EV Digest 5282
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Multi charger.
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Multi charger.
by Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
by John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: High Voltage Nationals Plea
by John Emde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Good Boy charger (Re: Looking to build a badder-boy charger)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Multi charger.
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: The batts went flat...
by "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) RE: Bizarre Amphour Meter Idea
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
by "Richard Rau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Update on my motor coupler
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12) Re: Schumacher: SE-1072
by "jmygann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
by Joel Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Gel batteries, was: Re: Large AH SLAs available
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Battery install party, DC next Sunday
by Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Bizarre Amphour Meter Idea
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: Bizarre Amphour Meter Idea
by "Bill Dennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
Mike Phillips wrote:
> When we were at AC Propulsion, the engineer showed us a module that
> would go with each battery. It's a charger and regulator in one box.
> They have 28 lead acid battery's in their pre lithium vehicles.
>
> It seems to me that regulation and charging are both important factors
> in keeping a pack alive. I think making a 60 watt switcher/regulator
> for each battery is not a big deal in terms of logistics.
Well, we did this on Rick Woodbury's Tango #3, and it was a "big deal".
He had 25 Optimas in the car, each with a 6.5" x 3" x 1"
charger/monitor. These contained a Vicor Batmod 12v 15amp charger, and a
little microcomputer that measured battery voltage, battery temperature,
charger current, charger temperature, and total pack voltage. They all
communicated serially to the dash unit and bulk charger. They wound up
costing about $300 per battery, and needed liquid cooling to get the
heat out of battery box.
> They could be made about 1/2" thick, so they would fit ok in my box.
Good luck finding a 60w charger that's that thin!
> How does the idea strike you folks having a charger for each battery,
> or a pair of chargers in one box versus having one central charger?
It works; it's just expensive and complicated. These problems could be
dealt with if you have enough engineering time and tooling to throw at
the problem (i.e. were mass-producing them in China). But then you have
to worry about reliability. One failure, and your vehicle can be totally
disabled. Cheap power supplies aren't going to last long in the
automotive environment.
--
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 ---
Lee,
Wow, 180 watt power supply is a biggy. How about a 50 watt? I see that
it might be a bigger deal than I first thought. Clampers and a
bulkcharger are not bad. Clampers, a monitor and a bulkcharger are a
bit crowded.
I'm looking into this some more. Mostly it depends on the battery shape
because my box will be packed. There is a 65/70ah battery from BB
battery that has a perfect recess in the front of the top, for a board.
Have you played with any Prius Nimh batts yet?
Mike
--- Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Phillips wrote:
> > When we were at AC Propulsion, the engineer showed us a module that
> > would go with each battery. It's a charger and regulator in one
> box.
> > They have 28 lead acid battery's in their pre lithium vehicles.
> >
> > It seems to me that regulation and charging are both important
> factors
> > in keeping a pack alive. I think making a 60 watt
> switcher/regulator
> > for each battery is not a big deal in terms of logistics.
>
> Well, we did this on Rick Woodbury's Tango #3, and it was a "big
> deal".
> He had 25 Optimas in the car, each with a 6.5" x 3" x 1"
> charger/monitor. These contained a Vicor Batmod 12v 15amp charger,
> and a
> little microcomputer that measured battery voltage, battery
> temperature,
> charger current, charger temperature, and total pack voltage. They
> all
> communicated serially to the dash unit and bulk charger. They wound
> up
> costing about $300 per battery, and needed liquid cooling to get the
> heat out of battery box.
>
> > They could be made about 1/2" thick, so they would fit ok in my
> box.
>
> Good luck finding a 60w charger that's that thin!
>
> > How does the idea strike you folks having a charger for each
> battery,
> > or a pair of chargers in one box versus having one central charger?
>
> It works; it's just expensive and complicated. These problems could
> be
> dealt with if you have enough engineering time and tooling to throw
> at
> the problem (i.e. were mass-producing them in China). But then you
> have
> to worry about reliability. One failure, and your vehicle can be
> totally
> disabled. Cheap power supplies aren't going to last long in the
> automotive environment.
> --
> 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
>
>
Here's to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently
The ones that change the world!!
www.RotorDesign.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello to All,
A good 'ol comparo is just the thing to put an exclamation mark on
Matt's recent achievement of blasting through the 1/4 mile in just 13.3
seconds, so I thought I'd educate those who may not be into performance
cars, on just how powerful and quick Matt Grahm's 'Joule Injected'
electric 240SX is.
