EV Digest 5645
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) Re: Trying to understand shunt regs
by Steve Condie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) RE: EV digest 5644
by "Adams, Lynn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) unknown motor, questions for the Gurus
by Matthew Milliron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Zilla 1141 code
by Otmar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Jacking up the rear of a VoltsRabbit (WAS Re: creaky rear struts in
VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.)
by "Chuck Hursch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Jacking up the rear of a VoltsRabbit (WAS Re: creaky rear struts in
VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.)
by "Roland Wiench" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: Overheating Controller
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Solectria Force
by "mike young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Reverend Gadget - To make Electric 49 LowRider Olds
by Steven Lough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: Chris Paine to Ride in White Zombie, Ride? Hell, DRIVE it!!
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Fwd: Electric Vehicle Engineers Needed Immediately
by "Jorg Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: Better range with low seat height
by "Jody Dewey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
An FC vehicle is still an EV, I don't see where the list was designated
to be only BEV. Sometimes there are also emails about generator "range
extenders", the FC may better fill that role. Sometimes even "pusher"
trailers which are a complete contradiction of the EV principle.
I wouldn't want to spend too long talking about FCs, not because they're
OT but because they're simply not available. Debating the merits and
drawbacks of nonexistant products is pointless since no one here is
capable of designing or building a fuel cell.
Danny
Tom Watson wrote:
HEY!
I may be wrong, but isn't this alot off topic?
Isn't there a hydrogen list you could be posting to rather than clog
up the electric vehicle group?
Frankly, I don't care to discuss hydrogen vehicles unless there is a
discussion of the electric motor or a battery or super cap involved
in the discussion! I consider hydrogen vehicles to be a lost
cause!... Just look at the freaking cost!!!
Move along now!
Tom
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Based on my (far less rigorous) experience, that looks like two 6.8's. With
two 6.8's I start to get a visible glow at around 14.4. With a 6.8 and a 6.2 I
get a visible glow at around 13.8 - 13.9.
Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "Paul G." wrote:
>
> On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:47 AM, Lee Hart wrote:
>
> > Here is the current vs. voltage relationship.
> >
> > Current Voltage
> > ------- -------
> > 0.1ma 12.46v
> > 1ma 12.88v negligible current when not on charge
> > 10ma 13.18v
> > 100ma 13.60v starts bypassing when battery exceeds gassing threshold
> > 200ma 14.42v lamp begins to glow
> > 500ma 15.24v lamp fully lit and limiting current
> >
>
> Love your testing Lee. Is that the 2x 6.8 numbers or the 6.8 + 6.2
> numbers? I'm guessing the second but wouldn't have guessed the 1ma
> point for either configuration.
This one is already potted; I think it has one 6.2v and one 6.8v zener.
--
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
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+
countries) for 2ยข/min or less.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Do you guys know of a reliable web source about the energy it takes to
make hydrogen?
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sure you're wrong. Its not all off topic. There are some facts and
figures discussed here which relates using hydrogen to fuel "electric"
cars. Frankly, any technology that makes electricity to power an
electric car is technically on topic. You may not be into educating
or persuading the public as to the benefits of "Electric Vehicles",
but for those who are this is important information to get right so
they don't come out sounding like that Barthmuss guy from GM.
>
> I do not disagree with you though about hydrogen vehicles being a
lost cause.
>
> Mike,
> Anchorage, Ak.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:38 am
> Subject: Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > HEY!
> > I may be wrong, but isn't this alot off topic?
> >
> > Isn't there a hydrogen list you could be posting to rather than clog
> > up the electric vehicle group?
> >
> > Frankly, I don't care to discuss hydrogen vehicles unless there is a
> > discussion of the electric motor or a battery or super cap involved
> > in the discussion! I consider hydrogen vehicles to be a lost
> > cause!... Just look at the freaking cost!!!
> >
> > Move along now!
