokam-style Lithiums would
be particularly at risk
here given their lack of a hard shell. Lack of an
externally-induced short,
internal shorts are said to be most likely due to
overtemp which is
something that the manufacturer puts the internal
polymer fuse in there to
handle.
> 2) What is the likelihood of a short as a failure
mechanism
> for a Lithium
> batt?
As mentioned above, internal shorts are possible,
but mechanisms are in
place by the manufacturer to lead the cell to fuse
open in case of a short
or high heat.
In the above 2004 NTSB study, AC Propulsion had
shipped some Lithium battery
modules and one had caught fire in shipment. Each
of these "modules" was
composed of 2 "blocks" of 68 cylindrical Lithium
cells connected in parallel
by spot welding to a grid at the top and bottom of
each cell. Two blocks
were then bolted together to form a 7.4v module.
The NTSB conclusion for the fire source?
They couldn't be certain, but the preponderance of
evidence led them to
believe that external metal "tools" floating around
in the package had
managed to bridge the modules external contacts
leading to an external short
circuit. This external short circuit then caused
the package and batteries
to begin to burn, which led to cells going overtemp,
etc. I.E. they
couldn't conclude that an internal short was the
likely cause.
Clearly ACP wasn't too concerned about paralleling a
mass of Lithium
batteries without fuses since each of their modules
was configured as a
2S*(68P) config.
Maybe they've since changed this?
-Myles
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.11/264 - Release Date:
17/02/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Oat, you have a good point and your logic is sound. It could cause some
negative feelings about EV drag cars. On the flip side of the coin the
original intent was to bring about the awareness that EV drag racing
actually exists. Most people I talk to are amazed to find this out. The
other good thing to come out of all of this is that the webmaster has put up
a whole new page to showcase EV drag cars. Without the number of electrics
currently on the site it would not have warranted a separate page at all.
This I feel is a very significant gain for creating an awareness of EV drag
racing and EVs in general. This page will most likely exist even after there
are no EVs in the top 100. I say mission accomplished and now we can get
back to the battle :-)
Roderick Wilde
----- Original Message -----
From: "Otmar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: Dragtimes Vote
At 8:39 AM -0800 2/18/06, John Wayland wrote:
.....
I vote every day for the EVs, and sure wish all who voted regularly and
propelled White Zombie to the number one spot, would do the same for our
EV friends fighting for next month's honor.
Am I the only one that thinks that three months of EV's in a row might be
boring to those not into EV's?
I'm all for having EV's in the top spot every now and then, but too often
and I think it reduces the effectiveness. I would think that the gassers
would think we have taken over the site (as our large numbers certainly
can) and then they might not go there as often.
I for one am going to wait a couple months, then we can try for #1 again.
Just my 20 milliwatts.
--
-Otmar-
http://www.CafeElectric.com/
The Zilla factory has moved to Corvallis Oregon.
Now accepting resumes. Please see:
http://www.cafeelectric.com/jobs.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.11/264 - Release Date: 2/17/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.11/264 - Release Date: 2/17/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> It appears that for a brief period, the site had a "pay for
> votes" options...All I can say is, the website is based here in South
Florida,
> and I think we all know how well South Florida can handle
elections...'nough said.
I love it...not only is it a riggable vote, but you can buy your drag queen!
That the site is based in So. Florida is icing on the cake.
On the other hand...as they say...'only in America'.
Thanks for the laughs!
I side with Otmar on this...let the dragtimes site sleep awhile.
But I'm not a racer...
-MT, Portland, Or.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Shawn, All
Thanks for the possible answer to how / why the Audi took 1st spot. Although
I've been voting it's via one of the auto vote links that was provided and I
hadn't checked to see where they were standing for a few days. When I did go
to see (more toward if Rod had overtaken Matt, as he's been slowly creeping up
on Matt) I was oddly surprised to see the Audi in first. Even if car clubs
have an advantage over individuals and may not be the fairest method it at
least puts the votes in the hands of the people and not the dollar.
As to Otmars statement / question about being an irritation factor. I've
thought about this also, and feel a slower / gentler approach can have a less
threatening nature to it. Then again how are they gonna feel when we take over
the world?? 8^ )
Cya all
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Shawn Waggoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It appears that for a brief period, the site had a "pay for votes" options.
Matt Graham saw it earlier, but it has since been withdrawn from the site. I
can only speculate that it was due to an outcry from the various site
visitors. Apparently, votes were a penny-a-vote, with options of $10, $15,
$25, etc. So I would guess the Audi owner threw down the $25 to boost his
votes.
All I can say is, the website is based here in South Florida, and I think we
all know how well South Florida can handle elections...'nough said.