Admissions:
(A) I'll mostly reference relatively new gas cars, since older gas
machines are nowhere near as clean running as an electric car is, though
there are two representatives from the 60's muscle car era. For the most
part, it's today's lower emission type performance machines vs Matt's
zero emission electric car. Also, it's generally known that today's hi
pro gas cars are quicker and faster than their legendary 60s era muscle
car brethren, though old farts stuck in the past don't often realize
this :-) In fact, many of today's hot 4 banger import machines can blow
the doors off 'most' of the 60s era muscle cars, and they do it while
passing stringent crash standards, clean air standards, and fuel economy
standards, three categories the old muscle cars would all fail.
(B) Given two vehicles that run the same 1/4 mile ETs, one a gas car and
the other an electric car, the electric is nearly always substantially
quicker off the line and up 60 mph because of the electric motor's huge
torque at zero rpm. Thus, with two cars that both run 13.5 seconds, the
race goes like this...the electric jumps off the line and by 60 mph is
perhaps 2-3 car lengths ahead of the gas car, by the end of the 1/8th
mile the gas car is now picking up speed at a higher rate and is now
pulling up on the electric, and by the end of the 1/4 mile, the gas car
has caught the electric as they both flash through the traps. Both cars
run the same ET, but the gas car has a higher top end speed, while the
electric has a quicker 0-60...see how this works?
OK, on with the fun.....
(1) In recent years, to many folks' astonishment, the once stodgy 'old
man's car' Cadillac has transformed it's model lineup from blimped-out
bulbous huge land yachts into America's premium hi performance sedans.
Today's Caddys are muscular and fast and corner like sports cars. The
top dog model is the CTS-V, a $52,000 400 hp road burner who's
borrowed-from-the-Z06 Corvette V8 jams it from 0-60 in 5 seconds flat
and runs a 13.4 second 1/4 mile (2005 model). Road & Track magazine
described it as having 'explosive straight-line performance'. Guess
what? Matt's electric car beats it in the 1/4 mile! I estimate Matt's
car runs 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, too, so it toasts the Caddy here as well.
If the Caddy has 'explosive performance, I wonder how they'd describe
Matt's EV?
(2) OK you say, what about a real sports car? How about Porsche's
newest, the $70,000 Cayman S? This Boxter derivative with its
midship-mounted 291 hp flat six rips 0-60 in 5.1 seconds and does the
1/4 mile in 13.4 seconds (2006 model)....Matt's electric beats it in
both 0-60 and the 1/4 mile run!
(3) How bout the new $35,000 2006 Charger R/T with its highly touted 350
hp Hemi V8? It too, would get roasted by Matt's electric Nissan, since
the Charger's 0-60 of 5.9 seconds and its 14.1 second 1/4 mile ET are no
match for Matt's electric car.
(4) Just for fun, the 68 Charger R/T with a mighty 440 V8 rated at 375
hp (old hp rating) ran 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and managed a 14.9 second 1/4
mile ET. Lowell Simon's electric Porsche would beat this car by a half
second through the 1/4 mile! Matt's car would be 1.6 seconds
quicker...an eternity in 1/4 mile terms!
(5) Exotic? Try this....the $83,000 2003 Masserati Spyder GT has a 390
hp V8 and runs 0-60 in 5.0 seconds and has a 13.5 second ET.
What fun it would be, to find a well-healed dude in his Masserati, tell
him your Japanese car has been converted to run on batteries, then leave
him in the dust! Oh yeah, almost forgot to say it....Matt's car beats
this one, too.
(6) The $26,000 300 hp 2006 Mustang GT V8 runs 0-60 in an impressive 4.9
seconds and manages the 1/4 mile in 13.5 seconds, but it would get beat
by Matt's EV.
(7) In light of the above, the 68 390cid 335 hp V8 powered Mustang GT
ran 0-60 in 7.8 seconds and did a 15.2 second 1/4 mile ET.
(8) The $32,000 2003 Subaru STi with its brawny 300 hp turboed flat four
does 0-60 in just 4.9 seconds and runs a 13.3 second ET. OK, this car is
a match for Matt's EV, but the EV would still get it in the 0-60 run.