> > Tom
> >
> > -------------------snip-------------------
> > EV Digest 5643
> > >
> > > Topics covered in this issue include:
> > >
> > > 1) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 2) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > 4) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 5) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > 7) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 8) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 9) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 10) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply
> > > by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > 12) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > 21) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What kills me is with all of this talk of GM and FC technology, only
3% of this list has a BMS in their EV.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sure you're wrong. Its not all off topic. There are some facts
and figures discussed here which relates using hydrogen to
fuel "electric" cars. Frankly, any technology that makes
electricity to power an electric car is technically on topic. You
may not be into educating or persuading the public as to the
benefits of "Electric Vehicles", but for those who are this is
important information to get right so they don't come out sounding
like that Barthmuss guy from GM.
>
> I do not disagree with you though about hydrogen vehicles being a
lost cause.
>
> Mike,
> Anchorage, Ak.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:38 am
> Subject: Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > HEY!
> > I may be wrong, but isn't this alot off topic?
> >
> > Isn't there a hydrogen list you could be posting to rather than
clog
> > up the electric vehicle group?
> >
> > Frankly, I don't care to discuss hydrogen vehicles unless there
is a
> > discussion of the electric motor or a battery or super cap
involved
> > in the discussion! I consider hydrogen vehicles to be a lost
> > cause!... Just look at the freaking cost!!!
> >
> > Move along now!
> > Tom
> >
> > -------------------snip-------------------
> > EV Digest 5643
> > >
> > > Topics covered in this issue include:
> > >
> > > 1) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 2) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > 4) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 5) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > 7) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 8) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 9) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > 10) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply
> > > by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > 12) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > 21) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 12:57 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: EV digest 5644
EV Digest 5644
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: Chris Paine to Ride in White Zombie, Ride? Hell, DRIVE it!!
by "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
3) Re: Overheating Controller
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) RE: OT Methane Fueling WAS: WKTEC GM's Reply
by Chet Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: who's reviving the electric car?
by "Michaela Merz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) re: solectria force
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7) Phoenix Motorcars Evaluating Electric Pickup Using UQM Technology
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
8) RE: Sangamo meter (was:RE: Chris Paine to Ride in White Zombie)
by "Myles Twete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: Chris Paine to Ride in White Zombie
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) Re: Electric Drag Scooter
by "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: who's reviving the electric car?
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: Solectria Force
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: conversion business- was-DC Motor torque calculations
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: conversion business- was-DC Motor torque calculations
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by Lock Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: conversion business- was-DC Motor torque calculations
by Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Solectria Force on hills?
by Steve Gaarder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: conversion business- was-DC Motor torque calculations
by David Dymaxion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Zilla 1141 code
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by Tom Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Re: Trying to understand shunt regs
by Lee Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by "David Roden (Akron OH USA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
by MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 12 Jul 2006 at 14:36, Tom Watson wrote:
> I may be wrong, but isn't this alot off topic?
Not really.
When discussing the EV list's topic, our charter says, "An electric vehicle is
any vehicle which uses an electric motor as the primary or sole motive force.
The energy storage device used to drive said motor can use any technology
including, but not limited to, solar electric, electric battery, fuel cell,
internal
combustion engine coupled with a electric generator (hybrids), or any
combination of these."
You can read the entire (brief!) charter at :
http://www.evdl.org/help/
However ...
IIRC (someone correct me if my memory is wrong), several years ago a
lengthy and sometimes acrimonious discussion on the EVDL led to a more
or less formal vote to minimize discussion of hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles.
They were not really banned, just considered OT. (It's interesting that this
thread was tagged OT even though its original subject - GM's defense of their
decision to kill the EV1 - was on topic.)
In any case, while it may be somewhat off topic, IMO it is not "alot off
topic."