In the mean time it looks like Rod and Matt's cars are moving back into the
top slots. Keep the votes going for all the EV's!
--
Shawn M. Waggoner
Florida EAA
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rod Hower
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 3:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Dragtimes Vote
Something is really fishy concerning the initial
voting.
The Subera last month jumped up to 1400 votes and then
barely got 10 votes a day after that. I think they
are finding a way to artificially increase voting when
the car is initially featured.
Maybe you could email the site owner and ask him about
the legitimacy of this vehicle (the Audi).
I believe the Corvette has a large following and has
many voters just like the EV's.
I don't however believe the Audi has a very big
audience.
Rod
--- John Wayland wrote:
> Hello to All,
>
> Bruce Weisenberger wrote:
>
> >Noticed the talk on Dragtimes voting has died off-
> Also noted some Audi came out of nowhere and slaped
> the Mazda and the Nissan back to 2nd and 3rd place
> and that Corvette that was third is still trying to
> move up.
> >
>
> Thanks for posting this, Bruce. Where 'did' that
> Audi come from, and how
> in the world did it get so many votes, so fast?
>
> I vote every day for the EVs, and sure wish all who
> voted regularly and
> propelled White Zombie to the number one spot, would
> do the same for our
> EV friends fighting for next month's honor. All it
> would take, is for
> this group to sit down today and vote once, and the
> Audi guy would see
> stars and wonder how the EVs shot past him. Come on
> everyone, this is
> fun! Vote for the EVers!
>
> See Ya....John Wayland
>
>
---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
How to maximize range with AGMs in my EV Geo? One idea was that if AGMs are
good at peak power delivery, then size them so that's where they operate given
the current demands of the EV. Since the other components of the EV Geo are
already in place like the Curtis 1231 with 144v / 500 amp limits, then size the
AGMs to work with this. And finally, try multiple series strings of these, say
3 for now, and the ability to switch thru the 3 strings as each string is
exhausted.
So if the EV Geo cruises at 75 amps and peaks at multiples of this on hills
and acceleration, then maybe use BCI=U1 (~33ah) or smaller batts in 3 strings
of 144 volts or less. Basically try to size them so they are delivering peak
power as much of the time as possibile.
So there's 3 strings of these but you are only running on 1 string at a time.
When the string is exhausted (50%-60% d.o.d), simply turn the dashboard rotary
swtich to the next string and continue driving.
Another reason for the 3 series strings is it could allow the other 2 to
recover somewhat while the presently selected string is being drawn from. So as
you drive you just keep switching thru them, increasingly faster no doubt.
Eventually of course, they would run out.
Has anyone tried this? The question is would it actually result in
significant extension of range versus the traditional AGM pack configurations
like just a single series string of bigger batts.
A variant would be to size the batts even smaller so they are delivering peak
power at the 75 amp cruise. But then when more current is needed, the other
strings automatically kick-in temporarily to supply the extra current demand,
then turn off again. With smaller batts one could have more strings to switch
through to tap their recovery energy after the first pass through all of them.
One could still rotate through them with a dashboard switch as the presently
selected string became exhausted.
I guess one logical extension of this is that so much string switching starts
happening that it is automated and you get into "pulse draws" from the strings
like in microsecond or nanosecond bursts. If one did this, could it
significantly extend the range capabilities of lead-acid packs?
Too much complexitiy though and one might as well try something else for
maximum range like a trailer or advanced batts. But could "pulse draws" from
Nimh or Li-ion increase their range delivery too?
Mark Freidberg
-1980 Jet Electra Van 600
-1994 Geo Metro EV
-2002 Ego 2
---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> Many large capacity Li cells are actually smaller ones in parallel.
> TS cells look like a book with interleaved neg/pos pages-plates.
> In effect paralleled ones.
The plates of a single large cell are intrinsically better matched than
several separate small cells. They will automatically all be of the
same age, at the same temperature, same electrolyte concentration, etc.
The manufacturer does a more consistent job of interconnecting the
plates than is likely with external cells. So, there are still benefits
to a single large cell.
But I agree; there may be concerns that push you towards separate cells
in parallel. It might be safer if the cells ever caught fire, explode,
or had some other catastrophic failure if they were divided up.
Economics might make the larger (or smaller) cells cost less. Many
smaller cells might fit better.
--
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 ---
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
> I do need 24v to run the scooters I build. Can those [Thundersky]
> batteries be configured to 24v? If so what are the amp hours at that
> voltage?
The ones I have are TS-90LP individual cells, rated at 3.6v 90ah each.
They actually deliver no more than 70ah, and their internal resistance
is high so you can't pull over 25 amps or they will overheat. A 24v pack
would require 6 or 7 cells.
