EV Digest 5721
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: In progress EV question
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: Soldering vs Spot welding
by "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) Re: The math for a 1000 mile pack
by Wayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: The math for a 1000 mile pack
by "Ryan Stotts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: X1 doing 11.9 1/4 mile video (was The Wrightspeed X1, a different
class of c
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: ACI Superchargers / Soneil Battery Chargers
by Ryan Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7) EV's make it to the comics
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: More on SepEx
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: EV digest 5720
by Steve Gaarder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10) RE: Zivan NG3 charger output voltage flexibility
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: 1300lbs lighter!!
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) Re: Voltage Measurement Circuit for Basic Stamp2
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: The math for a 1000 mile pack
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) Re: controlling A/C motor
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: Zillas not available?
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) Re: The math for a 1000 mile pack
by Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: ACI Superchargers / Soneil Battery Chargers
by "David Sherritze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) The 300zx is back on the road!
by Jeff Shanab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) Re: The math for a 1000 mile pack
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Preaching the EV gospel, was The math for a 1000 mile pack
by Jim Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21) Re: Zillas not available?
by "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22) RE: The math for a 1000 mile pack
by "Curtis Hollingshead" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23) Sentra Stuff.
by <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
John wrote:
> If I may follow up. How thick and of what material
> should the plates be made? I assume steel, but is
> there a specific alloy I need?
I don't know what they "should" be made of ;^>, but mine were made from
pieces of mild steel about 1/4" thick, if I recall correctly (I'm pretty
sure it was thicker than 1/8").
Remember, this crossmember is only supporting the weight of the motor
(~100-150lbs depending on the motor); it is not required to resist any
torque reaction since it is holding the motor via the clamshell bracket
(which will remain still while the motor twists within it if the tranny
is not adequately restrained against torque reaction).
> Is the tube you used for the crossmember and arms actually
> circular or is it rectangular?
The material I used was circular, just because that is what was laying
around. If you are going to purchase material specifically for this,
then square or rectangular crossection tubing would be easier to work
with perhaps more practical (in terms of attaching the clamshell bracket
and/or mounting the controller, etc. above it). If you use rectangular
tubing, you might consider mocking up the crossmember using a piece of
2x2 lumber first and then cut and fit the tubing to the appropriate
lengths & angles after.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
When you buy sample cells, they come with tabs so you can test them
out with clip leads or whatever.
When you are assembling a pack of cells, you have to weld each end of
a tab to a cell. Thus, bulk cells come with no tabs attached because
that is the OEM's job.
Bill Dube'
My question is: if the batteries have to have tabs spot welded on
them, why aren't the batteries supplied from the factory with tabs
already on them?
Other than this, these batteries are looking better all the time.
Dave
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was thinking about this as I am guilty as charged. I know 40 miles would
serve me just fine for most days, but that one day that comes along...
GUILTY.
GM and Ford make some nice little cars that are rather economical, and sell
pretty well. Yep, it is true, but they do not sell them in North America.
Why? Because they can't sell them that well, and they have a nice fat margin
selling bigger vehicles.
So how do you sell more efficient cars to the US consumer? I think the only
reason we all run around in 20 MPG vehicles rather then 10 MPG vehicles is
simply because the government forces the automakers to have a fleet average
of what 25 MPG for cars? As a result we do drive lighter and more efficient
cars then we did in the 70s.
The key to getting our fuel consumption down will be by making the fleet
average a lot more aggressive then it is now. I know the auto makers belly
ache and manage to get the average delayed or reduced each time it is
changed, but they are full of BS. If the government keeps listening to the
big three, then we will all end up in the same financial mess they are
currently in. They have the cars, they have the technology to meet those
standards now.
In the last few years automakers have given us more power with the same fuel
economy. This has sold a lot of cars. It is time to press for tighter fuel
economy as they sure can build some stupid power within the present
standards. 250+ HP minivans are the norm in the US. You know how much power
a minivan has in Europe? Probably less then half of that on average. I
wonder if you can find a new minivan in the US with less then 200 HP.
The market can change. We all used to love big, heavy cars. The little
imports looked like silly toys when they first started popping up. Now we
like smaller, lighter but more powerful vehicles.. Oh yeah, and SUVs and
Trucks too.. But comparing a modern 1/2 ton truck to a 1/2 ton truck from 20
or 30 years ago is a vast improvement in economy even though we now have
twice the power on tap.
Sorry, I'll be quiet now..
-Wayne
On 8/3/06, Death to All Spammers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm guessing 500wh/mile. So you need a 500 kwh pack. That's about 10
> times the size of a good sized pack. Whew. Even in litium that would
> be a huge pack.
