EV Digest 5306
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Reverse, was: Re: Fast Street Car with Twin DC Motors
by "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Hydrogen: The Emperor Is Naked
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: Dumb question time
by Stefan Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) I need to rephrase my "motor options" question
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5) Re: Motor options(Jeff's setup long)
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: Independant Rear Suspension for Twin/Siamese DC Setup
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: Reverse, was: Re: Fast Street Car with Twin DC Motors
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Ground fault
by "Tom Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Reverse, was: Re: Fast Street Car with Twin DC Motors
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) More or Less the Attitude of the Oil Companies
by Wayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: Dumb question time
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: 24V DC contactors on Ebay from HB Electrical Mfg Co
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: identifying mystery forklift motors
by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dana Havranek)
14) Re: Ground fault
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: identifying mystery forklift motors
by James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) 80Kw Dolphin?
by Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: identifying mystery forklift motors
by Darin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: 80Kw Dolphin?
by Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: Ground fault
by "Ted C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: internal resistance
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Best 8V battery and best place to purchase 18 of them
by Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: Public charging- APPROVED (and other stuff)
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) DC-DC converter: How to select?
by Calvin King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) Re: CURRENT ELIMINATOR NEWS
by Ricky Suiter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Replacing springs with something beefier
by Ryan Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
James Massey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How is this for reverse for a dual-motor racer? The motors will need
to be
well synchronised, and locked together - along the lines of White
Zombie.
It requires a low-amp controller and one additional contactor, but the
Zilla may get upset as this goes with the controller doing its' thing
between the M- and the B-, if the controller sits between the B+ and
the
M+, the small controller will have to go there.
Reverse contactor
o=o
===o o==M- controller 2
P1 |
o=o A1 | F2
M+=o o===@@@===@@@=======M- controller 1
| | |
| | S |
| | o=o |
| ===o o==== P2 |
| A2 F1 | o=o |
|==@@@====@@@===o o===
P1, P2 = parallel contactors
S = Series contactor
A1 = Armature motor 1
A2 = Armature motor 2
F1 = Field motor 1
F2 = Field motor 2
Current paths are as follows:
Forward, series mode, S contactor is closed, current flows A2, F1, A1,
F2,
through the controller to B-.
Forward, Parallel mode, P1 and P2 contactors are closed, Current flows
parallel A1, F2 // A2, F1 then via controller to B-.
Reverse, Contactor P2 (but not P1) and reverse are closed, current
flows
A2, F1, F2 (in reverse to forward flow) then via reverse controller to
B-.
This doesn't reverse the motor. Reversing the direction of current flow
will not reverse a series wound motor. You have to reverse the
direction of either the field or armature, but not both.
Paul "neon" G.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
But if you live in Texas, 46% of the power is for an EV comes from
natural gas, which I believe is also the domain of the oil companies.
And following that 41% is from coal.
One could point out that electricity could come from nuclear or wind
power, even if for the most part it isn't today. The promises that
hydrogen could one day be generated from clean, plentiful or renewable
sources, or through thermolysis, etc is quite similar.
Danny
Mike Phillips wrote:
I'm about to go perform surgery on an EV. Later on I'll look up the
source that I was quoting.
The point he was making was that most methanol is under the domain of
oil companies since it comes from methane that comes from oil drilling.
Mike
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Neon John wrote:
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006 09:54:36 -0700 (MST), "Peter VanDerWal"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The bombarder's centerpiece is a 15kv, 50KVA pole pig (utility
transformer) driven in reverse to provide the high current at 15kv
necessary to process neon tubes. This MDR switches over 100 amps of
highly reactive power with no fuss and no muss. It replaced a NEMA 2
contactor which was quickly worn out (contacts burned) in the service.
Do you know of any MDR relays that would be appropriate for EV use as a
main contactor?
They sound like the bee's knees ;)
Sorry, I don't. I rarely buy one new. I grab 'em up surplus and at
hamfests whenever I see 'em. Just in case mecuriphobia grips the
world hard enough that they become unobtanium. I've never tried one
on DC personally, though I've seen them used on DC in industrial
equipment so I don't see why they wouldn't work.
They are already off the market in most of Europe, evidently... The DC
ratings are typically for "resistive" loads, any comment on translating
those numbers to "inductive" loads?
As I recall MDR use a puddle of mercury to short two contacts. Ever
consider what will happen to the puddle when the car hits a bump?