> BTW how do you charge those puppies?
I use a switchmode power supply, adjusted for 4.2v and a 30amp current
limit. I charge them individually.
--
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 ---
Again, sorry for confusion, i think we are understanding the same thing
>> No not really. The relationship between voltage and rpm is a design
>> consideration. Yes high voltage makes it easier to achieve high RPM, but
>> it isn't required. There have been 12,000 rpm brushed motors that run on
>> 3V and 5000 RPM motors that run on 600V.
>>
>> Yes that is true, BUT not at the same torque or even the same hp. These
>> things are all interrelated and tradeoffs exist.
>> I was trying to offer some explination without going into the extream
>> details, there are always exceptions.
>>
>> I was trying to point out how, from a converters standpoint, what
>> difference the two AVAILABLE choices have. Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>
>
>I'm not following you. For one thing DC motors suitable for conversions
>are readily available at voltages from 36V to 600V.
And for a given HP or torque at an rpm what is the battery amps of the two
systems?
36V @ 1000 amps = 60Amps * 600V
Losses are relative to square of amps, and cable size,connectors and to some
extent silicon, are related to amps.
>As many the folks that argue about drag racers point out, there is no law
>of nature that directly links voltage to HP(or torque). You can find
>motors designed for just about any voltage at a wide variety of HP.
But I think it would also be agreed that there are some practical limits to the
number of amps(and volts for that matter)
Drag racer A goes with 36 Volts and highest amps avail
Drag racer B goes with higest voltage avil AND highest amps avil
My money is on drag racer B.
In an AC motor, the BEMF generated is subtracted from the applied voltage and
the remaing voltage is avail for making torque.
When a motor is rewound so that a lower voltage can make higher rpm, the torque
constant goes down. Watts is Watts and HP is a product of rpm and torque, no
free lunches :-( I am not a motor guru, but I have poored over charts and
there is usually a torque curve per voltage applied.
>Secondly there are MUCH more than two choices available to converters.
>Granted the two commonly available AC systems are relatively low current
>so they work better at high voltage, but there are numerous DC solutions
>available and DC controllers that can handle high voltage (>300V). These
>controllers will work with either the commonly availabe low voltage motors
>(rated at 120V or less) or you can pay the bucks for a high voltage DC
>motor. EIther way the resulting HP has less to do with the motor than it
>does with what the controller can trow at it.
Agreed, I really was talking about the 2 most commonly avail conversion choices.
>The bottom line is, it doesn't matter what the voltage is, just what the
>power is.
Agreed.
> It also doesn't matter what the motors RPM is, since you are
>almost certainly going to gear it down for the wheels. Granted -all else
>being equal- higher ratio transmissions will have higher losses. However,
>the difference is relatively small.
Agreed, agaiin pointing to my statement about the biggest difference we
converters see in AC+gear reduction vs DC+stock tranny is the higher amps.
>So it doesn't matter if you have a 12,000 RPM AC drive system running at
>360V or a 6,000 RPM DC drive running at 120V, assuing similar system
>efficiency, if you pull 60kw from the batteries you'll end up with
>approximately 60hp at the wheels. With a given HP output, at the same
>vehicle speed, you are going to get the same wheel torque.
Yes! Watts = V * Amps But what if 60kw isn't enough :-(
60KW is about 80hp.
60KW at 360V is 167Amps
60KW at 120V is 500Amps
but lets say we want 200hp
my zilla set for 400 battery amps and a motor limit of 170V and 1000amps on a
300V pack lets say sagging to 240V
is 96KW = 128HP but could be as high as 170V @ 1000A or 170kw at motor = 226Hp
I have 2/0 cables all over the place. If I was dragging this I would put 4/0 or
double 2/0 in motor loop.
What are the pukert losses at 400 battery amps? what are the controller and
wire heating losses.
Ok now what if I had 480V capable motor on 360V pack
Even in motor loop now that I can go higher in voltage, I will never see over
472Amps.
Which goes back to my original point, one the rest of the system, what
difference does it make? one word... AMPS.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I have several to choose from btu the one I lie so far is a .83 hp perm
mag motor. I am just experimenting and I think this motor will be barely
powerful enough if it is at all. The snow thrower is an open chute toro
that has vanes to direct the snow. The engine I am removing is a 2 hp 2
stroke.
I chose this motor because it runs on 24 volts not 36 or 48 like the
other motors I have.
24 volts means less weight in batteries.
If I were converting a snow thrower like yours I would choose a series
wound motor that runs on 36 or 48 volts from a forklift hydraulic pump
setup.
Mike G.
Mike, what kind of motor are you using for the snow blower (series, shunt,
compound) and how many HP? I've got an 8HP ICE snowblower that I'm thinking
about converting. Thanks.