I don't see any problem with the discussion continuing, just as long as :
1. It's flagged as OT
2. It doesn't threaten to swamp other issues
3. It doesn't become a flame war
If anyone disagrees or has further concerns with this thread, please email me
privately. However, don't try to do so by replying to this email. The usual
private address dance follows :
In the formula given, concatenate the mailname, second level domain, and
top level domain following to get my private email address :
mailname == evadm
2LD == drmm
TLD == net
e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OR, simply replace
evpost
in the FROM field above with
evadm
David Roden
EV List Assistant Administrator
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Potentially large acreages of energy farming could be much cheaper than
solar cells.
I didn't say FCs will be ready soon. I don't believe it. For one,
under what I've heard is the latest technology there may not even be
enough platinum in the world to have all the cars be FC-driven. Well,
they do say they should be able to eventually get platinum needs down to
like 1/10th of what is needed now and I hope they can.
I don't get stuck with a particular technology in mind. I just don't
like to see questionable claims passed off as apparent hard facts,
especially negative ones.
Actually I believe the same materials problem may exist with EVs. Right
now lead prices are high, and I wonder how much more could be produced
if the use for every car increased from one small starting battery to
maybe twenty times as much. Or nickle, cadmium, lithium, whatever.
It's possible that if the demand increases, supply can increase with
only a small increase in price but it's also possible that dramatically
greater supply is not even possible at any reasonable price. This would
make it unfeasible to convert a great deal of the fleet even if it
appears economical with a few vehicles. But I have no idea what the
capabilities of the materials industry is so it would be pointless to
speculate on the situation.
Danny
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why bring carbon into the equation? Instead of algae ponds, the same acreage of
solar cells could be used *right now* instead of pie-in-the-skying for
development dollars. Save the liquid fuels for chemical processes and essential
ICE's, use the gases at low pressure to make electricity, quit wasting billions
on FC boondoggles when a fraction of that could make batteries affordable for
wide-spread use.
You say FC's will be ready soon...there are people with all kinds of beliefs -
flat earth, the universe is less than 7000 years old, policians have our best
interests at heart - but there is plenty of proof to the contrary, too. Not
saying don't work on your theories, just don't beg for taxpayers dollars while
you're at it.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I got a Leeson motor from work. The website doesn't seem to have
any info on it. I want to make an EVmotorcycle. Will this do it? Or,
just a scooter. Time for class. How do I figure HP? Max RPM?
what does FR, F.F, type, INS etc. mean? It spools up real nice and
quiet on 24 volts. It has brushes.
Leeson DC perminant magnet
Model - CM34D20NZ1C
volts - 75-140
rpm - VAR \
amps - VAR > Varies depending on amps and votages used?
H.P - VAR /
FR. - 34
amb - 40 degrees celcius
F.F - 1.38
type - DN
thermal protection HO1A
INS - H3
duty - INT
Matt Milliron
http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/702
My daughter named it, "Pikachu". It's yellow and black,
electric and contains Japanese parts, so I went with it.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
But not having a BMS doesn't make an EV less effiicient, just less economical
to operate. I take the point of this thread as refuting the GM claims
suggesting FCV's being the wave of the future.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 11:41 am
Subject: Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
To: MIKE WILLMON <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> What kills me is with all of this talk of GM and FC technology,
> only
> 3% of this list has a BMS in their EV.
>
> Mike
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
At 11:18 AM -0700 7/11/06, Ricky Suiter wrote:
First I'll start off saying I've emailed Otmar about 36 hours ago
and haven't recieved a response yet, I'm just getting a little
anxious. At this moment the Saturn is dead in my driveway.
Sorry to be out of town on you. Andrew Letton was right, I was flying
back from California and with my dead laptop I was out of email
contact for some time. Yes it seems even Mac laptops have problems if
you drop and abuse them often enough.
I had an Albright SW200 contactor in the car, which was a used
part, that I think was causing problems. It had obviously been
opened under load and the tips were pitted. I took it apart and
sanded the tips and polished them, which now I know is a bad thing,
but it did seem to remedy things for a few weeks. What was happening
was it was shutting down under full throttle. I broke down and
ordered a Kilovac EV200 contactor figuring I was going above the
Albright's rating using 144 volts anyhow. I installed the new
contactor, made sure to reuse the snubber diode, everything was
hooked up correctly. I powered the high voltage back up and went to
turn the car on and got nothing. It precharges then just gives the
error 1141, which is contactor resistance high.