>
> Mike
I agree! But how many people have an ICE that can go 1000mi between
fill-ups? I doubt a semi with both tanks full can go that far!
EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
100mi";
Then we say "here's a car that goes 100mi", and the public says "but
we might have to go farther, so we want to go as far as a tank of gas,
and be able to recharge in 5min";
As soon as we say "this car has a lithium pack and goes over 300mi,
and will charge in 4hrs", the public will say "we want to go all day
and never have to wait around for the car to charge unless we're
asleep", and they'll add "oh, and we want to do this going 80mph in a
truck with the aerodynamics of a brick".
We can blame the car companies for some things, but a public that
can't slow down but bitches about the price of gas (or commutes with
one or two people in trucks and SUVs instead of small cars because
"bigger is safer") just proves that an average IQ has as many people
below it as above it.
P.S.- My Ranger doesn't have a tonneau cover or underbelly treatment
and currently gets 3mi/kwh (from the mains), and the current pack
weighs >1600#, so using specs on the biggest Kokams
(3.7V/240Ah/5.0kg), that's 133kwh or about 400mi. Problem is the
"truck-like" suspension would kill you on a long drive!
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
cowtown wrote:
I agree! But how many people have an ICE that can go 1000mi between
fill-ups?
I agree, but the ice refuel time is not that big of a deal compared to
a pack recharge.
EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
100mi";
This is the resistance I constantly run into when vying for EV
acceptance. A high 90 something percentage of the time, a 40 mile
range EV would fit nearly every ones needs. The problem stems from
the ice owners current vehicle that has the capability to and has gone
on longer trips. They feel "threatened" and scared by the thought of
someone taking away their gas powered car and replacing it with a car
that can only go so far between the hours it has to be on a charger
before it can go again. Everyone I have spoken to about EV's is
terrified at the thought of "only" 40 miles of range.
But the idea of a 1000 mile range Lion pack in the back of an F150..
It's totally possible though right? If I had the money, I'd build one
just to show the OEM's that look, yes it is possible and yes, it can
be done(have done it).
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> I imagine that after the X1 has had a couple years to mature like your
> drag race vehicle and Johns as well that it will without a doubt be the
> EV to beat.
>
> Mike
Well, the Atom with a 245hp engine does 0-60 in 2.8-2.9 sec, depending
on shift ability, so I wonder what their 300hp version does in the
quarter. It's under $50K, which is rich for me but less than an X1.
Then you wonder "how big a tank does it have and how far can *it* go?"
Same goes for the Tesla - how does it compare to the Elise, not only
in speed, but in handling (slalom time, track times and speed, all the
C&D/MT stuff).
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi David and all,
The ACi's were mounted to a
piece of plywood with about 6 inches between them for air circulation,
because they generate so much heat.
I've been playing around with these things also - like Richard, the 3
amp versions. They do such a good job keeping the batteries in-line.
The only failures I've had have been due to overheating as they baked in
the sun while in the hatch-back area. I've cooked several units this way.
After having multiple failures and
replacements under warranty. Email from Soneil and ACI states that they do
not consider their chargers a good fit for use in EV's
While I know that electronics are specifically designed for harsh
environments, I don't understand what special techniques are employed to
make them hardy to vibration. I've torn apart the Soneil chargers, and
I don't see what would fail due to vibration. Maybe someone can explain
what fails in a vibrating environment? The basic construction is a
single layer PCB, transformer, some ICs, and several other components.
I do, however, understand why exposure to high temperatures would cause
the failures I've seen :)
-Ryan
--
- EV Source <http://www.evsource.com> -
Summer Special - Free shipping on all orders over $500!
Includes Zillas, WarP and Impulse Motors, and PFC Chargers
E-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Toll-free: 1-877-215-6781
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am not laughing. Negative message
"you have to sell your house to get an EV"
Actually maybe it will do some good, if tesla,tango,AC propulsion listen
and go for 0-60 in 8 for 30K, maybe they won't be the butt of the
comic's jokes.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
That's the point. If a tranny is designed to be used with
a motor (sepex or series, or any for that matter), no problem.
I was describing conversions where obsessed with power
people try to cover entire speed range on one gear.
Since high RPM is not available, they have to use tall
(like 4th) gear to start with so they can cruise at
70 mph and commutator does not fly apart. But then,
obviously take off on 4th gear is sluggish.
Solution? Increase motor starting torque so at the wheels
you have at least the same torque as when you take
off normally on 1st gear. If you have 3x ratio
difference between 1st and 4th gear, you must have 3x initial
torque the motor will provide. DC motors and powerful
controllers are not the issue anymore, you can get them.