Bill Dennis
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Marco electromc wrote:
> Lee do you mean thunderskys are crappy from factory?
> Or the ones you have happen to be not so good?
I bought them cheap, from the factory, as part of a group buy, and got
what I paid for. :-( Good for learning and experiments; useless for an
EV (though might work for something very small like a scooter or
electric bike).
I think Thundersky shipped us old/defective units, which never performed
up to specs. Others ran into the same sort of thing. Quality control is
often a risk with Chinese products.
--
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 ---
Oops.
I am trying to put back together my EV. I kept chargeing the batteries
with a single charger, a few per weekend during the months it was down,
but I forgot one, the one I was using as an AUX battery. It looks like
there may have been a load not all the way off, it was down to 2 Volts :-(
So I got the single battery charger("dayton 10amp") and started it on
6Volts, It started off very slow then picked up the pace so I turned it
to 12V. After about 4 hours it is up to 11V on the charger and the
amount of amps increased to the point were the charger started cutting
out. Remove the charger and it drops quickly to about 7Volts and the
battery feels warm. Did I commit my first battracide and reverse a
cell? Can I fix this?
This is a XCD orbital, made sept 2005 purchased in about november with
the whole traction pack.The rest of them in the pack read about 12.66 V
and was lighting the led on the balancers.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Jeff, All
I've been unable to find the time to post here lately, but am trying to play
catch up this morning. To be honest I find this thread humorous. Why do
people prefer Ford or Chevy or visa-versa while still others hate both?? Why
do some choose red over blue?? I believe we need to view this not as a war but
as a dance. The only question is who gets to lead, hehehe?? But even this is
mute as today there is no leading partner and everyone just grooves to their
own funk. If in fact we all became robots and become uniform copies of one
another we will loose the color and flavor of what it is to be human. I wasn't
going to post to this thread but saw my name come up and so I wanted to address
Jeff's question as best I can. Anyways thanks for listening to my cup half
full sermon 8^ P
Below Jeff talks about commutator RPM's and their limits. A little history
is in order here about steel comm's. Jeff contacted Toledo Comm. awhile back
and received some quotes on steel comm's. I just talked to one of the guys I
deal with and was informed that Kirkwood was bought by Toledo (or something
like that) and that Toledo inherited remaining old steel commutator stock. I
was informed solidly (as he goes there alot) that "no one" is or has the
ability any longer to make steel comm's even at higher prices at least as far
as these motors go. He suggests that once those comms are gone they are gone.
Maybe my guys wrong, but when he tells me he buys 90% his comms there and goes
there all the time and walks though the factory well I tend to believe him.
Could they again be manufactured?, sure but the start up costs would be great.
On the other side of the coin I've been working with Dan who works next to me
at the complex. He build airplanes for a living but has become very interested
in the motors I'm doing. He'll be assisting me in Kevlar banding the comm's as
he has the materials and know how at hand 8^ ) Bottom line is that I received
another ADC9 with a crack running from shaft to bar through the bake-a-lite the
other day. This is the second ADC with a cracked comm. I've seen. This brings
the damaged comm totals to ADC9's (2) and Warp9's (4) I won't count Rod's as it
was just melted, hehe. IMO the ADC's are tougher still in that their failures
seem to have been less catastrophic results 8^ )
I admit to seeing a very small % of what's out there and am only relaying
what I find as time goes on. This isn't even a motor preference thing
(everyone's using bake-a-lite) but more of how can we raise the rpm limits for
EV DC drives. Another thing to think about while talking about rpm's and
comm's is the amps and heat being produced by the motor. So while there might
be high rev'ing large DC motors out there they might be doing light work so to
speak.
Now this leads me to the question that I thought DC looses torque / eff. as
it climbs in rpm's, am I missing something?? In a direct drive system like
Waylands sure more rpm equals faster speeds, but I feel developing a nice 2
speed tranny or differential designed for EV's has a brighter future and even
high speed capabilities. Either way both AC and DC lack true infrastructure
needed for both the daily and racing guys to truly compete against the
gasser's, which answers the bigger question of why there are not more EV's over
gassers. This should be the goal of all.
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andre said > " No reason they could not be built in EV sizes with
RPM's in the 10,000 to 12,000 range.
Actually there may be a good reason why not, Jim can aswer this better.
The force excerted on the comm bars goes up with square of the comm
diameter and the number of bars and size of these bars are in conflict
for high rpm and high amps. So while it is easy to build a small
diameter high rpm commutated motor, it is impractical to build a large
diameter high rpm motor.