Yep, nothing. Not a puddle at all. A tube containing mercury and a
closely fitted ceramic displacer. The displacer's motion is highly
damped.
Indeed, the MDI specs state no interruption at a min impact of 2000G,
which would be a decent jolt.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK. Here is what I want in my 92 Festiva. Since I haven't bought the motor
or batts, I have time to change my mind.
I want GOOD ACCELERATION! Better than the ICE version (which was very slow).
At least as good as my Toyota Corolla with 1.8 L, 4 cylinder engine. I'm
not asking for a drag car, but I need to keep up with the hectic traffic here
in
Atlanta. If it can't do that, I'm not wasting my time or money.
I wanted to use the GE EV-1 controller at 84 V with bypass (full 84 V,
unregulated) for acceleration.
84 V, ~150 A is more than enough to keep the car rolling at 50 MPH. The
bypass is for acceleration only.
I need exactly a 20 mile range and a cruising speed of 45 - 50 MPH. I also
want to keep the batt weight down. That's why I went with the 14 X 6 V design.
I can use the 11" lift motor, 7" x 15" Sep Ex lift motor, 8" ADC, 9" ADC, or
any other motor that I can find / afford for that matter.
I can also use whatever battery pack option I can find and afford. The
afford part means it has to be floded lead acid.
So, what should I do? Do I have to change the controller? Should I be using
the 9" ADC with 14 x 12 V flooded batts? I really had me heart set on using
the 84 V EV-1 with bypass to keep the cost and weight down. But, it if won't
give me good performance, then I'm not going to build it, and I might as well
forget the project. Seriously, I won't build another underperforming car.
Please advise.
Thanks,
Steve
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My 300zx was suppose to be quick. As one of the only daily drivers in
fresno, I just wanted to avoid fostering the image of EV's as slow.
I had planned for 300V on the idea that the acceleration wouldn't lag to
much as the pack discharged and sagged. I ended up with 288 nominal for
now keeping the 25th orbital for the Aux battery.
Initially I got my warp 9 with 14 degrees of advance from netgain when
they just went to painting them red.(now they cost $300-$400 more) It
took me a while to convert. The car had really good pull in second gear,
better than stock, even with 750 Lbs of batteries over the rear axle, it
could spin the tires. Ironically, on the maiden voyage of increaseing
the pack to 288V I was getting out of someones way who was really on it
and I was afraid of overreving so I was shifting into third. Something
stuck or hesitated and during the shift I exploded the commutator.
I wanted to go to a siamese 9 but the funds arn't there and a extra
$1000 for reversing and S/P contactors shoots that idea for this year.
Jim saved my motor, ressurecting it from the ashes earning it the name
"Pheonix". Kinda appropriate I feel as this car spent the last 3-4 years
under a tarp behind work where the previous owner brought it from
Corvallis Oregon when he finished school up there.
That Event has damaged something else. but I haven't figured out what.
Maybe flat spots in the tranny bearings or CV joints or loosened ring
bolts, it is not as quiet and smooth as it was before. I still haven't
gotten the rpm sensor on it(shame on me) so I am very carefull now. It
doesn't quiet have the same torque it had before, but I haven't figured
out where it is lacking, It keeps up with traffic well often passing
people. My speed sensor has not been working, I am fixing that today.
But I kept up with everyone , even passed a few, on the freeway in 4th
gear, I haven't even tried 5th gear yet, It is to noiesy and not to
stable. It needs new rear springs and feels like it is toed out. wheeee.
but 70mph has not been a problem.
Just like when I had the emeter connected to the bottom 12V battery and
it cleared itself during the voltage sag near the end of the run where I
really needed it, haveing 156V in this car would just get progressivly
slower as I drove, With a minimum of 240 Volt (10V/battery) that is
still above the 170 max for the motor and so the sag is not too
noticeable. In fact. It is easy to destroy a battery if I am not
carefull, I can't feel it..(one of my regs got wet and ended up always
bypassing ) that poor battery when down to 6 volts It is sitting fine at
14+ at end of charge now, so it survived(so far, knocks on wood by-products)
Here is the way I look at it. at 170V limit to the motor, I can still
put 1000 amps into the motor loop with a zilla 1K if and only if my
voltage doesn't sag below 170V. If I had only 144 Volts, I could never
get to 170 motor volts. 1000 amps @ 120V(sagging 144V pack) would be 50
Kw's less in the motor loop with 1000 battery amps than 170V @1000 amps
with only 700 battery amps at 240V (sagged 288pack) but it will sag less
so even better scnario. If I had a low voltage pack, I would need a
zilla 2K for this very heavy EV. But all is not perfect. I don't seem to
get much range with orbitals and I needed 24 regulators at $45 each.