But the tranny still meant to take 3x less torque from the
motor than you'd be doing, so you're 3x overloading it.
Porsche tranny might handle it all right, Geo metro might not.
That's what I'm talking about.
Just ask now many people on the list can drive at
freeway speed, don't shift, can take off as quickly as
former ICE allowed *on 1st gear*, and don't use
big motor/controller. (Big means far more torque
than AC one would require) Perhaps none.
I drive on the second gear all the time.
The torque of the motor is more but comparable to the torque
of former engine, so I know the tranny is not stressed.
2nd gear yields ~6.5k RPM which is nothing for the
AC motor.
Victor
Evan Tuer wrote:
On 8/3/06, Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You sure can build single speed vehicle with SepEx or series
would motor for that matter as well. Size it (and controller)
large enough and on a tall gear it will cover your speed range.
In practice though, the torque is so giant in this case, that
in a normal tranny not meant to take such abuse, something
will likely break. Clutch slip, or if you don't have one,
strip a few teeth off the gear, not to mention wear of the
tranny shaft bearings due to abnormal side load.
It sounds like you're taking an extreme case and applying it universally.
The most numerous road going EVs in the world (PSA ones) all have
sepex, all are single speed using a tiny custom gearbox and
differential, and not once, ever, have I heard of a transmission
problem.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, Seppo wrote:
What about having the armature and field not coordinated but controlling them
separately? You would have the accelerator pedal controlling the Zilla as
usual, and then a separate potentiometer for the field, connected to a lever
in the cabin ('gear selector'). You start with the full field current ('1st
gear'), depress the accelerator and when you start gaining speed, you push
the 'gear selector' lever to 'higher gear' (smaller field current). Like
having a continuously variable manual gearbox...
The regen would be simple. When you want regen, just pull the field lever
towards 'smaller gear', i.e. higher field current. At some point themotor
voltage will exceed the battery voltage and start pushing current intothe
battery. Some additional electronics is probably needed, but maybe adiode
backwards across the Zilla is enough?
Now that's simplicity, and appeals to my geek sidee. I'd hate to have to
teach a spouse or friend how to use it, tho. A more sophisticated version
would be to have the "normal" position of the lever let the field vary
according to the armature current, as a previous poster (sorry, I forget
who) suggested. You could lower the field current when you wanted speed,
and raise it when you wanted regen.
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006, David Dymaxion wrote:
It would be a shame to creep the car in heavy
traffic with 110 or so Amps when maybe 40 Amps or so would suffice.
Very good point. Varying the field with armature current would answer
this one too.
The other way you could do it (with a stick shift or maybe with an
automatic) is to use a contactor to directly connect both the
armature and field. It'll jerk and do a brief surge of current, but
once at idle speed use very little power. My Kostov uses about 30
Amps @ 12 Volts idling (just 360 Watts). It would waste a little, but
not much, power to idle all the time. You'd have to slip the clutch
or depend on the automatic's slip to get going. You could lessen the
starting jerk by using a resistor, and then direct connect.
I'm told the old SCT Rabbits did exactly this. They had to run the motor
at a lower voltage than optimal, however, in order to keep the idle RPM
down to a usable level.
Final thought: If your charger does enough amps, you might be able to
use it to power the field.
Great idea - are any available chargers flexible enough to do this?
cheers,
Steve Gaarder
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Chuck Hursch wrote:
> Ok, so that's (the W) likely what's going on with my K2. Without
> digging the instructions out, I recall the Italian-ese indicates
> it's an IUI charger. But during the bulk charge, on the battery
> side, depending on how discharged the pack is, it might start out
> at about 11.0 to 11.1A, and slowly droop down to 10-something
> amps before the roll-over begins on the second (U) stage.
That's not really very much variation and could simply be constant
current with the current limit changing slightly as the charger heats up
internally.
> I have
> also measured the current going up on the AC side of the charger
> during that first phase, from something like 16A to 17A or a bit
> more before the roll-over to the U stage.
During constant current operation, the output power will increase as the
battery voltage rises (output power = output current * output voltage),
and so the input power required must rise also. Since the line voltage
is fixed, the increase in input power is observed as an input in the
line current.
If the charger were operating in constant current, then the output power
would increase by about 9.1% as the battery charges from 2.2 to
2.4V/cell. If the charger started off drawing 16A from the line this
would correspond to an increase in the line current to 17.45A, which is
about what you observed.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Made a record low of 252 wh/mile tonight in the USE S10. Old record
was 260 driving very slowly. Tonight was on the freeway and all over
town. 20.1 miles range now compared to 14.4 before. Wish I had the old
pack that had 20 miles range before the dead lead pack was removed.