(9) The $50,000 2004 Audi V8 version of its S4 hi pro sedan, has 340 hp.
It runs 0-60 in 5.4 seconds and the 1/4 mile at 14.0 seconds. Matt's
electric 240SX would blow its doors off.
(10) I saved this for last. The $36,000 Nissan 350Z sports car with its
powerful 287 hp V6 runs 0-60 in 5.7 seconds and does the 1/4 mile in
14.3 seconds. Matt's electrified Nissan beats the new gas powered Nissan
by a full second in the 1/4 mile!
I hope you all had fun reading this, and I hope those of you who may not
always follow the EV drag racing stuff will now have a better
appreciation for what guys like Matt are doing to keep EVs in the spot
light. I bet there are a whole bunch of dazed gasser folks who are still
stunned by what they saw an electric car do at the Moroso Race Track the
other night!
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Rod
No we don't have a web site. One would think that after 3 years
.... but who has time for that. Eventually, I'll have something on the
www.fveaa.org site as a member car.
Later
John
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:08:41 -0800 (PST) Rod Hower
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John,
> Do you have a web site for the new dragster?
> "Aggravated Battery" on google image search comes up
> with less than desirable images of people :-)
> Thanks,
> Rod
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi John, thanks for the comparison - good to read.
I was looking at Matt's site ( www.jouleinjected.com ) but I could not find
any details on the transaxle setup. Is it rear or front or 4WD? Does it
have a tranny or direct drive? Do you know the final diff ratio?
Thanks
Don
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Wayland
Sent: March 26, 2006 9:36 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
Hello to All,
A good 'ol comparo is just the thing to put an exclamation mark on Matt's
recent achievement of blasting through the 1/4 mile in just 13.3 seconds, so
I thought I'd educate those who may not be into performance cars, on just
how powerful and quick Matt Grahm's 'Joule Injected'
electric 240SX is.
Admissions:
(A) I'll mostly reference relatively new gas cars, since older gas machines
are nowhere near as clean running as an electric car is, though there are
two representatives from the 60's muscle car era. For the most part, it's
today's lower emission type performance machines vs Matt's zero emission
electric car. Also, it's generally known that today's hi pro gas cars are
quicker and faster than their legendary 60s era muscle car brethren, though
old farts stuck in the past don't often realize this :-) In fact, many of
today's hot 4 banger import machines can blow the doors off 'most' of the
60s era muscle cars, and they do it while passing stringent crash standards,
clean air standards, and fuel economy standards, three categories the old
muscle cars would all fail.
(B) Given two vehicles that run the same 1/4 mile ETs, one a gas car and the
other an electric car, the electric is nearly always substantially quicker
off the line and up 60 mph because of the electric motor's huge torque at
zero rpm. Thus, with two cars that both run 13.5 seconds, the race goes
like this...the electric jumps off the line and by 60 mph is perhaps 2-3 car
lengths ahead of the gas car, by the end of the 1/8th mile the gas car is
now picking up speed at a higher rate and is now pulling up on the electric,
and by the end of the 1/4 mile, the gas car has caught the electric as they
both flash through the traps. Both cars run the same ET, but the gas car has
a higher top end speed, while the electric has a quicker 0-60...see how this
works?
OK, on with the fun.....
(1) In recent years, to many folks' astonishment, the once stodgy 'old man's
car' Cadillac has transformed it's model lineup from blimped-out bulbous
huge land yachts into America's premium hi performance sedans.
Today's Caddys are muscular and fast and corner like sports cars. The top
dog model is the CTS-V, a $52,000 400 hp road burner who's
borrowed-from-the-Z06 Corvette V8 jams it from 0-60 in 5 seconds flat and
runs a 13.4 second 1/4 mile (2005 model). Road & Track magazine described it
as having 'explosive straight-line performance'. Guess what? Matt's electric
car beats it in the 1/4 mile! I estimate Matt's car runs 0-60 in 4.5
seconds, too, so it toasts the Caddy here as well.
If the Caddy has 'explosive performance, I wonder how they'd describe Matt's
EV?
(2) OK you say, what about a real sports car? How about Porsche's newest,
the $70,000 Cayman S? This Boxter derivative with its midship-mounted 291 hp
flat six rips 0-60 in 5.1 seconds and does the
1/4 mile in 13.4 seconds (2006 model)....Matt's electric beats it in both
0-60 and the 1/4 mile run!