I am getting 425 Wh/mile so lots of room to improve, but today is the
first time I drove my ICE, I figure once a month is good for it. I
haven't bought any gasoline in march. And at this rate, I won't need to
until june. My employer lets me charge and I charge at home, I can't see
it on my PG&E bill, it is less of a difference than the variaility of
Solar energy production. I live 8 miles from work. the other day I went
downtown after work and then home 18 miles in one trip. The E-meter says
that is about it, but the voltage at rest still seemed good. The emeter
and I need to agree more, I think it lost it's pukert and aH settings,
it has been acting weird. I had gotten a link 1000 and I made my own
prescaler so confidence is low.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Don Cameron wrote:
> Anyone know the respective torque ratings and weights of these rear ends?
Without slicks, you won't be breaking anything. Your tires will just spin.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 11:18 AM 1/04/06 -0800, Paul wrote:
Reverse contactor
o=o
===o o==M- controller 2
P1 |
o=o A1 | F2
M+=o o===@@@===@@@=======M- controller 1
| | |
| | S |
| | o=o |
| ===o o==== P2 |
| A2 F1 | o=o |
|==@@@====@@@===o o===
P1, P2 = parallel contactors
S = Series contactor
A1 = Armature motor 1
A2 = Armature motor 2
F1 = Field motor 1
F2 = Field motor 2
Current paths are as follows:
Forward, series mode, S contactor is closed, current flows A2, F1, A1, F2,
through the controller to B-.
Forward, Parallel mode, P1 and P2 contactors are closed, Current flows
parallel A1, F2 // A2, F1 then via controller to B-.
Reverse, Contactor P2 (but not P1) and reverse are closed, current flows
A2, F1, F2 (in reverse to forward flow) then via reverse controller to B-.
This doesn't reverse the motor. Reversing the direction of current flow
will not reverse a series wound motor. You have to reverse the direction
of either the field or armature, but not both.
Hi Paul, and all
Yes it does reverse the motor, since the current flow through motor 2 field
is being reversed, relative to the forward direction and the current flow
through the armature. The current flow through motor 1 field is not being
reversed, but since there is no current in reverse through the armature of
motor 1 that does not matter.
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't post often but read the list always. I have a 1989 Isuzu pick-up that
I have just got converted and been driving it for about a month. I checked for
ground faults to the frame from the 120 volt pack and had none when I put it on
the road. Now I just checked it and I had 29 volts on the neg side and 34
volts on the pos side. I measure this with the power packed hooked up ready to
drive. So I thought I would unplug the power pack and just measure it from the
power pack with nothing else hooked up. Well still got the same measurements.
My question is if there is a short to ground shouldn't I have like say 30 volts
on one side and 90 volts on the other side if it is a 120 volt pack?
Tom
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi John, and All
I realised that the Zilla switches between B+ and M+, so at the Zilla there
is always a connection between M- and B-, but not between B+ and M+, so the
following layout would be needed to use the Zilla to do reverse using the
method I've thought up:
FWD P1
o=o o=o F1 A2
B+[]M+=o o=o o===@@@===@@@=======M-
Zilla | | | |
| | | S |
| | | o=o |
| | |==o o===| |
| | | P2 |
| | F2 A1 | o=o |
| |==@@@==|=@@@=|=o o==|
| |
| o=o |
|=o o=======|
Reverse contactor
P1, P2 = parallel contactors
S = Series contactor
A1 = Armature motor 1
A2 = Armature motor 2
F1 = Field motor 1
F2 = Field motor 2
So the current paths are:
* Forward, Series: B+, Zilla M+, FWD contactor, Field of motor 2, Armature
of motor 1, series contactor, Field of motor 1, Armature of motor 2, M- and B-.
* Forward, Parallel: B+, Zilla M+, FWD contactor, (splits) [P1 contactor,
Field motor 1, Armature motor 2] (in parallel with) [Field motor 2,
Armature motor 1, P2 contactor] (rejoins), M- and B-.
