EV Digest 6009
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by "Death to All Spammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2) RE: lee's emeter companion?
by "Roger Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3) RE: REVA (not) in Australia
by "Mark Fowler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4) Re: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
by Jack Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7) Re: 9Electric Progress Report -- Ring Roller
by "Rush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by Cory Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10) Re: lee's emeter companion?
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11) Re: my head feels like a frisbee
by "Mark McCurdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12) 42 volts + boost?
by mike golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13) Re: 42 volts + boost?
by Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14) RE: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
by "Joe Plumer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15) Re: #22
by David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16) RE: Electricvette.com homebuilt electric trike in popular science this
month
by "Don Cameron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17) RE: REVA (not) in Australia
by "Tim Ireland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18) Re: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
by "Mike Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19) RE: Electricvette.com homebuilt electric trike in popular science this
month
by Mike Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20) Re: DWP has 74 RAV4-EV lease returns
by Kenneth Dove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Begin Message ---
> Without regen and during driving the gauge should never move
> upwards though, it can move down at different speeds dependent
> on the way you are driving.
>
The Ranger's "fuel guage" is as accurate as an ICE version, and never
rises while driving, but the DTE (distance to empty) guage is better,
and will actually go up if I dramatically change my driving style from
high speed to low speed if I run the slower speed for long enough to
let the computer recalculate remaining range (not stop and go low
speed, though, even with a little regen thrown in). It is a lead-acid
pack, so any meter without Peukert's correction would be less useful,
probably moreso for the average newbie EV driver. Is it hard to add it?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Cor van de Water wrote:
> Without regen and during driving the gauge should never move
> upwards though, it can move down at different speeds dependent
> on the way you are driving.
I believe you are wrong.
Consider the following example:
After driving some distance on the freeway I have consumed X kWh and my
fuel guage indicates 1/2 full because at that rate of consumption my
Peukert corrected capacity is 2X.
I then exit the freeway and travel on surface streets at a much reduced
speed and rate of consumption. The Peukert-corrected capacity of my
pack at this reduced rate of consumption is 3X. The fuel guage must
therefore move upwards to a reading of about 2/3 to accurately reflect
that I have 2/3 of my capacity remaining at this new rate of
consumption.
Not only does my fuel guage drop more slowly at the lower rate of
consumption (same as for an ICE), but the percentage of available energy
remaining also increases, so the guage really should increase to reflect
this. I suppose one could have the SW prevent the meter from increasing
and instead have it 'stick' on 1/2 until the remaining capacity at the
lower rate of consumption is once again 1/2 of that available, however,
I think this would make the guage less useful.
Cheers,
Roger.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I just spoke to Tom at DOTARS
http://www.dotars.gov.au/utilities/contact.aspx
He's going to find out what they actually said to Mr Ferraretto about
the Reva and give me a call tomorrow.
Let's see what happens...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Massey
> Sent: Thursday, 12 October 2006 1:49 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: REVA (not) in Australia
>
>
> At 01:13 PM 12/10/06 +1000, Mark wrote:
> >I don't get the crushing bit.
> >
> >The three articles that came up on Google News when I asked
> about "Reva
> >Australia" all mentioned that the car would have to be exported or
> >crushed.
> G'day Mark, and All
>
> It wouldn't be the first time our local rag got it wrong,
> but, page 82 of
> Launceston Examiner (Thursday October 12, 2006)
>
> ================
>
> Title: Electric car off the roads
> CANBERRA - Bureaucracy is denying Australian motorists the
> chance to drive
> electric, Labor says.
> The Reva electric car has been imported from India by an
> Adelaide company,
> but must be either crushed or exported next month under a
> ruling from the
> Department of Transport and Regional Services.
> Federal Roads Minister Jim Lloyd said the Reva did not meet
> Australian
> safety standards and could not be run on Australian roads.
> Opposition transport spokesman Kerry O'Brien said the Reva,
> built for urban
> commuting, should not have to stand up to the same safety
> standards of open
> road vehicles capable of doing 200kmh.
> "restricted to low speeds, quadricycles won't be for
> everyone, but have the
> potential for short trips or commuting to work at low cost
> with a minimum
> impact on the environment" Senator O'Brien said."But the
> Howard Government
> is saying the Reva has to be measured against the same standards as
> petrol-powered cars such as the Commodore or Falcon, weighing
> four times as
> much and capable of speeds well in excess of the legal limits."
>
> ================
>
> That's all I know.
>
> Regards
>
> [Technik] James
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
As discussed before the Optima isn't really 45Ah because at 1C rate and
50% DOD, it is more like 24Ah useable capacity.
The IB9000 can do 100% DOD at 1C rate. So a more direct comparison is a
30 cell pack (27Ah) at 13lbs (cells only, add wt for housing,etc), that
looks like 1/3 the weight of the Optima.
I've been testing the cells.
The IB9000 cells can do 10C (90amp) continuous discharges, and 1C (9amp)
charges (at least). Not sure where you get 50A and 3.6A charge.
They will heat up at 90amps after a short while, but they still deliver
the juice. They will deliver 250amps with significant voltage sag (and
probably with some damage too), but maybe for an 11-second blast it'll
survive for the next round.