(3) How bout the new $35,000 2006 Charger R/T with its highly touted 350 hp
Hemi V8? It too, would get roasted by Matt's electric Nissan, since the
Charger's 0-60 of 5.9 seconds and its 14.1 second 1/4 mile ET are no match
for Matt's electric car.
(4) Just for fun, the 68 Charger R/T with a mighty 440 V8 rated at 375 hp
(old hp rating) ran 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and managed a 14.9 second 1/4 mile
ET. Lowell Simon's electric Porsche would beat this car by a half second
through the 1/4 mile! Matt's car would be 1.6 seconds quicker...an eternity
in 1/4 mile terms!
(5) Exotic? Try this....the $83,000 2003 Masserati Spyder GT has a 390 hp V8
and runs 0-60 in 5.0 seconds and has a 13.5 second ET.
What fun it would be, to find a well-healed dude in his Masserati, tell him
your Japanese car has been converted to run on batteries, then leave him in
the dust! Oh yeah, almost forgot to say it....Matt's car beats this one,
too.
(6) The $26,000 300 hp 2006 Mustang GT V8 runs 0-60 in an impressive 4.9
seconds and manages the 1/4 mile in 13.5 seconds, but it would get beat by
Matt's EV.
(7) In light of the above, the 68 390cid 335 hp V8 powered Mustang GT ran
0-60 in 7.8 seconds and did a 15.2 second 1/4 mile ET.
(8) The $32,000 2003 Subaru STi with its brawny 300 hp turboed flat four
does 0-60 in just 4.9 seconds and runs a 13.3 second ET. OK, this car is a
match for Matt's EV, but the EV would still get it in the 0-60 run.
(9) The $50,000 2004 Audi V8 version of its S4 hi pro sedan, has 340 hp.
It runs 0-60 in 5.4 seconds and the 1/4 mile at 14.0 seconds. Matt's
electric 240SX would blow its doors off.
(10) I saved this for last. The $36,000 Nissan 350Z sports car with its
powerful 287 hp V6 runs 0-60 in 5.7 seconds and does the 1/4 mile in
14.3 seconds. Matt's electrified Nissan beats the new gas powered Nissan by
a full second in the 1/4 mile!
I hope you all had fun reading this, and I hope those of you who may not
always follow the EV drag racing stuff will now have a better appreciation
for what guys like Matt are doing to keep EVs in the spot light. I bet there
are a whole bunch of dazed gasser folks who are still stunned by what they
saw an electric car do at the Moroso Race Track the other night!
See Ya...John 'Plasma Boy' Wayland
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Mike Phillips wrote:
> Can a buck-boost system also be power factor corrected?
Yes; any topology can do power factor correction. The standard four
topologies are buck, boost, buck-boost, and Cuk'. All others are
derivitive of them. To do power factor correction, you have your
control circuit sense the input voltage, and force the input current to
track it.
But as Roger said, this automatically means the output current must vary
with the instantaneous AC line voltage; zero at each zero-crossing, 1.4
times more at each peak of the line, etc. To deliver an average of 100
watts, a PFC topology is actually delivering 0 to 200 watts at different
times in the AC cycle.
That's why most PFC stages are followed with a seperate converter that
has a nice smooth well-filtered output voltage. Computers and such
things *must* have smooth DC; not wildly varying power.
Luckily, batteries don't usually care. So you can use a straight PFC for
a battery charger. You just have to provide enough "brute force"
filtering so the ripple isn't too bad when the battery is fully charged.
> I love a learning curve, but if you have a 10kw charger that works that
> well, have you ever considered selling it or the docs/software?
I did the design for Schott Power Systems, so they own it. Plus, we used
their custom HWT transformers -- very nice, but unavailable!
I could design another one myself; but it's a big project. Then my
worldwide sales over the next 5 years would probably be 100. It's not
worth it.
My hat's off to people like Rich Rudman and Otmar Ebenhoech. They *are*
doing the man-years of hard work it takes to bring such products to
market, even though their total sales are 100 or so, and even at the
high price they must sell for, they surely aren't making a living.