* Reverse: B+, Zilla M+, Reverse contactor, Field of motor 2 (in reverse
current flow), P1 contactor, Field motor 1 (does no work as Armature of
motor 1 has no power), Armature of motor 2 (in the same direction as
forward), M- and B-.
Now, to do the same job with a small controller, it would be necessary to
find a controller such as an AXE controller or similar, but it must switch
between B+ and M+, the same as the Zilla does, since the Zilla is not
connecting B+ to M+ (like the Curtii) and is connecting M- to B-. So, once
a +ve switch controller is found, the following circuit could be used:
P1
o=o F1 A2
B+[]M+====o o===@@@===@@@=======M-
Zilla | | |
| | S |
| | o=o |
| |==o o===| |
| | P2 |
| F2 A1 | o=o |
|==@@@==|=@@@=|=o o==|
72V |
(or whatever) |
battery |
tap o=o |
B+[]M+======o o=|
Con2 Reverse contactor
P1, P2 = parallel contactors
S = Series contactor
A1 = Armature motor 1
A2 = Armature motor 2
F1 = Field motor 1
F2 = Field motor 2
Con2 = small controller
So in this case the current paths are:
* Forward, Series: B+, Zilla M+, Field of motor 2, Armature of motor 1,
series contactor, Field of motor 1, Armature of motor 2, M- and B-.
* Forward, Parallel: B+, Zilla M+, (splits) [P1 contactor, Field motor 1,
Armature motor 2] (in parallel with) [Field motor 2, Armature motor 1, P2
contactor] (rejoins), M- and B-.
* Reverse: 72V battery tap, B+ small controller, M+ small controller,
Reverse contactor, Field of motor 2 (in reverse current flow), P1
contactor, Field motor 1 (does no work as Armature of motor 1 has no
power), Armature of motor 2 (in the same direction as forward), M- and B-.
Although this would unevenly discharge the battery pack, as the lower 72V
(or whatever the tap voltage is) would be discharged more than the rest.
That said, it would be possible to use a Z1k-HV and use the full battery
voltage for the reverse controller, programmed right back to do reverse.
Regards
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
All the more reason for EV's (as though more reasons were necessary).
http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=7080760&tid=apc&sid=7080760&mid=19144
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
"Stefan T. Peters" wrote:
> Do you know of any MDR relays that would be appropriate for EV use as a
> main contactor? They sound like the bee's knees ;)
Mercury Displacement Relays use a rather large amount of liquid mercury,
and so are quite sensitive to position and shock/vibration. I don't
think they are suitable for a moving vehicle. The switch would open and
close on bumps, and from hard cornering, accelleration, or braking.
There are many other types of mercury-wetted relays that are not
position-sensitive, that would work in a car. However, the ones I know
about are mainly small, low-power ones. Maybe Neon John knows of some
suitable large ones?
--
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 ---
Cor van de Water wrote:
> Two contactors with two contacts, this should be
> usable as a reversing contactor.
>
> I understand HB Electrical was used in Citycar.
> http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ7599826464QQcmdZViewItem
Yes, these look exactly like the one in my ComutaVan. HB was bought out
by Prestolite, so these are still made under the Prestolite name. I
believe they were rated 72v, 200amps.
--
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 ---
Hi, Darin.
Here's a Baker that has been living in my basement since 1978.
http://home.comcast.net/~dhavranek/forklift.htm
Maybe yours is similar.
It's a beast.
Dana
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hey Darin
>
> Ahhh a good old Baker motor. Are there any motor numbers on the motors??
> If
> you take some pics and send them to me I might be able to ID them at least.
> I'm
> not familure with any shunt wound drive motor though so be fun to look at.
> Maybe jar my memory from days when I saw Bakers, hehehe. I doubt I'd have
> any
> real specs but once i know the motor I can throw out some feelers for ya.
> Hope this helps
> Jim Husted
> Hi-Torque electric
>
> Darin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I removed 4 motors from my surplus forklift last week (Baker FTD-110).
>
> Only one of them (power steering) had a plate on it with partial
> specifications (0.88 hp @ 48 V). The three other motors (two identical
> hydraulic pump motors and the drive motor) just have Baker part numbers
> on them.
>
> Any suggestions on how to find out what the specs are for the mystery
> motors? Can they be estimated from physical dimensions?