Anyone have this happen? I think 1141 means the contactor drive
circuit is shot because it won't shut the contactor at all, and it
certainly will close if I hook 12 volts to the coil.
There have been a number of very good responses to this thread. It
sure is nice to know that so many of you understand how it works!
Yea Shit can that diode on the EV200. It has it's own diodes and controls.
You are SPECIFICALLY instructed to NOT USE any DIODES on the economizer
circuit Kilovac contactors.
Ok some responses need comments. :) Kilovac does not have a snubber
built in. In fact it's a very noisy economizer circuit with voltage
spikes that tend to cause problems with other electronics. I have
since researched more and found that the Kilovac EV200 can be run on
the Hairball without the snubber, but it does not hurt to do so.
Don't try this with a different contactor though, the SW200 from
Albright still must have a snubber.
I have heard that maybe he uses a 1.5Ke36CA. I would use a 1.5Ke18CA because
it's much closer to the 12 volts that should be there.
This would certainly be a problem. The reason I use a 24V part is
that the high breakdown voltage allows the Kilovac contactor to turn
off fast and not weld on. Try to use a lower voltage
Zener/Snubber/Transorb and you are asking for a welded on contactor.
Ralph Merwin gets bonus points for quoting the manual. He is right,
and I do think quite carefully before putting something in the manual.
Mark Farver is right on, this is excellent advice:
At 2:17 PM -0500 7/11/06, Mark Farver wrote:
1141 ( Main Contactor High Resistance ) is a tricky one. I believe
John Wayland was having problems with it in the WZ. I've never
seen it happen while starting the car, only under high amps. Did
you clear all the codes before trying again?
As I understand it the precharge portion of the Hairball has a
circuit that measures the voltage across the main contactor. I
believe it expects this voltage to be very high (pack voltage)
before precharge starts. Once precharge starts it expects it to
drop to nearly zero (below six volts sticks in my mind) before it
attempts to close the main contactor. Once the MC is closed and
during operation it expects that voltage to stay low, if it rises
too high it logs a 1141 and shuts down.
Your problem is probably not something wrong with the system. Check
your precharge wires between the hairball and MC, and measure the on
resistance of your new MC. Take it out of the car, and wire it to a
circuit with some high amp load (headlight). Measure the voltage
drop across it while closed (it should be very nearly zero), and if
possible the current flowing. You can then calculate the resistance.
Make sure you do not have the precharge wires in the high current
path. ie, the precharge wires should be outermost wire on the main
contactor terminals.
My guess is both of your contactors are shot, or you have a problem
in the wiring between the hairball and contactor.
Mark Farver
I'll add that 1141 can happen when starting the car. It will show up
if the contactor does not turn on when the Hairball expects it to
turn on. This can be a blown contactor driver in the Hairball (which
happens the first time a large contactor is turned off without a
snubber) or it could be a contactor not making a good connection when
requested to turn on.
I'd like to comment on the suggestions for bypassing the Hairball and
turning on the main contactor directly while it is in the circuit.
NEVER DO THAT! At the least the controller will not run. At the worst
the car could take off uncontrolled with a blown controller killing
someone in the process. There is a reason the Hairball controls the
main contactor.
At 8:07 PM -0700 7/11/06, Ricky Suiter wrote:
Thanks for the replies everyone. Gets wierder now.
The contactor does have the built in coil economizer. The car was
fully working before with the Albright contactor with Otmar's
supplied diode. I got in the car and moved it up my driveway to
change the contactor out, everything was fine. I swapped out the
contactor, swapped the diode over too. I used it because the Zilla
manual says to, and even says something about the supplied diode
being compatible with the Kilovac contactors. I don't see how an
extra diode would hurt anything, though I did play with the
contactor before installing it and noticed there was very little arc
when it was disconnected (BTW, don't play with a contactor near a
computer monitor, it really messes it up).