I think that we have gone backwards in recent years. The old steel comms
were much stronger but have all but been replaced with "molded mica
comms" , It doesn't seem to take much to blow them up :-(
One other thing is that the brush surface speed goes up and there is a
limit where the film won't form and the brushes grind to dust.
I have thought of other ways of doing a commutator for high rpm the
torpedo drone motors are a good example and so are the face type used in
fuel pumps(kinda scary to find out fuelpumps in our cars are commutator
motors until it is understood that it is sparkless because it is
carbon-carbon.)
Imagine if you were to invert the whole series motor. The wedges would
be stationary and their section gets wider from point of contact, not
skinnyier. The rotating plate with the brushes on it comes out to slip
rings that can handle rpm well and some large high silver brushes since
there is little to no sparking on them. The plate would look like a
distributer and perhaps could have weights and springs for rpm dependent
advance! The outside windings are the armature and perhaps we could
put caps between the now stationary segments to limit sparking, but the
sparking is needed or we don't get the needed film. I don't know how
this would effect cooling of the motor. The "field" in the center would
be small and simpler, so it could be on a hollow shaft with air running
thru it? Maybe then we can crank out some rpms.
This would be a lot of work and I am sure people would see that this is
not really a step forward. more of a sideways step. Would it be worth
it? I think no
How about 6-step on an induction motor. Would that be the "ford"
Induction motor? Simpler(cheaper?) control on AC wound motor, regen and
"fail on" safe.
---------------------------------
Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
i'm talking about li-ion either, making my message short probably explain
your hard answer, let me write the plain text version :^):
I'm talking about lithium >cobalt< oxide cathode based cells which are well
known for their higher power (and spectacular failure) than manganese ones:
http://www.buchmann.ca/Article5-Page1.asp
http://www.buchmann.ca/chap2-page7.asp
http://www.sat-akku.ch/index_e.html?/main-e/glossary/accumulators-lithium-ion-mn.html
though sony 18650 abuse tests show no spectacular failure:
http://www.stensat.org/Docs/battery_test_results.pdf
They are now using Nickel/Manganese cathode for powerfull cells as "safe"
Valence (as others http://www.batteriesdigest.com/id471.htm)
go further and use phosphate material cathode, which give more stability
but cell loose few mV and power in the process.
I hope advertising director at Valence had, at less, congratulations for
such video idea :^)
cordialement,
Philippe
Et si le pot d'échappement sortait au centre du volant ?
quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
Forum de discussion sur les véhicules électriques
http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
----- Original Message -----
From: "lyle sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse James & Monster Garage Go
Lithium!!!)
> If you want to use Duracell brand, Phillipe, go right
> ahead. LITHIUM ION was what was discussed about in
> the Monster Garage Build which the majority of
> industry uses cobalt.
>
> --- Philippe Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > This video is intelligent marketing, they use cobalt
> > cells which are well
> > known for spectacular reaction to such abuse.
> >
> > try the same test (as i did) with manganese cells
> > and nothing at all will
> > happen !!!
> >
> > cordialement,
> > Philippe
> >
> > Et si le pot d'échappement sortait au centre du
> > volant ?
> > quel carburant choisiriez-vous ?
> > http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr
> > Forum de discussion sur les véhicules électriques
> > http://vehiculeselectriques.free.fr/Forum/index.php
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "lyle sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 2:52 PM
> > Subject: RE: Lithiums in Parallel (was: RE: Jesse
> > James & Monster Garage Go
> > Lithium!!!)
> >
> >
> > > If you have questions about what can happen to a
> > > Lithium battery and how it performs when it shorts
> > > watch the Valence Battery video.
> > > http://www.valence.com/SafetyVideo.asp
> > >
> > > Now think about the high voltage that some
> > vehicles
> > > require and how little it takes for a spark to
> > jump
> > > and start a fire. Internal temperature sensors
> > are
> > > not going to help after a car accident. The
> > plates in
> > > the cells could be damaged and a catastrophic
> > meltdown
> > > can occur. Better batteries are the safer option.
> > >
> > > --- Myles Twete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I had asked:
> > > >
> > > > > 1) Has anyone ever seen or heard of a Lithium
> > > > battery
> > > > > actually shorting?
> > > >
> > > > No comments yet, so I did a web search...okay,
> > these
> > > > things do short
> > > > sometimes.
> > > > But the consensus out there is that the
> > > > manufacturers are supposed to (and
> > > > do) put mechanisms in place to prevent INTERNAL
> > > > shorts from leading to any
> > > > catastrophic destruction. Typically their
> > approach
> > > > is to create an internal
> > > > polymer fusing link. Nevertheless, there are
> > > > documented cases of alleged
> > > > internal shorts leading to fires or worse:
> > > > http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2005/HZB0501.pdf
> > > > However, the primary vulnerability to short
> > circuit
> > > > is externally generated
> > > > shorts. Further, even external circuit shorts
> > > > aren't supposed to lead to
> > > > fire or explosion due to the mechanisms the
> > > > manufacturer is supposed to put
> > > > in place.