>
> The two pump motors are approx. 8 x 15 inches (not including shaft
> ends), 110 lbs, series wound.
>
> The drive motor is approx. 12 x 15 inches (not including shaft ends),
> 235 lbs, shunt wound.
>
> I'd ask the Baker forklift company, but they don't appear to exist anymore.
>
> Darin
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
> starting at 1¢/min.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 05:20 PM 1/04/06 -0500, Tom wrote:
Now I just checked it and I had 29 volts on the neg side and 34 volts on
the pos side. I measure this with the power packed hooked up ready to
drive. So I thought I would unplug the power pack and just measure it
from the power pack with nothing else hooked up. Well still got the same
measurements.
My question is if there is a short to ground shouldn't I have like say 30
volts on one side and 90 volts on the other side if it is a 120 volt pack?
Hi Tom
If you has a *short* that is what you would have. You have *leakage*, and
if those measurements are made with a digital multimeter then the leakage
is in the order of meg-ohms, and so is nothing to worry about.
Regards
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 01:04 AM 2/04/06 +0000, Dana wrote:
Hi, Darin.
Here's a Baker that has been living in my basement since 1978.
http://home.comcast.net/~dhavranek/forklift.htm
Hi Dana
Interesting that in the corner of the I.D. plate, your motor seems to have
"Made by General Electric".
So maybe a Baker motor is a GE by another name?
Regards
James
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ok, so while working on and cleaning this latest Dolphin, I came across
something interesting:
It's got the standard cover, but with a Delco sticker pasted over the
cover's normal "Hughes" inlay. But what is *really* interesting is the
Dolphin sticker.
It's a factory label, and while mine (and all the others I have seen)
says "50kw Vector Control" this one clearly says "80kw Vector control".
The IGBTs seem the same, but they have a 600 amp tag rating on them.
Question is I've never heard of a Dolphin doing 80kw. Anyone else ever
heard of one?
I'll try the computer in my car tomorrow.
Chris
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey Jim -
I already had a few pics taken. Unfortunately the closer pics are of
the pump motors. I believe the drive motor also has a motor no. on it;
I'll have a look tomorrow and post back. If there's any particular
angle you want to see let me know.
http://www.metrompg.com/offsite/baker-motors.html
Happy to provide the trip down memory lane!
cheers-
Darin
--
Jim Husted wrote:
Ahhh a good old Baker motor. Are there any motor numbers on the motors?? If
you take some pics and send them to me I might be able to ID them at least.
I'm not familure with any shunt wound drive motor though so be fun to look at.
Maybe jar my mem
ory from days when I saw Bakers, hehehe. I doubt I'd have any real specs but
once i know the motor I can throw out some feelers for ya.
Hope this helps
Jim Husted
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The only place I have seen that is in the Dol7 software. It has a
choice between 50kw and 80kw.
Mike
--- Christopher Zach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, so while working on and cleaning this latest Dolphin, I came
> across
> something interesting:
>
> It's got the standard cover, but with a Delco sticker pasted over the
>
> cover's normal "Hughes" inlay. But what is *really* interesting is
> the
> Dolphin sticker.
>
> It's a factory label, and while mine (and all the others I have seen)
>
> says "50kw Vector Control" this one clearly says "80kw Vector
> control".
>
> The IGBTs seem the same, but they have a 600 amp tag rating on them.
> Question is I've never heard of a Dolphin doing 80kw. Anyone else
> ever
> heard of one?
>
> I'll try the computer in my car tomorrow.
>
> Chris
>
>
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 ---
I track ground faults on fire alarm systems all the time. Your meter reading
tells me that you fault is on the pos side of your motor/load. The voltage
is lower on the neg side because the current has to flow though the
motor/load thus lowering your voltage potential. Most digital multi meters
are very sensitive. With you only getting 30volts off a 120 pack voltage I
would venture to say your fault is not a very strong one. If you're
interested in tracking it you can start by breaking the circuit in the
middle. Meter the circuit one way against ground. Then the other way.
Continue this process of elimination till you narrow down the fault
location. But be very careful. With the circuit grounding to the vehicle it
is very easy to be touching the body of the vehicle and complete the
electrical path. OUCH!!!