The contactor deffinitely closes when power is applied to the
coils (even with the diode across it). I went out and disconnected
the contactor coil connection from the hairball and it's showing
about 7.5 volts when the key is turned on and no change in that
when I give it the start signal. I'm thinking something must have
happened in the hairball. I did clear the codes and try again, and
again and again, but no go.
I just want to know what the heck I messed up.
Thanks guys
Rick
It is possible that something is burned up inside the Hairball. The
7.5V with it off sounds like a ground trace may have melted from a
inadvertent brush with a power connection. In that case I would have
to have the Hairball back for repair. Be sure to use the Oregon
address below if that is the case.
There are a few handy LED's on the Hairball for diagnosing 1141 errors:
First there is the Yellow LED. It lights when there is more than 6
Volts across the precharge terminals on the Hairball. These terminals
should be wired directly to the large power terminals on the
contactor. If this LED is on when the main contactor is supposed to
be on, then the contactor is not really turning on.
Second there is the Green LED. This LED is in parallel with the
output that drives the main contactor coil. If it never turns on
during the start sequence, and you are getting only a 1141 error,
then there is a problem internal to the Hairball, probably a blown
contactor driver.
Third is the Precharge LED, this is one of the red ones and it turns
on when the Hairball is attempting to precharge the controller.
Maybe it would help if I describe a standard sequence of startup.
1) Key off: Yellow on, green off, Precharge off.
2) Key on and turned to start does this:
a: Precharge LED on,
b: less than two seconds later, Yellow off.
c: directly after Green on (with the contactor click hopefully).
d: about five seconds later Precharge off.
At this time, the controller should have green on, yellow off, red off.
If for any reason the Yellow comes back on (open contactor, noise,
etc) then the Hairball will shut down and log an error.
I hope this helps.
--
-Otmar-
914 EV, California Poppy,
http://evcl.com/914/
Cafe Electric llc.
33842 S.E. Eastgate circle
Corvallis OR 97333
(866) 860-6608 Fax and voice mail, 24 hours.
http://www.CafeElectric.com/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My creaky rear struts have started acting up again since I
temporarily raised the air pressure in the tires for when I
thought I would be taking a longer trip (I normally keep them at
35psi F and 29psi R, and I took them up to 44/34). I think it is
primarily the driver's side rear strut that is making the noise,
although it is hard to tell for sure. We swapped sides a year or
so ago since I was getting a bit of a hammering sound from the
passenger side rear strut when I went over slightly washboard-y
road surface at 25-30mph. The struts are the original
VoltsRabbit struts from 1994; the springs are newly installed
May/June 2005. We wanted to see if the sound moved.
My question in this posting has to do with how to safely jack up
the rear of a VoltsRabbit. When we had all the batteries out of
the car, we could jack it up on the middle angle iron of the rear
battery pack housing, using a piece of wood about the width of
the housing to spread out the stresses. No problem there. What
I cannot remember is whether we did this with batteries in the
car. My feeling is that it will be ok to do so since the battery
weight will be in that housing, so I really should not have any
additional stresses over the unloaded state for all that sheet
metal around the housing. My horror vision is having the rear
end of the car drop while the pack stays on top of the jack. I
don't think I can jack on the suspension tube, since it needs to
pivot to let down the struts so I can get them out of the car.
I felt comfortable doing this with another person's help, but to
do this all by myself in my apartment carport is a little
intimidating. I've virtually given up trying to take this car
into mechanics to get work done since they either don't
understand EV issues or they totally freeze up for liability
concerns (increased weight, hi-voltage etc.). I even had one guy
jerk the EV back across his parking lot because he couldn't get
the interplay between the clutch and the controller down - I'm
just tired of the equipment abuse.
Whaddya all think (especially VW Rabbit gurus)?