> > > > The biggest vulnerability to internal short is
> > due
> > > > to externally-penetrating
> > > > objects. I'd guess the Kokam-style Lithiums
> > would
> > > > be particularly at risk
> > > > here given their lack of a hard shell. Lack of
> > an
> > > > externally-induced short,
> > > > internal shorts are said to be most likely due
> > to
> > > > overtemp which is
> > > > something that the manufacturer puts the
> > internal
> > > > polymer fuse in there to
> > > > handle.
> > > >
> > > > > 2) What is the likelihood of a short as a
> > failure
> > > > mechanism
> > > > > for a Lithium
> > > > > batt?
> > > >
> > > > As mentioned above, internal shorts are
> > possible,
> > > > but mechanisms are in
> > > > place by the manufacturer to lead the cell to
> > fuse
> > > > open in case of a short
> > > > or high heat.
> > > > In the above 2004 NTSB study, AC Propulsion had
> > > > shipped some Lithium battery
> > > > modules and one had caught fire in shipment.
> > Each
> > > > of these "modules" was
> > > > composed of 2 "blocks" of 68 cylindrical Lithium
> > > > cells connected in parallel
> > > > by spot welding to a grid at the top and bottom
> > of
> > > > each cell. Two blocks
> > > > were then bolted together to form a 7.4v module.
> > > >
> > > > The NTSB conclusion for the fire source?
> > > > They couldn't be certain, but the preponderance
> > of
> > > > evidence led them to
> > > > believe that external metal "tools" floating
> > around
> > > > in the package had
> > > > managed to bridge the modules external contacts
> > > > leading to an external short
> > > > circuit. This external short circuit then
> > caused
> > > > the package and batteries
> > > > to begin to burn, which led to cells going
> > overtemp,
> > > > etc. I.E. they
> > > > couldn't conclude that an internal short was the
> > > > likely cause.
> > > >
> > > > Clearly ACP wasn't too concerned about
> > paralleling a
> > > > mass of Lithium
> > > > batteries without fuses since each of their
> > modules
> > > > was configured as a
> > > > 2S*(68P) config.
> > > > Maybe they've since changed this?
> > > >
> > > > -Myles
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jukka Järvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: Volumetric energy density of Lithium battery
I hate to break this to you, but they are made by ThunderSky. Excellent
batteries when used correctly.
Good , I'd like to hear about them , and how they are working for you .
One remarkable feature of ThunderSky is that they can make custom cells.
What is the difference in price , what is this price now . ? about :-) (
maybe in ah / dollars ) I have a lawn mower that I get to cycle the
batteries quite a bit , sometimes 7 %40 dod a day , I also fast charge them
as to charge the mower in 15 min between jobs . I have been thinking this
would be a good battery test bed . I could add one battery to the string and
watch it perform with the lead. Right now I'm using a 52 ah batterie and
use 50 to 100 amp it run .
No. There is no site to promoto this pack.. yet.
Are you going to be selling them ?
When the cycle life is not the most important issue with pack but the
power is compromises can be done. Even in electrolyte level.
Well now I know how some feel when reading my post , what dose that mean?
Steve Clunn
-Jukka
STEVE CLUNN kirjoitti:
From: "Jukka Järvinen"
I made 100 kWh pack. 139 cells in string with BMS. 200 Ah Li-Co (LCP)
cells. Kicks nicely 1 MW for 5 minutes. :)
500v 200ah ? When you say 1 MW dose that mean your where pulling 2000
amps and had no voltage drop or 4000 amps and the voltage dropped to 250v
?
1 MW would be over 1000 hp .
Is there a web site on these " remarkable " batteries and what is the
price per ah. ?
Steve Clunn
weight 800 kg. 1000 x 1600 x 1600 mm size. Fits nícely in the back of
Van if necessary.
-Jukka
Jukka Järvinen
R&D Director
Oy Finnish Electric Vehicle Technologies Ltd
Sepänkatu 3
11710 RIHIMÄKI
FINLAND
VAT ID: FI18534078
jukka.jarvinen(a_t)fevt.com
mobile. +358-440-735705
fax. +358-19-735705
--
Jukka Järvinen
R&D Director
Oy Finnish Electric Vehicle Technologies Ltd
Sepänkatu 3
11710 RIHIMÄKI
FINLAND
VAT ID: FI18534078
jukka.jarvinen(a_t)fevt.com
mobile. +358-440-735705
fax. +358-19-735705
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Otmar" >
Am I the only one that thinks that three months of EV's in a row might be
boring to those not into EV's?