I had a similar fault on my vehicle. I traced it to where the 2/0 cable
connected to the motor. The stud that the cable bolted to had a bit of
crusty stuff that went to the motor housing. Brushed it off and no more
fault. You could also fine it to be just motor brush dust.
Happy Hunting,
Ted
Olympia, WA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 2:20 PM
Subject: Ground fault
I don't post often but read the list always. I have a 1989 Isuzu pick-up
that I have just got converted and been driving it for about a month. I
checked for ground faults to the frame from the 120 volt pack and had none
when I put it on the road. Now I just checked it and I had 29 volts on the
neg side and 34 volts on the pos side. I measure this with the power
packed hooked up ready to drive. So I thought I would unplug the power
pack and just measure it from the power pack with nothing else hooked up.
Well still got the same measurements.
My question is if there is a short to ground shouldn't I have like say 30
volts on one side and 90 volts on the other side if it is a 120 volt pack?
Tom
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Victor Tikhonov wrote:
> ...too black ands white. As you said, the issue is very complex to
> state in one sentence, but you managed: "AC is out there *mainly*
> because designers didn't bother to learn about preceding history of
> DC". I agree, there may be more ignorant engineers than genuine ones...
> But, yes, this guy should never have gotten close to a design team.
> I suppose he was just an articulate paper presenter for GM, not an
> engineer.
No, he really was an engineer, and had worked on the inverter and motor
designs a lot. He was indeed an expert in the field of AC motor control.
Unfortunately, he knew almost nothing about DC motor control.
> DC driven vehicles are most numerous and for good reasons. All depends
> on priorities. If for instance GM perceived (right or wrong) that
> average driver won't like to shift, they must use 10k rpm motors then
> to cover entire speed range on one gear, AC or DC.
No; trains, trolleys, and electric buses have used DC traction motors
"forever", and they are single-ratio for 0-80 mph (and more). Every
custom-designed EV, whether AC or DC, is always single-ratio. You only
find transmissions in conversions.
> I don't think EV1 would be what it is (was) if used a DC system.
I'm sure that is true. The EV1 design started at Aerovironment, where
Alan Cocconi designed the AC motor and inverter. GM basically took the
design from them, and carried it forward from a crude prototype to a
finished car. They "finessed" it, but didn't change the basic concept.
>> The reason that you study history is so you don't have to repeat it...
> No arguing here, 100% agree. Few people bother though, and it is sad.
> I think general attitude of most is -- unless benefits are apparent
> and immediate, no one will...
It's a complex situation. Let me try to explain my thoughts more fully.
Design is somewhat like a game of chess. There are millions of possible
moves. Some result in a win, others a loss.
A poor player does not study past games that have been played, and he
does not think into the future. He just looks at the board right now,
and picks the first move he sees that seems to give him an advantage.
A fair player still does not study past games; but he will think about
the future. He will consider *several* possible moves, and think about
what the other player will do for each of them. He may only look 1 or 2
moves ahead, but that still gives him an enormous advantage over the
poor player; he'll beat him almost every game.
A good player start studying past games, and learning from them. He
avoids strategies that look good but turn out bad in the end. And, he
thinks more moves into the future. He can beat the fair player most of
the time.
But to be a truly great chess player requires something more. Humans
can't remember every game ever played, and can't think very many moves
into the future. To be great, one has to master the essence, the
gestalt; the underlying themes or patterns of the game. A master can
look at the board, and spot the good moves almost immediately, as if by
instinct, without any deep memory or calculations.
Design engineering is the same. The poor engineer just grabs the first
solution that comes along, without any consideration of its merit. He
gets the job done quickly, but not well. It's often a "brute force"
solution. It barely meets the requirements, and often has weaknesses
that will soon show up very soon.
A fair engineer will consider more options, and compare them on their
relative merits. One may be more accurate, another cheaper, another more
reliable, etc. So he makes trade-offs, and picks the design that best
fits the requirements *right now*. His designs work better, and have
fewer problems. But you would still recognize them as "obvious"
solutions.
The good engineer has a much deeper knowledge of the history of the
problem. He will look for *all* the solutions that have been tried, and
how they turned out. He will find the not-so-obvious solutions that may
turn out better, like an old vacuum-tube circuit updated with modern
FETs to achieve a very low parts count, or an unusual material that just
happens to do the job better than the obvious choices.