This pack has only 5 kwh worth of range.
I think that this truck could creep down to 200 wh/mile. It averaged
270 wh/mile for the first 10 all highway miles. So it had to push the
average down to 252 by going around 200-230 for the last 10 miles.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I hired a couple neighborhood boys to help me cart off the 1300 lbs of
> dead lead in the box. They stuffed most of it into my wagon for
> recycling and I kept 24 of the best batts. The truck is amazingly
> higher off of the ground now. Maybe a couple inches front and rear!!
> Acceleration is much better now. So I'm really motivated to make a
> modified module that will bring this nimh pack up to 312v nominal from
> the 273v that it is now. The truck should really haul butt then!!
>
> Mike
>
> 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've build very linear DC isolator without primary side
power source. Only issue it does not work
below LED threshold voltage (~1.3V or so) and
require calibration. Still, quote trivial circuit.
But I hear you. Normally the primary power is taken
from the object being measured, in this case - the battery.
So not a problem really.
Victor
Steven Ciciora wrote:
The thing I don't like about solutions like this, is
that you need an isolated power supply to power the
op-amps on both sides of the opto-isolator.
I've done something similar in the past, but using a
more "standard" dual opto-isolator. I servoed the
current through both LEDs in series, such that the
signal on one of the transistors is what I wanted, and
I _assumed_ that it is the same for both transistors.
Only one of the transistors was isolated. If it's a
dual opto-isolator, it's a pretty good assumption.
- Steven Ciciora
--- Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While optoisolation of analog signals where drifts
due to
the supply, temp and aging effects are compensated
for,
are not trivial, actually quite easy to do.
For starter, download spec sheet for HCNR-200 opto
coupler (from Digikey
web site) and look for the circuit on the page 10.
This is
the most versatile way, and 'course not the only way
to do it.
Victor
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
The ICE metality towards EV's will change quickly with fuel prices.
Even ego has it's cost limits.
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Wayne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was thinking about this as I am guilty as charged. I know 40 miles
would
> serve me just fine for most days, but that one day that comes along...
> GUILTY.
>
> GM and Ford make some nice little cars that are rather economical,
and sell
> pretty well. Yep, it is true, but they do not sell them in North
America.
> Why? Because they can't sell them that well, and they have a nice
fat margin
> selling bigger vehicles.
>
> So how do you sell more efficient cars to the US consumer? I think
the only
> reason we all run around in 20 MPG vehicles rather then 10 MPG
vehicles is
> simply because the government forces the automakers to have a fleet
average
> of what 25 MPG for cars? As a result we do drive lighter and more
efficient
> cars then we did in the 70s.
>
> The key to getting our fuel consumption down will be by making the fleet
> average a lot more aggressive then it is now. I know the auto makers
belly
> ache and manage to get the average delayed or reduced each time it is
> changed, but they are full of BS. If the government keeps listening
to the
> big three, then we will all end up in the same financial mess they are
> currently in. They have the cars, they have the technology to meet those
> standards now.
>
> In the last few years automakers have given us more power with the
same fuel
> economy. This has sold a lot of cars. It is time to press for
tighter fuel
> economy as they sure can build some stupid power within the present
> standards. 250+ HP minivans are the norm in the US. You know how
much power
> a minivan has in Europe? Probably less then half of that on average. I
> wonder if you can find a new minivan in the US with less then 200 HP.
>
> The market can change. We all used to love big, heavy cars. The little
> imports looked like silly toys when they first started popping up.
Now we
> like smaller, lighter but more powerful vehicles.. Oh yeah, and SUVs and
> Trucks too.. But comparing a modern 1/2 ton truck to a 1/2 ton truck
from 20
> or 30 years ago is a vast improvement in economy even though we now have
> twice the power on tap.
>
> Sorry, I'll be quiet now..
>
> -Wayne
>
>
>
> On 8/3/06, Death to All Spammers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm guessing 500wh/mile. So you need a 500 kwh pack. That's about 10
> > > times the size of a good sized pack. Whew. Even in litium that would
> > > be a huge pack.
> > >
> > > Mike
> >
> > I agree! But how many people have an ICE that can go 1000mi between
> > fill-ups? I doubt a semi with both tanks full can go that far!
> >
> > EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
> > most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
> > 100mi";
> >
> > Then we say "here's a car that goes 100mi", and the public says "but
> > we might have to go farther, so we want to go as far as a tank of gas,
> > and be able to recharge in 5min";
> >
> > As soon as we say "this car has a lithium pack and goes over 300mi,
> > and will charge in 4hrs", the public will say "we want to go all day
> > and never have to wait around for the car to charge unless we're
> > asleep", and they'll add "oh, and we want to do this going 80mph in a
> > truck with the aerodynamics of a brick".