Like EValbum getting bombarded with hi breads till there are no battery
Ev's
I'm all for having EV's in the top spot every now and then, but too often
and I think it reduces the effectiveness. I would think that the gassers
would think we have taken over the site (as our large numbers certainly
can) and then they might not go there as often.
Like letting sombody win at a game so they keep playing . You want to PWM
the votes , :-) . Hmmmm There is one section just for EV's , I'd like to
put mine in there but I wouldn't want everbody voting for it , I'd like to
see how it dose on its own. Maybe I'd just be mudding up the water , I know
I could do better than 17.25 in the 1/4 , I've been telling myself I'll put
it in after I get a better time .
I for one am going to wait a couple months, then we can try for #1 again.
Just my 20 milliwatts.
I wonder if all those orders for big controllers that people who see drag
time are making has got you over worked . :-) .
steve clunn
--
-Otmar-
http://www.CafeElectric.com/
The Zilla factory has moved to Corvallis Oregon.
Now accepting resumes. Please see:
http://www.cafeelectric.com/jobs.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
From: Remy Chevalier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A123 Delivers on Nanotechnology Promise by Bill Moore
From:
http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&storyid=979
A123 Delivers on Nanotechnology Promise
By Bill Moore
Interview with A123 Systems vice president Ric Fulop about his company's
nanotechnology lithium-ion battery
February 17, 2006
A123 Systems, based in Watertown, Massachusetts, has been operating under
the radar for the last four-and-a-half years, quietly raising some $62
million in capital, perfecting its chemistry, and building factories in Asia
to supply an advanced, nanotechnology-based lithium-ion battery to electric
power tool giant, Black & Decker.
Within the next month or so those batteries will begin appearing in Dewalt
portable power tools at tool distributors and retailers near you and when
they do, it likely will mark a major shift in the direction of not only
portable tools and personal electronics but also the automotive industry.
The secret inside A123's battery is a nanophosphate material discovered by
M.I.T. professor Yet-Ming Chiang. Thousands of times smaller than the
micron-sized materials used in first generation lithium-ion batteries,
A123's chemistry enables it to have twice the power density of competitor
products, said Vice President of Business Development, Ric Fulop.
"In batteries for EVs or hybrids, you want very quick kinetics. You want to
discharge power and regen power really quickly. You want to be able to have
very good [material] packing densities. pack as much material in a tight
space as you can, so we put a lot of engineering around those things to
deliver performance that can really change the way people design products."
Also, unlike other lithium-ion battery hopefuls, A123 chose to not make any
public announcements until it actually began shipping commercial product,
which it is now.
Their business plan also has set them apart from some of their competitors.
Instead of licensing their technology or supplying materials for others to
use make nano-based batteries, A123 decided early on to actually manufacture
their own components and batteries.
"We make our own active materials, unlike other battery makers who buy
whatever is on the market," Fulop explained. The company now has two
wholly-owned factories in China, plus operations in Korea and Taiwan. China
BAK also provides additional manufacturing capacity in China.
The first commercial product is a 26650-type cell, but the company also
plans to introduce others in the future, including larger format cells
"targeted at the automotive business." Those batteries are still in research
and development, however.
The 26650 cell is similar in size to a standard C-type alkaline. Because of
its dense chemistry, it is rated at being able to accept a power pulse of
100-times its rated capacity, compared to other "advanced" batteries which
are rated at only 20-times capacity. It is specifically engineered as a
power battery able to supply short burst of electrical energy, as opposed to
an energy battery designed for longer, slower power drains found in an
electric car. This makes it ideal for use in hybrid-electric cars, Fulop
said, as well as other applications including lawn care and garden
equipment.
He also intimated that more announcements will be forthcoming about other
companies who have decided to use their battery. Early investors in the
company include Sequoia Capital, Motorola and Qualcomm. Most recently,
General Electric also became an investor.
I asked Fulop how difficult it would be to switch from making batteries for
power tools to making them for hybrid cars.
"It is not a trivial matter," he replied. He estimated that given the
company's current manufacturing capacity, it could produce about 45-50,000
packs for a car like the Prius annually.
"Automotive is a business that takes a long time to develop, a long sales
cycle of years, multiple years to design a car around your lithium
technology, and it also requires very high levels of quality."
Because A123 chose to focus on the power tool market first, Fulop believes
this will enable it to develop the necessary high-quality manufacturing and
quality control skills necessary to eventually produce lithium-ion batteries
that will meet the exacting standards of carmakers.