> As for the OEM's, I know them personally, so I hope they listen. They
> are motivated because instead of a customer buying a new unit when
> theirs smokes, the customer sends it to me for repair. So the OEM makes
> no money. In fact, it's gotten to the point where the customers ask if
> the unit is rebuildable before they will buy it! Yet another place to
> cost the OEM money! Some units are not rebuildable because the parts
> are $5 each in quantities of 1000 only.
Good! The idiotic strategy I'm seeing more and more is:
1. Company has a successful, reliable product they build in the US.
2. New CEO orders that it be outsourced to China.
3. Plans, tooling, software, everything sent to China.
4. Chinese version is cheaper, but much lower quality. CEO pays
himself a big bonus, shuts down US plants.
5. Customers complain about low quality to Company; Company complains
to China; Chinese solution is, "Ok, we give you 10% more product
to make up for the 10% that is bad." CEO greedily accepts (thinks
he's getting 10% more for his money).
6. Company shuts down QC and repair facility; "service" consists of
telling distributors to blindly replace anything the customer says
is bad with those 10% free replacement units.
7. Customers tire of low quality and having to do the QC themselves.
Why buy junk with a name brand? They go to China and buy it directly.
8. Company CEO tells China, "You can't sell our product directly to our
customers!" China says, "Sure we can! This our market now, stupid
American. Have nice day!"
--
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 ---
Mike Phillips wrote:
> Wow, 180 watt power supply is a biggy. How about a 50 watt?
The lower the wattage, the smaller they can be and the less waste heat
there is to deal with.
But, you have to decide whether these little 50w modules are your
main/only charger, or just "helpers" for a big bulk charger. If they're
your main charger, it will take days to fully recharge a 65/70ah
battery.
> Have you played with any Prius Nimh batts yet?
A little. I have some EV-1 batts too. Still experimenting and learning!
--
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 ---
I'll give that a test. I did put a molex connector in between all the
emeter inputs to make it easy to unplug the whole thing, so that could be
causing some inaccuracies as well. I also might go ahead and get the
isolation DC 2 DC, then there would always be a small load on the pack and
the emeter would always be counting down slightly rather then counting up
when there is nothing going on.
It could just be the meter though, as the currents on both charge and
discharge are reading higher than my clamp on ammeter and the meter in my
charger, then again when I test the voltage at the shunt with my DVM under
load things look fine. I'm more inclined to believe a shunt based current
measurement then my clamp on ammeter.
Ultimately accuracy in numbers is not important to me, as long as I can
determine when my batteries are full and when they are nearing empty :-)
damon
From: Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The batts went flat...
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:20:35 -0600
damon henry wrote:
> Well, I guess I will just chalk it up to my emeter's personality.
If you have just a simple, clean, pair of wires from the E-meter to the
shunt, and connect them together at the shunt (i.e. put them on the same
side screw terminal on the shunt), and it STILL reads some current, then
the E-meter itself is bad. It means the E-meter senses a voltage when
there really is no voltage.
--
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 ---
Lee, can you tell me how you came up with a value of 200 Ohms for R1? The
AD537 spec says, "The nominal value of R is chosen so that full-scale input
voltage sets up a current of 1ma in it."
For 50mV full-scale, I would have thought a 50 Ohm resistor would have been
called for (or possibly a 100 Ohm resistor if you're counting -50mV to
50mV).
Thanks.
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bizarre Amphour Meter Idea
Dale Curren wrote:
>>> I'm ready to spend money on this project. What chips and shunts
>>> should I buy?
>> Which "this"? Several ideas have been talked about in this thread.
> The bicycle computer one seems to be the "bizarre" idea he wants to
> persue.