> >
> > We can blame the car companies for some things, but a public that
> > can't slow down but bitches about the price of gas (or commutes with
> > one or two people in trucks and SUVs instead of small cars because
> > "bigger is safer") just proves that an average IQ has as many people
> > below it as above it.
> >
> > P.S.- My Ranger doesn't have a tonneau cover or underbelly treatment
> > and currently gets 3mi/kwh (from the mains), and the current pack
> > weighs >1600#, so using specs on the biggest Kokams
> > (3.7V/240Ah/5.0kg), that's 133kwh or about 400mi. Problem is the
> > "truck-like" suspension would kill you on a long drive!
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
If I recall, I had a solid state DC relay (you can use contactor
too). It ran continuously. Normally it has to cycle on/off
when pressure builds too much, but I never got around to
implement that. As a test, it worked from the stock pressure switch
connected in series with "on" switch on the dash.
Victor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Victor,
how did/do you control the electric motor for the A/C ?
on/off contactor or something else?
I'm looking to control the Solectria Permanent Magnet A/C motor (approx.
144 or 156 VDC) without the original controller.
Thanks, Ben
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hey all
I just had to chime in here. My turn-a-round time (or lack there of) more
often than not sucks also! I'm not happy about it, but the other choices of
higher costs, a cheaper product, or working my life away are for me even more
unappealing. Mostly (for me) it's just the time it takes to do it right. For
those who might think "how hard could it be" and would like to have a motor
build-off, say when! (to quote Tombstone) 8^P Hell I'll even spot you a
helper, hehehehe!
Anyway I felt the website bordered on slander in order to promote another
produce rather than on it's own merit! Boo to those responsible and I issue my
second "Hi-Torque Wienie" Award! What I find most often is that it always
seems the guy crying foul the loudest is usually the biggest cheat!
Just my opinion.
PS: For those concerned about pending orders, I'm pretty sure I can beat
Otmar, LMAO, hehehehe!
Cya
Jim Husted
Hi-Torque Electric
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
No need. Make standardized swappable packs as cordless tools.
You drill all day long but you don't wait for it it to recharge.
You stick in fresh battery and depleted one can charge slowly.
An EV is a big cordless tool. The second pack (and the first one
for that matter) doesn't have to be yours, it can be leased
and swapped at any "gas" station quicker than it takes to refuel
ICE. It's only a matter of establishing infrastructure.
There are no technical/engineering issues.
BTW, 500Wh/mile is about twice power consumption as average "normal".
To cover 1000 miles you'd need "only" 250kWh pack, but it is
drop dead 100%DOD at the end. Just 5% bigger pack would
give you extra 50 miles to get to the nearest swap station.
This has been discussed before. No one is interested to
implement it, people only understand dollars. No one will
do it even chocked to death from smog while gas is cheap
and available. Sometimes it's good when a govt can mandate
something [like this, or like ZEV], but it's dreaming.
We do what we can.
Victor
Ryan Stotts wrote:
cowtown wrote:
I agree! But how many people have an ICE that can go 1000mi between
fill-ups?
I agree, but the ice refuel time is not that big of a deal compared to
a pack recharge.
EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
100mi";
This is the resistance I constantly run into when vying for EV
acceptance. A high 90 something percentage of the time, a 40 mile
range EV would fit nearly every ones needs. The problem stems from
the ice owners current vehicle that has the capability to and has gone
on longer trips. They feel "threatened" and scared by the thought of
someone taking away their gas powered car and replacing it with a car
that can only go so far between the hours it has to be on a charger
before it can go again. Everyone I have spoken to about EV's is
terrified at the thought of "only" 40 miles of range.
But the idea of a 1000 mile range Lion pack in the back of an F150..
It's totally possible though right? If I had the money, I'd build one
just to show the OEM's that look, yes it is possible and yes, it can
be done(have done it).
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
In one day, I had 6 out of 10 go bad.
The vehicle was not moving (although it had been driven that morning), it
was a 90 + degree day with high humidity, but no rain.
So I suspected the same thing, that they could not cool themselves in the
high temp and high humidity and burned out.
But apparently Soneil has decided that with my high failure rate is
vibration related.
At any rate, after I receive the refund I plan to go with DELTRAN Power
Chargers. They are only 5 A chargers and they cost a little more but they
are waterproof and built for some vibration.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Ryan Bohm
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 7:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: ACI Superchargers / Soneil Battery Chargers
Hi David and all,
> The ACi's were mounted to a
> piece of plywood with about 6 inches between them for air circulation,
> because they generate so much heat.