The great engineer goes one step better. He "gets inside" the problem
to see it from many novel viewpoints. It is said that a difficult
problem becomes easy when viewed from the right perspective. The great
engineer will *find* that perspective! He isn't limited to just what's
been done before; he can synthesize a *new* solution that never existed.
In my view, Paul MacReady and Alan Cocconi are great engineers; they
learned the history of the problem, considered all the solutions that
had been tried to date, and then INVENTED new ones. Their "Impact"
design was brilliant, and WAY off the map; far out in unexplored
territory.
GM has many good engineers; but no great ones. They were able to polish
and refine the basic idea, but not to fully understand and perfect it.
Rather than carry the idea forward, to improve and extend it; they
backed away from it, toward a more conservative, traditional, obvious,
low-risk design.
I think that GM had two choices:
1. Use the Aerovironment Impact design as the starting point, and build
the whole project around it. Not just the car; but the entire design,
manufacturing, sales, and service. It's more like building a computer
than a car. You can't build computers in an auto plant; if you try,
you're doomed to fail.
Or:
2. Treat the Impact as a valuable data point, but not relevant for
building cars within GM's existing plants, sales, and service
organizations. Start with another blank sheet of paper, and design
an EV that *does* fit. But, they would have to find "great engineers"
of the calibre of MacReady and Cocconi; people that thoroughly
understood the capabilities and limitations of the GM organization,
yet could think "outside the box." It would be a project akin to
when GM created the Saturn division, or when Toyota created the
Prius.
But, GM chose neither approach. Instead, they tried to compromise on
something halfway between. Change the Impact design to be more
conservative, but not enough so they could actually manufacturer it
effectively. With 20/20 hindsight, this turned out to be a doomed
strategy.
--
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 ---
Tom, I don't know if you got a response to this post.
Generally speaking, Trojan 8V is on a par with
USBattery.
With US Battery, you get a higher-up (Mr. Nawaz
Qreshi) lurking out to help us EVers, which is pretty
cool!
-Trojan is more expensive, but give you more miles
over lifetime-- deeper discharges (Lynn, is that about
right?).
-US Battery will be cheaper per mile.
I'm going by memory here.
--- Tom Shjarback <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is the best 8V battery out there? I believe
> Trojan
> makes three capacities and US Battery makes two
> capacities.
> Of course I lean toward the higher capacities, any
> reason
> not to? With what I know now I would go with the
> highest
> capacity US battery with the small L terminals.
> Comments??
>
> Also any reason not to go with the small L
> terminals?
>
> Where is the best deal to be had? Go local, or is
> there
> someone who will ship them and give a better price?
> And
> what has current pricing for 8V in bulk of 18 been
> recently?
>
> Thanks for any information in advance.
>
> Tom
>
>
'92 Honda Civic sedan, 144V (video or DVD available)!
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Richard Acuti wrote:
> On Wednesday, the county garage manager approved me for a permenantly
> reserved space right in front of the security booth. The space has a
> support column with a 110 v outlet on it. I've been charging there
> since then. It's an -almost- ideal situation. The staff all know about
> me and I've answered everyone's curious questions but I don't have
> permission in writing (because the manager doesn't work at the garage
> directly)... I know, I know. It's a little wierd.
Bring donuts or contribute to the garage's coffee fund regularly, and
remember the manager on his birthday :-)
> I'm kind of in the "endurance phase" of my EV experiment now. I'm
> driving about 30 miles a day in a 25 year old plastic/aluminum EV.
> I've just replaced the brushes a few hundred miles ago.
My experience with the ComutaVan was that it was always breaking down in
various little ways, but they were always pretty simple to fix. I never
needed to replace the brushes in 15k miles, though I did have a brush
spring break once. I still have a set of brushes that I bought as spares
in case you need them :-) I also kept a journal, which ran to almost 30
pages. I might be able to print it out and send you a copy if you like.
> The original Anderson voltmeter was missing so I installed a Curtis.
> The original contactor array was replaced with a Curtis 1221B before
> I bought the vehicle.
Ok. Does it still have the stock twelve 6v batteries (i.e. a 72v pack)?
> The "emergency stop" button, "hot" motor light and brake failure
> warning light are all disconnected. I can figure out the latter 2 but
> I'd love some help with the Big, Red Button.