Ok. For this and most of the other things mentioned (like running a
clock motor as your display device), you need to start with the voltage
to frequency converter circuit. I suggest starting with the Analog
Devices AD537. It's an older IC and a little expensive, but does
everything with one chip (V/F converter, voltage regulator, voltage
reference, input amplifier, etc.). Here's a circuit from their data
sheet for measuring a 0-50mv signal (like the voltage across a 50mv
shunt). View with a fixed-width font like Courier:
________|\|__________________________________________________
| |/| D1 _|_ | |
__|__+ ___ 1uF > 100k |
___ 12v battery | > |
| - com > output frequency |
__| _______________ | proportional |
| | _____|1 gnd Fout 14|___|___to current |
| > + | | | (0-10 KHz for 0-50mv) |
| > Shunt com __|2 Sync +V 13|_____________________________|
| > - | |
| |___/\/\________|3 Iin Cap 12|___
| | R1 | | | _|_ C1
| com 200 |_____|4 -Vin | ___ precision capacitor
| scale | | Cap 11|___| 0.0047uF
|___________ | ____|5 +Vin |
| | Vos 10|__
R2 > | |
100k > __|6 Temp Vos 9|__
offset > | |
|_____|7 Vref -V 8|__
|_______________| |
Analog Devices AD573 com
As shown, this measures the charging current into the 12v battery. It is
powered off the 12v battery itself, and draws about 1.2ma. C1 sets the
basic frequency; it should be a high quality temperature-stable part. R1
and R2 should be trimpots. R1 sets the full-scale frequency with 50mv
across the shunt. R2 sets the offset, i.e. the frequency output with 0
mv across the shunt. Note that you can't have negative frequency, so it
doesn't measure positive and negative current. But you can set the
offset so (for example) +50mv to -50mv gets converted to 0 to 10 KHz.
That way 10 KHz means +50mv, 5 KHz is 0 mv, and -50mv is 0 KHz.
--
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 ---
Don,
Your questions are answered in the 'Timeslip Comments' within Matt's Drag
http://www.dragtimes.com/Nissan-240SX-Timeslip-7382.html
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Don Cameron
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 9:58 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
Hi John, thanks for the comparison - good to read.
I was looking at Matt's site ( www.jouleinjected.com ) but I could not find
any details on the transaxle setup. Is it rear or front or 4WD? Does it
have a tranny or direct drive? Do you know the final diff ratio?
Thanks
Don
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Release Date: 3/24/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
With 5 days to go, I plan to start machining on the coupler Tuesday and get
it done by Friday - hopefully.
I have 2 plans currently. The first is to use the Steve Clunn
(www.grassrootsev.com) method. Thanks to Steve for the CD explaining how to
build it.
Basically, take a 1/2 Lovejoy coupler and mount the flywheel to it with the six
1/2 in bolts (fine thread). I ordered one of those 1/2 couplers from
mcmastercarr.com. Paid way too much for it, but I needed it fast with only 5
days
remaining to get it built. Basically, take the thing and either use the motor
as
your lathe, or an actual lathe. Turn off the ears and get it flat. In my
case, I also need to clear the bearing on the flywheel, because mine isn't
flat.
Turn the outside so that it just fits the recess in the flywheel. Note the
clearance for the bearing previously discussed. Get it to be a very tight fit.
Then, literally press fit it onto the flywheel - very tight fit, so use a
small press to do it. Drill 2 pilot holes (of the six) by using a sleeve.
Drill
out 2 of the 6 holes and tap them (these holes are 180 degrees apart). Check
the fit and TIR of the assembly. Adjust as necessary. Then, do the other
four. This should work fine, but it doesn't give me the taperlock. It uses a
key and setscrew. For relatively low power <= 144 V, <= 500 A, it should work
OK for me. But if it doesn't, I have plan B.
Use a taperlock sprocket. The one I bought won't work, but I ordered another
one with a smaller hub and larger overall diameter. In this case, simply put
it on the mill, center it up, and drill / tap the six holes. Bolt the thing
right up to the flywheel as-is. It's ugly, but I think it will work. The
edge of the sprocket provides about 1/8" of thickness for the screws, a few
threads. Beyond that, the screws will be partially in the hub, but they will
protrude about half way. In other words, the hub is too small, so 1/2 of each
bolt
will be inside and 1/2 will be outside. Assemble the thing and then weld
those protruding bolts to the hub of the sprocket so they don't back out. I
also
think this could work and is relatively simple. It will be ugly looking, but
should be sturdy enough to work. The only problem is that if you want to
take it apart, you will destroy the sprocket in the process and have to get a
new
one to remake it. Fortunately, you wont damage the motor shaft at all. The
good news is that it doesn't harm the motor shaft, and it does give the
taperlock. I don't know of anyone doing this, but it makes sense to me that is
should work. There is an even better method using the same sprocket, but I
don't
have time for all that machining. Get a 4" diameter steel disc, about 1/2"
thick. Bore out the center so that it fits perfectly over the hub of the
sprocket. Press this sleeve made from the disc onto the backside of the
sprocket.