I've been playing around with these things also - like Richard, the 3
amp versions. They do such a good job keeping the batteries in-line.
The only failures I've had have been due to overheating as they baked in
the sun while in the hatch-back area. I've cooked several units this way.
> After having multiple failures and
> replacements under warranty. Email from Soneil and ACI states that they do
> not consider their chargers a good fit for use in EV's
>
While I know that electronics are specifically designed for harsh
environments, I don't understand what special techniques are employed to
make them hardy to vibration. I've torn apart the Soneil chargers, and
I don't see what would fail due to vibration. Maybe someone can explain
what fails in a vibrating environment? The basic construction is a
single layer PCB, transformer, some ICs, and several other components.
I do, however, understand why exposure to high temperatures would cause
the failures I've seen :)
-Ryan
--
- EV Source <http://www.evsource.com> -
Summer Special - Free shipping on all orders over $500!
Includes Zillas, WarP and Impulse Motors, and PFC Chargers
E-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Toll-free: 1-877-215-6781
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks to a quick repair by Otmar (I neglected the part of the
instructions about keeping it dry and smoked the internal gate drive)
and me finally re-arranging things under the hood, the 300zx returns to
daily service tomorrow. I took it for a short drive and it is on the
charger now, I forgot what a dream it is to drive that thing. Just in
time for the opening of Who Killed The Electric car here in Fresno.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
What kind of vehicles are you referring to Victor that are at 250wh/mile?
Mike
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Victor Tikhonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> No need. Make standardized swappable packs as cordless tools.
> You drill all day long but you don't wait for it it to recharge.
> You stick in fresh battery and depleted one can charge slowly.
>
> An EV is a big cordless tool. The second pack (and the first one
> for that matter) doesn't have to be yours, it can be leased
> and swapped at any "gas" station quicker than it takes to refuel
> ICE. It's only a matter of establishing infrastructure.
> There are no technical/engineering issues.
>
> BTW, 500Wh/mile is about twice power consumption as average "normal".
>
> To cover 1000 miles you'd need "only" 250kWh pack, but it is
> drop dead 100%DOD at the end. Just 5% bigger pack would
> give you extra 50 miles to get to the nearest swap station.
>
> This has been discussed before. No one is interested to
> implement it, people only understand dollars. No one will
> do it even chocked to death from smog while gas is cheap
> and available. Sometimes it's good when a govt can mandate
> something [like this, or like ZEV], but it's dreaming.
>
> We do what we can.
>
> Victor
>
>
> Ryan Stotts wrote:
> > cowtown wrote:
> >
> >> I agree! But how many people have an ICE that can go 1000mi between
> >> fill-ups?
> >
> >
> > I agree, but the ice refuel time is not that big of a deal compared to
> > a pack recharge.
> >
> >
> >> EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
> >> most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
> >> 100mi";
> >
> >
> > This is the resistance I constantly run into when vying for EV
> > acceptance. A high 90 something percentage of the time, a 40 mile
> > range EV would fit nearly every ones needs. The problem stems from
> > the ice owners current vehicle that has the capability to and has gone
> > on longer trips. They feel "threatened" and scared by the thought of
> > someone taking away their gas powered car and replacing it with a car
> > that can only go so far between the hours it has to be on a charger
> > before it can go again. Everyone I have spoken to about EV's is
> > terrified at the thought of "only" 40 miles of range.
> >
> > But the idea of a 1000 mile range Lion pack in the back of an F150..
> > It's totally possible though right? If I had the money, I'd build one
> > just to show the OEM's that look, yes it is possible and yes, it can
> > be done(have done it).
> >
> >
> >
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Ryan Stotts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
> most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
> 100mi";
This is the resistance I constantly run into when vying for EV
acceptance. <snip>Everyone I have spoken to about EV's is
terrified at the thought of "only" 40 miles of range.
Hey Ryan and all
When I run into this I counter with, 90% of their driving is short single
passenger commutes to work or store, and everyone I know has two cars! I've
found this usually shuts them down (maybe even think).
For the maintenance foes I compare them to the servicing needed by ICE. I've
always found it funny how people could be so worried about brush wear and never
bat at oil changes, etc.
For the true EV haters who are still squirming and denounce how slow they
are, I simply break out a WZ video, which still today gives me an EV grin just
watching 8^ )
Sadly for me it is the cost of a conversion that has kept me from becoming an
EV'er. Being I can even supply my own motor makes it a true bitch. Call me
vain but as Owner of Hi-Torque Electric I feel EVen my first EV just can't be a
dog, lmao 8^P Ohhh to win the lotto, I'd buy Otmar a house and say build me a
Zilla 3K, LMAO! Of course I'd have to buy Wayland a house and say build me an
EV then, hehehe!