Did you get the maintenance manual? I have that, too. It's pretty poor,
but certainly better than nothing. It has the wiring diagram to show how
the "big red button" was wired. Basically, it has a 12v coil, and a big
SPST contact. The contact is wired in series with the battery pack. The
coil is wired to +12v thru the ignition switch and a normally-closed
pushbutton on the dash. The button is normally "off". To use it, you
turn on the key, then press the button down (hard). It latches down,
because there is 12v power on its coil. If you ever press the "emergency
stop" button on the dash, it breaks power to the coil, and the Big Red
Button pops up, turning the car off.
> The original "engage" breaker was removed.
I hope they kept at least one big contactor to break power in case of an
emergency. The Curtis should be wired as shown in their manual; a big
contactor with its coil controlled by the switch on the potbox. When you
release the accellerator, the contactor coil turns off. A resistor
across the contactor's contacts keeps the controller precharged.
--
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 ---
From: "Richard Acuti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: March 29, 2006 9:18:15 AM EST
Subject: DC-DC converter: How to select?
I'm always reading about how everyone uses DC-DC converters in their
EV's but I never see anything about brand names or specifications.
I was hoping to see some good answers to this question. I have just
installed my new battery bank. I upgraded to 108 volts from 96
volt. I would also like to add a DC-DC converter, but don't really
know where to begin. (Rich will not part with his.)
If there is an answer to Richard's question, let us hear it. If we
don't buy a converter how do we build one?
Calvin King,
Now driving a 108 volt 81 Jet Electrica
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That's awsome Dennis! Those are some IMPRESSIVE reaction times. One of these
weeks I need to take a friday night off work and come watch you race.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 3/31/06 11:02:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< 1st nite race since last year nets a win.26 cars show up to bracket race
with
many previous race winners and the division 7 2005 champ.(he also went to
the
final round at Pomona last year for the US champoniship)We took him out in
the 1st round after he introduced himself as the champ that was going to
kick my
...I had a .001 reaction time and ran on my 11.95 dial with a 11.953 and
never looked back.I cut 3- .001s and a .012 with a .001 in the final
round.It
could not get any better. Dennis Berube >>
No its not an april fools post!!!
Later,
Ricky
02 Insight
92 Saturn SC2 EV 144 Volt
Glendale, AZ USA
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low
rates.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Everyone,
Ever since I got the 200sx on the road, it has had a really strange
sound coming out of the rear-end. It is IRS. 400 lbs of Orbitals are
in the backseat area. The before and after height measurements from
ground to rear wheel-well metal were within about 1/2". The front of
the vehicle is quite a bit lighter than it originally was. I did these
height measurements (BTW, the front was close to original too) right
after I got it on the road as an EV. Things could have settled now -
I'd have to re-measure. It does look to be sagging in the back some and
high in front. I'm guessing upon acceleration (which is the only time
I hear the screeching noise from the rear end) the vehicle rolls back
quite a bit. This could be causing something to rub during acceleration.
The noise is really hard to describe. Screeching isn't the best word,
but it's somewhat of a screech. It doesn't have to be a hard
acceleration either. It's most pronounced when starting out in 2nd or
3rd gear. Less pronounced if I start in 1st gear - which I rarely do.
On a hard acceleration it goes like this: immediate screech on takeoff
and then it dies off after I get up to about 20 mph (still accelerating
though). On moderate accelerations, you can feel the vehicle sort of
"break away" when the noise disappears. That is, I think it's dragging
quite significantly while the noise is present.
The vehicle has 206k miles on it now. I suppose something could be
faulty. I never noticed the noise before it was converted - granted it
didn't have the 0 RPM torque that it has now either. I'm leaning
towards something rubbing though, and guessing that if I replace the
rear springs with something beefier, the rubbing might stop.
This has been on my list of to-do's for quite awhile. Because I think
it might be affecting my efficiency, I want to nail it down. Two
questions for you all:
1) Does it sound likely that it is some rubbing due to a rear-ward
rolling during acceleration and that replacing the springs with some
that are more robust should solve the problem?
2) How do you go about finding beefier springs? Do you just go down to
the local suspension shop and tell them you want something
heavier-duty? Can you order them from somewhere on the web? Go
scouring a junkyard? How do you know what to look for?
Thanks,
Ryan
--
- EV Source <http://www.evsource.com> -
Selling names like Zilla, PFC Chargers, and WarP Motors
E-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Toll-free: 1-877-215-6781
--- End Message ---