Then, do what I described above. The sleeve serves as some extra meat for the
1/2" screws to go into. Problem is that this is a lot of extra work. The
good news is that you can easily detach the flywheel from it without damaging
the coupler.
I'll send an update next weekend letting you know how it went and what I
ended up with.
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I also have this charger for my 48 volt 225 amp/hr pack....
wondering if I could use the 60 volt setting briefly to equalize
when the 48 volt setting maxes out at 60 volts ??
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "damon henry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 12 volt steps from 12 to 72v, but it appears to be a simple
transformer
> rectified charger, so the 12V setting on low would probably work
fine for a
> 6 volt battery.
>
> damon
>
>
> >From: mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: Schumacher: SE-1072
> >Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:59:48 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >what are voltage options? I see it does 6V and 72V,
> >but I can't figure out what the other values are?
> >
> >Can two of these be put in series for 144volts?
> >thanks
> >
> >--- damon henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Neon John had posted a link to this charger
> > >
> >http://www.batteryservice.com/products_final.aspx?ModelNumber=SE-
1072
> > > and I
> > > decided to buy one to try out for my motorcycle. I
> > > already have most of the
> > > parts gathered to build two very similar chargers,
> > > but since I wanted
> > > something to leave and use at work, the fact that
> > > this is UL listed and
> > > already assembled made it very attractive to me.
> > >
> > > It arrived yesterday and I have had a chance to use
> > > it a few times now and I
> > > couldn't be happier. As some pointed out, it's not
> > > a smart charger, but
> > > still it is quite handy. It has 6 different voltage
> > > settings X 2 output
> > > settings which I assume is accomplished by 12
> > > different transformer taps,
> > > although I have not yet cracked it open. With 12
> > > availabe settings, it
> > > gives alot of utility for the money and seems to
> > > have no problem charging my
> > > motorcycle at a 10 - 15 amp rate even though it is
> > > supposed to be a 5 - 10
> > > amp charger.
> > >
> > > damon
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> >http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Just a dumb 'newbie' question here, but can
someone explain why it is not recommended to
use gel cells in an ev?
Cor van de Water wrote:
Ooops,
Lawrence, this is a GEL battery,
I an fairly sure that you should stay away from Gel cells for an EV ?!?!
AGMs are the best SLA battery type for they are resistant to shock
due to the glass mats between the plates - they can't go anywhere.
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 Lawrence Rhodes
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 11:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
http://www.criticalbattery.com/Battery%20Jack/Web%20Pages/GEL%20GROUP24%2012
%20VOLT%2080%20AH.htm
This one is 8.2 inches. I only did one search. LR........
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Freidberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 7:50 AM
Subject: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
Are there any sealed lead acid batteries of over 80ah available with a
total height of 8" or less?
Mark
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 02:55 PM 26/03/06 -0600, Joel wrote:
Just a dumb 'newbie' question here, but can
someone explain why it is not recommended to
use gel cells in an ev?
Hi Joel, and all
Gel batteries are not normally designed for high discharge currents. They
are designed for things like UPS systems or wheelchairs where the peak
currents are absolutely defined and are low relative to EV sizes, or in the
case of UPS systems may be high, but the short cycle life is not so
important (since most of the time they are on standby).
IIRC, someone in Europe is using Gel batteries amazingly sucessfully, which
I guess the reason is in a smaller car (Skoda?) at lower accelleration
rates and lower top speed than seems typical for American driving. Anyone
care to chime in who knows/knows of this vehicle?
So if you need a suburban commuter, gel batteries are able to be OK, but if
you need to join a daily race up the highway on-ramp you may be disappointed.
Regards
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
Well, I installed the first half of the BB600 batteries in the truck.
This is really one of those projects that would benefit from having a
couple of people around for help, advice, checking to make sure I'm not
shorting everything, etc.
So I'm throwing a party next Sunday to get the rest of the batteries
installed, the interconnects installed, and the chargers underway. If
you'd like to see a BB600 based electric truck, pls drop me a line.
We'll start at around 10am, go to about 3-4pm, and I'll have the grill
with burgers ready to go.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for the link Richard.