Had fun
Cya
Jim Husted
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
starting at 1ยข/min.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: Zillas not available?
> Hey all
>
> I just had to chime in here. My turn-a-round time (or lack there of)
more often than not sucks also! I'm not happy about it, but the other
choices of higher costs, a cheaper product, or working my life away are for
me even more unappealing. Mostly (for me) it's just the time it takes to do
it right. For those who might think "how hard could it be" and would like
to have a motor build-off, say when! (to quote Tombstone) 8^P Hell I'll
even spot you a helper, hehehehe!
>
> Anyway I felt the website bordered on slander in order to promote
another produce rather than on it's own merit! Boo to those responsible and
I issue my second "Hi-Torque Wienie" Award! What I find most often is that
it always seems the guy crying foul the loudest is usually the biggest
cheat!
> Just my opinion.
>
> PS: For those concerned about pending orders, I'm pretty sure I can beat
Otmar, LMAO, hehehehe!
> Cya
> Jim Husted
> Hi-Torque Electric
> Hey Jim!?
Anybody ELSE stepped to the plate and ordered a Siamese 8, 9 or 11 or
(Gasp) 13!?Like if you are building a racing trackless trolley.All that free
power just hanging around in Seattle, Vancouver and SF. What a waste!
Bob
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello.
My EV ('93 Toyota p/u) uses 24 Trojan T-145s (144V), and has a range of
50mi.
I would love to reduce the weight as the batteries alone weigh 1700+lbs.
Does anyone have any suggestions for a maintenance-free, light weight
battery solution with reasonable cost?
I'd like to eliminate watering the batteries, and not have to worry about
hydrogen offgassing, and if able to reduce the weight of my vehicle I could
increase my range significantly.
Also my acceleration sucks. I'm usually passed by at least 6 or 7 vehicles
before I can get up to speed in traffic.
Is it better to hammer the pedal, draw more amps at first to get up to
speed, or take 'er easy and baby it up to speed taking much longer?
I'm running a Curtis controller, and ADC 9" motor, that I thought should be
able to have my EV screaming down the road....? So either something is off,
or the weight in the bed of the truck is holding me back.
Not sure how the big boys are able to achieve the tire smoking power they
do.
Suggestions/thoughts?
Many thanks.
Curtis.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Victor Tikhonov
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: The math for a 1000 mile pack
No need. Make standardized swappable packs as cordless tools.
You drill all day long but you don't wait for it it to recharge.
You stick in fresh battery and depleted one can charge slowly.
An EV is a big cordless tool. The second pack (and the first one
for that matter) doesn't have to be yours, it can be leased
and swapped at any "gas" station quicker than it takes to refuel
ICE. It's only a matter of establishing infrastructure.
There are no technical/engineering issues.
BTW, 500Wh/mile is about twice power consumption as average "normal".
To cover 1000 miles you'd need "only" 250kWh pack, but it is
drop dead 100%DOD at the end. Just 5% bigger pack would
give you extra 50 miles to get to the nearest swap station.
This has been discussed before. No one is interested to
implement it, people only understand dollars. No one will
do it even chocked to death from smog while gas is cheap
and available. Sometimes it's good when a govt can mandate
something [like this, or like ZEV], but it's dreaming.
We do what we can.
Victor
Ryan Stotts wrote:
> cowtown wrote:
>
>> I agree! But how many people have an ICE that can go 1000mi between
>> fill-ups?
>
>
> I agree, but the ice refuel time is not that big of a deal compared to
> a pack recharge.
>
>
>> EVers say "we can give you a car that goes 40mi, which is more than
>> most people go in a day", and the public says "maybe if it could go
>> 100mi";
>
>
> This is the resistance I constantly run into when vying for EV
> acceptance. A high 90 something percentage of the time, a 40 mile
> range EV would fit nearly every ones needs. The problem stems from
> the ice owners current vehicle that has the capability to and has gone
> on longer trips. They feel "threatened" and scared by the thought of
> someone taking away their gas powered car and replacing it with a car
> that can only go so far between the hours it has to be on a charger
> before it can go again. Everyone I have spoken to about EV's is
> terrified at the thought of "only" 40 miles of range.
>
> But the idea of a 1000 mile range Lion pack in the back of an F150..
> It's totally possible though right? If I had the money, I'd build one
> just to show the OEM's that look, yes it is possible and yes, it can
> be done(have done it).