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Hursch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: creaky rear struts in VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.
> Unless I can keep the shock from turning, this will just spin
the
> shock. Don't have an impact gun anyways. I couldn't turn the
> nut down anymore when I tried a few days ago. Toscalito Tire
> says that means that it is bottomed out (?). Toscalito says
that
> whenever the strut or spring is replaced that the bump stop
> should be replaced (?).
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 8:58 AM
> Subject: Re: creaky rear struts in VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.
>
>
> > Chuck Hursch wrote:
> >
> > >I guess I will trying leaning into it a bit more
> >
> > Stick an impact gun on it and give it a shot or two and see
if
> it moves.
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't have the exact site I pulled numbers from with me here at the office.
I can get them tonight.
Here are some places to browse. The NREL pages have many research papers:
http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_production_delivery.html
http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/energy_analysis.html#analysis
http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/hev/performance.html
http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 11:39 am
Subject: Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
To: MIKE WILLMON <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Do you guys know of a reliable web source about the energy it
> takes to
> make hydrogen?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], MIKE WILLMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Sure you're wrong. Its not all off topic. There are some facts and
> figures discussed here which relates using hydrogen to fuel "electric"
> cars. Frankly, any technology that makes electricity to power an
> electric car is technically on topic. You may not be into educating
> or persuading the public as to the benefits of "Electric Vehicles",
> but for those who are this is important information to get right so
> they don't come out sounding like that Barthmuss guy from GM.
> >
> > I do not disagree with you though about hydrogen vehicles being a
> lost cause.
> >
> > Mike,
> > Anchorage, Ak.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Tom Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:38 am
> > Subject: Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > HEY!
> > > I may be wrong, but isn't this alot off topic?
> > >
> > > Isn't there a hydrogen list you could be posting to rather
> than clog
> > > up the electric vehicle group?
> > >
> > > Frankly, I don't care to discuss hydrogen vehicles unless
> there is a
> > > discussion of the electric motor or a battery or super cap
> involved> > in the discussion! I consider hydrogen vehicles to be
> a lost
> > > cause!... Just look at the freaking cost!!!
> > >
> > > Move along now!
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > -------------------snip-------------------
> > > EV Digest 5643
> > > >
> > > > Topics covered in this issue include:
> > > >
> > > > 1) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > 2) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > 4) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > 5) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > > by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > 7) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > > by Mike Willmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > 8) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog Reply, IMHO.
> > > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > 9) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > > by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > 10) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply
> > > > by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > > 12) Re: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > > by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > 21) RE: OT re:WKTEC GM's Reply/Blog
> > > > by Chip Gribben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
> around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Chuck,
When I jack up my EV, I go super safety, because my total weight is 6840 lbs
and the rear weight is 4630 lbs.
I first set the emergency brake and block the front wheels with a 4 by 4 cut at
a 45 degree angle that has a No. 5 grit floor sanding paper glue to them.
Next I raise the rear on one corner with a 5 ton floor jack. You could get by
with a 2.5 ton jack.
I raise it enough so I can get my heavy duty floor jacks under the frame. I
do all four corners of the EV, even if you are only working on one end. I do
not like a steep angle of a vehicle on jacks. Best to keep it all level.
I than install 12 ton hydralic jacks and continue to jack up the vehicle until
the floor jack is extended leaving three safety pin holes down into the floor
jack. I never extended it all the way.
With the floor jacks in place and lock, I also leave the two 12 ton hydralic
jack in place. I normally jack the EV about 18 to 20 inches off the pavement.
I than get on the rear bumper and jump up and down like a mad man, testing
out the jacks.
I than can use the floor jack for removing my air suspension system,
differential, etc.
One time I jack the whole car up about 3-feet and block it with bridging, which
is crisscross timber of the 8 by 8 inch size. The same method house movers
use.
Roland
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Hursch<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ev@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:58 PM
Subject: Jacking up the rear of a VoltsRabbit (WAS Re: creaky rear struts in
VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.)