Here are the specs:
No tranny
4.08 to 1 ratio rear end
max 5000RPM
255/50-16 BFG g-Force T/A tires (26.1" diameter)
Max speed at 5000RPM, with these tires is 92mph
So are the 9" motors being over-revved?
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Richard Rau
Sent: March 26, 2006 11:03 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
Don,
Your questions are answered in the 'Timeslip Comments' within Matt's Drag
http://www.dragtimes.com/Nissan-240SX-Timeslip-7382.html
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Don Cameron
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 9:58 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Electric Nissan 240SX vs Modern Gas Performance Cars
Hi John, thanks for the comparison - good to read.
I was looking at Matt's site ( www.jouleinjected.com ) but I could not find
any details on the transaxle setup. Is it rear or front or 4WD? Does it
have a tranny or direct drive? Do you know the final diff ratio?
Thanks
Don
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Release Date: 3/24/2006
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Not a dumb question at all.
Gel cells are just fine to use in an EV, many Solectria EVs came stock with
Gel cells and are still in use today, years later. Gels do not have a
problem with shock resistance - not sure where this idea came from?!??
Gels, like other batteries have strengths and weaknesses. Their strength is
a longer life cycle and tend not to go out of balance as easy as other
battery types. Their weakness is that they cannot deliver the current that
other batteries (such as AGMs).
I selected Gels for the New Beetle because:
- Solectria has a long history delivering production vehicles with this
battery
- Solectria and other Gel users report a long life (8 years and counting in
some cases)
- they do not go out of balance as easy
- I have a high voltage system (312V nom.) that does not require huge
current draws for fast acceleration.
The people who have high performance cars like to use AGMs because AGMs can
deliver a **lot** of current in a short period of time. Gels don't work
well in this case.
Don
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Joel Hacker
Sent: March 26, 2006 12:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
Just a dumb 'newbie' question here, but can someone explain why it is not
recommended to use gel cells in an ev?
Cor van de Water wrote:
> Ooops,
> Lawrence, this is a GEL battery,
> I an fairly sure that you should stay away from Gel cells for an EV ?!?!
> AGMs are the best SLA battery type for they are resistant to shock due
> to the glass mats between the plates - they can't go anywhere.
>
> 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 Lawrence Rhodes
> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 11:07 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
>
>
> http://www.criticalbattery.com/Battery%20Jack/Web%20Pages/GEL%20GROUP2
> 4%2012
> %20VOLT%2080%20AH.htm
> This one is 8.2 inches. I only did one search. LR........
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Freidberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 7:50 AM
> Subject: Large AH SLAs available with total height of 8" or less?
>
>
>
>>Are there any sealed lead acid batteries of over 80ah available with a
>>total height of 8" or less?
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------
>>Yahoo! Mail
>>Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
>>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Bill Dennis wrote:
> Lee, can you tell me how you came up with a value of 200 Ohms for R1?
> The AD537 spec says, "The nominal value of R is chosen so that full-
> scale input voltage sets up a current of 1ma in it."
Sure; the example circuit on the data sheet called for 130 ohms (for a
thermocouple input that peaked at 53mv as I recall). So I suggested a
200 ohm pot.
Working out the exact circuit and values is "left as an exercise for the
reader". There's a limited amount of work I'm willing to do on a design
like this for free. :-)
--
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 ---
Thanks, Lee. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting something
during my exercising. :)
Bill Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lee Hart
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:59 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bizarre Amphour Meter Idea
Bill Dennis wrote:
> Lee, can you tell me how you came up with a value of 200 Ohms for R1?
> The AD537 spec says, "The nominal value of R is chosen so that full-
> scale input voltage sets up a current of 1ma in it."
Sure; the example circuit on the data sheet called for 130 ohms (for a
thermocouple input that peaked at 53mv as I recall). So I suggested a
200 ohm pot.
Working out the exact circuit and values is "left as an exercise for the
reader". There's a limited amount of work I'm willing to do on a design
like this for free. :-)
--
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 ---
Joel Hacker wrote:
> Just a dumb 'newbie' question here, but can
> someone explain why it is not recommended to
> use gel cells in an ev?
Gel cells are not generally built for high currents. Since most EVs use
high currents (either on charge or discharge), floodeds or AGMs are
usually preferred.
However, gels can deliver long life if properly cared for. They have
been used in low-power EVs successfully, like the Solectrias.
--
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 ---