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi EVerybody;
A sort of progress report with the 87 Sentra I'm rebuilding. I got ALL the
batteries loaded yesterday. They EVen fit, after grinding away part of my
wooden battery box cover in back. Oh they look so sweet, nestling there between
the frame rails, ten of them. Sorta look like my Rabbit setup, if ya met my
Rabbit in Joliet.All cables are routed iunderneith along the hump in the
moddle, whatEVer ya call that? A Vestigial left over from the driveshaft daze?
Anyhow it is a nice cable run thing, you can hide them up there and never
scrape them off if you go off roading, ether by intension or mistake! THIS time
the batteries are sealed in a BOX in the trunk, I can carry stuff back there no
short circuses!No batteries or HV cables in the pass. cabin.
I fired up the cute little K and W BC -20 charger, car is 90 volts worth of
T 145's. Ten in back, 5 up front. I hooked up a male plug behind the gas filler
cap, where my OTHER "boycot OPEC" sticker will go, "Use Electric Fuel". Of
course I have, still my" The Future is Electric" tag, to put on front. but
first things first.
!. How high will the charged bat. pack go? About 110 volts fully
charged?Should I charge the hell out of it THEN set the K and W for 0 amps or
so. It has an AMP. and Volt setting. Anything special about setting that?The
batteries have had maintenance charging since getting home from Joliet, so they
are a tad unbalanced. Letting them cook about 4 amps tonite.EVerybody has had
water, to top them off.Was load banking some the other day, with a nicrome
resister, I was helping Global warming@ 18 volts about 80 amps. They just
poured their hearts out, amps wise out dropping to about 17 volts for over an
hour and a half, enough to do a cookouyt on that wire grid! Gotta build a
better tester, get some trolley car starting grids, they are nice and flat,
could do dogs an' burgers nice! Wanna build a quick charge setup for my next
visit to the Trolley Museum, pole, hooked on top BIG ass allagater clip to hook
to the rail, the other to the RR overhead!Think 300-400-500 amps!! Madman!
, eat yur heart out! And if I went to Long Island they, the LI RR has lottsa
3rd rails just lying around, for the taking! They are about 700 volts and all
the amps you could EVer dream of! Hellovs drop from 700 to 90 or 120 volts,
wityh cheery, glowing resisters.Back in the old daze Trolley maintenance folks
used at night a cluster of 5 120 volt large light bulbs in series, on a pole,
ya hooked it on the overhead and grounded to the trak with a big clip lead.We
called it "The Electric Sun" It WAS an origional, came with a work car the
museum accquired. If you are fairly observent in yur next subway ride you see
these 5 bulb clusters all around in the tunnels. And the old Subway cars. The
old subway cars had 5 paddle fans on the ceiling. If you got all your buddies
to grab, say, 4 of them, the 5th one will go like HELL!bYou can hang on and get
a whirl of a ride as that poor fan is seeing ALL the 600 volts! see the stuff
you could do in your deformative years , growing up in!
NYC<G>?Harmless, not like todaze people who have shootouts or try to
derail the train. Trains are easy to derail IF you know how! Most people DON'T
so I never was derailed in my Amtrak Pilot years! There were times I fely SURE
we wern't gunna plow through a compact car size pile of debris on the track.
Like your HO train, there is that silly little rim on the inside of the wheel
that keeps the damn thing on the trak, and steers, too! .Inch and a
quarter, thought ya would never ask.
Meanwhile, back in the garage;
Putting the Curtis back in for now. It is easier to just BUILD yur own
conversion than reverse engineering somebody elses!!! As I redecorated the
engine room, gotta set the Curtis up on a nice chunk of finned heatsink I
picked up at the Dump, and tablesawed to size. When ya saw aluminum on yur
table saw WEAR GOGGLES OR GLASSES! That shit flies!
Other loose end: A DC to dc converter? Any ideas for a 90 volt in 13 or so
out. Hate going back to a separate charger and long periods of electrical
twilite with out a DC to dc. I haven't followed the DC to dc thread, of late.
Iota? Sevcon?
I'm down to the wire. Hah dozens of them, hanging around. The vacuum pump
is still hanging on, I'll see how THAT works when I get a 12 volt accessery
battery plumbed in.I have the shaft had put on the comm end of the motor IF i
go that route. Gees It'll be nice to be drivin' electric again!Well ALL
electric as I had to " rough" it in a Prius, in the mean time. Gotta LOVE the
Toyota AC in these Global Warming years! It is nice but you still are buying
GAS!. I don't like supporting the Gas monopoly.
Seeya
Bob
--- End Message ---