"We are focused on commercial markets that are very high volume, and once
automotive is ready for our technology, we can enter it; we will have
already have economies of scale, statistical process control, and all those
things that you need to be qualified by an automaker.
"Our business model allows us to cross a chasm because we have a nice,
profitable, high-volume business that allows us to get economies of scale,
and then enter the automotive market where volumes are even larger."
Fulop doesn't see any issues ramping up production at some future date to
meet carmaker demands. He thinks it would take automakers longer to actually
design the car around his battery, then to expand the company's
manufacturing capacity. More daunting is the engineering necessary to meet
carmaker cost and calendar life targets, he admitted.
"Making batteries for hybrid electric vehicles for the cost targets and
calendar life targets are clearly not trivial exercises. There are real
issues in terms of engineering scale up, but I think we have a chemistry
that is quite robust and we are able to make batteries that are larger
size."
He thinks it feasibly to make a larger battery specifically for use in
hybrids, though "we would have to put in place a modification of the
production line." He estimated it would take 12-to-18 months to come up with
a larger, customized battery designed specifically for use in a
hybrid-electric car.
Although the technology behind the A123 battery was developed at M.I.T.,
like many other manufacturers, A123 has chosen to manufacture its products
in Asia. Fulop explained that in the new product "game" it's not enough to
have great technology, you must also have high quality mass production
capabilities at competitive prices. He doesn't rule out setting up American
production plants some day, especially if large carmaker orders require it,
but for now, to be competitive with other Asian rivals, they have to rely on
Asia's production capabilities.
Because of its nanophosphate chemistry, A123 asserts that it's battery is
the first "intrinsically safe" lithium-ion cell on the market.
"There is no risk for thermal runaway," Fulop claimed, which has been a
concern with older lithium chemistries. "This is the first high-power
lithium chemistry to offer that benefit."
He said that the combustive-potential of early lithium-ion batteries was
like building a bomb, although a better analogy might be setting off a
volcano because the materials in the battery would self-ignite and melt at
the temperature of molten lava. Not a good thing to happen to your laptop or
cellphone, especially on airplane at 37,000 feet.
Thermal runaway has hindered carmaker adoption of the chemistry, favoring
instead more stable NiMH batteries, which are what currently help power all
of today's modern hybrids.
Assuming A123 -- and other lithium-ion manufacturers like Valence -- have
tamed the thermal beast, how does the Watertown, Massachusett company's
battery compare to the competition?
Fulop contends that if you place their battery next to SAFT's lithium-ion
cell at the same power rating, A123's battery has twice the energy density.
In addition, to also being "intrinsically safe", it also offers "twice the
life." And it's also already in high production and it's a "green" chemistry
without any cobalt, a rare but toxic element.
On the subject of sustainability and recycle-ability, Fulop noted that A123
is one of the first truly environmentally safe batteries. Both its anode and
cathodes can be safely deposited in landfills without environmental
consequences. He also pointed out that because cobalt is such a rare,
strategic metal, that there simply isn't enough of it in the world to put it
in batteries for electric-drive vehicles.
EV World asked him how he thinks federal government research dollars like
those proposed in the recent State of the Union address should be spent. He
replied that he believes the US Advanced Battery Consortium is probably the
best organized entity of its type and has a world-class program for
developing better automotive battery technology.
"Obviously, the more funding they receive, the faster this is going to
happen."
He also mentioned that it was a grant from the government that got A123
Systems going in the beginning.
Clearly, that now appears to be money well spent. He pointed out that if you
replaced the current NiMH battery found in a modern Toyota Prius with A123's
battery, you could cut the weight of the battery a dramatic 80 percent.
And the race isn't over yet. Fulop says there is still room for improvement
and steady advancement in the company's products. But don't expect to call
or write them to get batteries for your pet EV project. Since the company
made its announcement last year, it's been swamped with inquiries, which it
has had to largely ignore. Instead, A123 is focusing exclusively on working
with large original manufacturers like Black & Decker; and Fulop hinted
there are other OEM announcements coming soon. He hopes that at some point,
the company can get far enough ahead to "seed" some new product development
with its batteries, but for now their entire first year's production is
largely sold out.
Be sure to listen to the entire 33-minute interview using our built-in,
Flash-based MP3 player or by downloading the file to your computer hard
drive for playback on your favorite MP3 device. If you're reading the PDF
version of this interview, use the following URL to download the file:
http://www.evworld.com/evworld_audio/a123_ricfulop.mp3
Lawrence Rhodes
Bassoon/Contrabassoon
Reedmaker
Book 4/5 doubler
Electric Vehicle & Solar Power Advocate
Vegetable Oil Car.
415-821-3519
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