My creaky rear struts have started acting up again since I
temporarily raised the air pressure in the tires for when I
thought I would be taking a longer trip (I normally keep them at
35psi F and 29psi R, and I took them up to 44/34). I think it is
primarily the driver's side rear strut that is making the noise,
although it is hard to tell for sure. We swapped sides a year or
so ago since I was getting a bit of a hammering sound from the
passenger side rear strut when I went over slightly washboard-y
road surface at 25-30mph. The struts are the original
VoltsRabbit struts from 1994; the springs are newly installed
May/June 2005. We wanted to see if the sound moved.
My question in this posting has to do with how to safely jack up
the rear of a VoltsRabbit. When we had all the batteries out of
the car, we could jack it up on the middle angle iron of the rear
battery pack housing, using a piece of wood about the width of
the housing to spread out the stresses. No problem there. What
I cannot remember is whether we did this with batteries in the
car. My feeling is that it will be ok to do so since the battery
weight will be in that housing, so I really should not have any
additional stresses over the unloaded state for all that sheet
metal around the housing. My horror vision is having the rear
end of the car drop while the pack stays on top of the jack. I
don't think I can jack on the suspension tube, since it needs to
pivot to let down the struts so I can get them out of the car.
I felt comfortable doing this with another person's help, but to
do this all by myself in my apartment carport is a little
intimidating. I've virtually given up trying to take this car
into mechanics to get work done since they either don't
understand EV issues or they totally freeze up for liability
concerns (increased weight, hi-voltage etc.). I even had one guy
jerk the EV back across his parking lot because he couldn't get
the interplay between the clutch and the controller down - I'm
just tired of the equipment abuse.
Whaddya all think (especially VW Rabbit gurus)?
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Hursch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>>
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: creaky rear struts in VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.
> Unless I can keep the shock from turning, this will just spin
the
> shock. Don't have an impact gun anyways. I couldn't turn the
> nut down anymore when I tried a few days ago. Toscalito Tire
> says that means that it is bottomed out (?). Toscalito says
that
> whenever the strut or spring is replaced that the bump stop
> should be replaced (?).
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu<mailto:ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>>
> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 8:58 AM
> Subject: Re: creaky rear struts in VoltsRabbit - slightly O.T.
>
>
> > Chuck Hursch wrote:
> >
> > >I guess I will trying leaning into it a bit more
> >
> > Stick an impact gun on it and give it a shot or two and see
if
> it moves.
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Dumb question.
Which way does the air blow on his heatsink? And Is it significant?
I have been told that blowing air onto heatsink moves more heat but
allows for a more uneven cooling and consequently pulling air off a
heatsink makes a more stable but slightly hotter source.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Well they are very perky for being doomed mike young
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Seth Rothenberg" <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Solectria Force
45 miles a day without charging would be a lead acid pack killer in
that car. 20-25 miles then immediate full recharging would work. That
car has no BMS. Therefore the battery's are doomed from the start.
There is a solectria group on yahoo for more details.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Seth Rothenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I saw Mike Young's post about the Solectria...
and I am considering it, but I have a few
questions for EVers on what I could expect....
I also have a Q or to for Solectria owners....
The ad says...
"I have been driving this car daily for most of my traveling
recently and it drives very good with a range of 40 to 50
miles between charges with conservative driving"
If a car can get 45 miles/charge,
is it reasonable or healthy for it to do this
twice a day? (Or would it kill the battery in a week :-)
My office manager said he could get me an outlet
(actually today, he backed off, said he'll look into it :-),
my trip TO work is 30 or 40 miles depending on how many
accidents there were on the Cross Bronx Distressway,
since I have the option to go via the Tappan Zee.
Home is almost always 30 miles.
Being unable to use it to commute doesn't rule it out,
but it makes an easier sales pitch to my saner half.
$45/week -> $4/week and no more $800 ICE repairs.
BTW, does it register like a regular Geo,
or does it register like a Solectria,
or a Specially Constructed?
Or is that State-Dependent?
Thanks
Seth
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Full Story compliments of the LA Weekly
story By JUDITH LEWIS Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 3:00 pm at:
http://www.laweekly.com/general/features/whos-resurrecting-the-electric-car/13975/
As passed on to ME by:
Google News Service/Google Alert for: Electric Vehicles
--
Steven S. Lough, Pres.
Seattle EV Association
6021 32nd Ave. N.E.
Seattle, WA 98115-7230
Day: 206 850-8535
Eve: 206 524-1351
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web: http://www.seattleeva.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roderick Wilde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: Chris Paine to Ride in White Zombie, Ride? Hell, DRIVE it!!
> Bob, you are allowed to carry a passenger if your car only does 13s not
12s.
> I did low twelve's with a passenger once in the "Maniac Mazda" at
Woodburn.
> It was Ryan Seacrest and we dusted off a Viper in the other lane. He will
> never forget that ride! his excitement was captured by a camera mounted in
> the car.
>
> Roderick Wilde
> "Suck Amps EV Racing"
Hi Rod;
Well, with my dead 280 lb ass on bored ,it PROBABLY would knock the 12
guyz down to 13 anyhow<g>?Aint the RR where a few hundred tons didn't really
make much differance.But it would be a fun ride EVen at 13's. We at Amtrak
don't have anything THAT fast.
Seeya on the sidelines.Or a Ride in the M. Mazda?
Bob
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Jul 12, 2006 5:09 PM
Subject: [sfeva] Fwd: Electric Vehicle Engineers Needed Immediately
--- "Jason Metzler @ Adam Jacobs"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Jason Metzler @ Adam Jacobs"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Electric Vehicle Engineers Needed
> Immediately
> Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 14:37:11 -0700
>
> Hello,
>
> I came across the Electric Auto Association website
> today and was hoping
> that you can lead me in a good direction. I am a
> technical recruiter who is
> looking for extremely talented electrical engineers
> to work for a client of
> ours who is developing a cutting edge
> high-performance electric vehicle.
> Our client is located in the San Francisco Bay Area
> and they are looking to
> hire talented electrical engineers on a full-time
> permanent basis
> immediately. They are looking for highly talented
> electrical engineers and
> test engineers who have experience in and a passion
> for electric vehicles.
>
> Do you happen to know of any professional groups or
> resources that I might
> use to find some talented engineers for our client?
>
> Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
>
>
> Jason Metzler
> Technical Recruiter
>
> Adam Jacobs Associates
> 120 Howard St., Suite 420
> San Francisco, CA 94105
> O: (415) 315-0150 ext. 226
> (800) 995-0150 ext. 226
> C: (415) 608-2158
> F: (415) 276-6061
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam around - and we
put it right into every message posted to a Yahoo Group!
http://mail.yahoo.com
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1)
Reply (via web post)
| Start a new topic
Messages | Files |
Photos | Links | Database
| Polls | Members | Calendar
You are receiving Individual Emails
Change Delivery Settings
Visit Your Group | Yahoo!
Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
New Message Search
Find the message you want faster. Visit your group to try out the
improved message search.
Share feedback on the new changes to Groups
Recent Activity
3
New Members
Visit Your Group
.
__,_._,___
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Actually on CoolFuel Roadtrip the EV Chopper was getting 60 miles per charge
pretty regularly. I believe he was running 120V system with Etek motor.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Lawrence Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 1:36 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Better range with low seat height
To all who have tried to get good range on motorcycles at freeway speeds I
think the chopper style bike has the most potential from an efficiency
perspective. With a lower seat and feet forward you offer a better angle to
windward. I noticed a Honda Shadow 750 getting over 60mpg. This rivals my
250cc Honda Helix. I know some of you don't agree with comparing MPG to
range but it works for me and I am considering a Honda Shadow conversion for
my next bike. Lawrence Rhodes......
--- End Message ---