<smart_ass>
Imagine that, a little toy D-cell doing 250amps, maybe those R/C guys
know something others don't
</smart_ass>
Jack
Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
I goofed on the weight & ah of their pack.
But, by referring to capacity of Optima battery, you could get (in theory)
a 50-cell pack (10s x 5p config) with 12V 45Ah at estimated weight ~10Kg (22
pounds). Given a careful housing design, this pack could be discharged at
50A continuously, and be recharged at 3.6A per 10-cell sub-group.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 8:11 AM
Subject: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
3.85809 is the weight of one string( each cell is 175 gram) at 12v
equaling
9ah. Just multiply by the ah you need. It would be in units of 9ah. So
an
Optima sized pack would be around 23 pounds & 54 ah. 60 batteries. 20
batteries or about 8 pounds for a BB 17 ah sized battery that is 18ah for
the d cells. At 5 dollars per cell that is 300 per battery. At 10
dollars
per cell that is 600 dollars or what you'd spend for a used Panasonic NiMh
from a Rav4. Lawrence Rhodes.....
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I disagree. From my interpretation of Peukert's, there are 2 ways of
viewing it.
The simplest description says that usable capacity goes down when
current goes up. However, what it does when current varies is usually
not well described.
As a second interpretation, the same equation can be restated to say "a
battery at X% State of Charge can supply up to Y amps". I believe this
is a more useful way of reading the equation, especially for an EV. The
capacity is still present. It reveals the fundamental problem of
calculating range via Peukert's. You must know what current you will
need as capacity is used to determine when the battery is depleted.
Thus effective capacity as predicted by Peukert's will have to change if
you are using the average current consumed over the last 1-20 minutes or
whatever as the input for Peukert's. Thus driving at lower levels of
current consumption should show an increase in remaining capacity.
It's also important to note that the history of current consumed carries
no guarantee of how much current will be needed in the future! If a
person drives at an average of Y amps down to X% SOC, Peukert's might
report 40 amp-hrs/20 minutes/10 miles left, but you might need 2*Y amps
to do the last leg on an uphill slope or on the highway at a higher
speed. If past current consumption level cannot accurately predict what
current is needed in the future, then Peukert's cannot accurately
predict remaining capacity & range.
Danny
Cor van de Water wrote:
There is indeed a big distinction between a gas car's
fuel gauge and an EV fuel gauge in that when you have regen
and you descend a long hill, your gauge should move upward
as you are putting more energy back into your pack, so the
available energy increases.
Without regen and during driving the gauge should never move
upwards though, it can move down at different speeds dependent
on the way you are driving.
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For all the talk about the manufacturers not knowing how to build EVs. A lot
of this could be put to rest if you owned one for several years and drove
it. The Ranger and S-10 both have very accurate SOC gauges. The Ford is about
right to the mile of what you have left. It seems to calculate over a period
of several days and readjust if your driving conditions or battery changes.
Both will be thrown off with bad batteries but at least your made aware most
of the time before you are stranded. With only a Ah gauge you would not know
this until the controller puts you in limp mode.
Don
In a message dated 10/11/2006 11:05:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Without regen and during driving the gauge should never move
> upwards though, it can move down at different speeds dependent
> on the way you are driving.
>
The Ranger's "fuel guage" is as accurate as an ICE version, and never
rises while driving, but the DTE (distance to empty) guage is better,
and will actually go up if I dramatically change my driving style from
high speed to low speed if I run the slower speed for long enough to
let the computer recalculate remaining range (not stop and go low
speed, though, even with a little regen thrown in). It is a lead-acid
pack, so any meter without Peukert's correction would be less useful,
probably moreso for the average newbie EV driver. Is it hard to add it?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David,
Very, very nice...
Rush
Tucson AZ
www.ironandwood.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Dymaxion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 6:06 PM
Subject: 9Electric Progress Report -- Ring Roller
> I'm definitely taking the scenic route on my conversion. Instead of just
> buying an adaptor, I bought a lathe/mill and welder, and have been learning
> to use them. I needed to roll a strip of steel into a hoop for my spacer. A
> friend rolled one for me, but because of his ring roller's design, it warped
> it. So I decided to build my own ring roller. It was a great experience, I
> learned alot, and it actually works! The first job I did on it was to gently
> curve roll bar pads to fit curved fenderwells (for another car, not the
> 9Electric). Soon it will be used to make my motor adaptor spacer.
>
> http://9electric.evforge.net/Tools/ringroller/
>
> Thinking EV conversion businesswise for a moment, a tool like this could be a
> step towards making adaptors more inexpensively.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Why not have (arbitrarily) 3 mileage gauges at 25 mph, 40 mph, and 60 mph?
It addresses almost all the issues without requiring the driver to
understand anything about batteries. If I'm ten miles from home and the
gauges read 14 miles, 11 miles, and 8 miles (respectively) I can easily
interpret that driving 45 mph will get me home. Temperature
compensation, internal resistance, and Peukert's factor are all in
software. Driving habits can be learned (add a multiplicative factor
based on predicted versus actual distance).
Stop-and-go traffic is the only thing not predicted by this, but that
could be learned for each speed range. In my experience, you either got
a lot of it in one area or you don't.
I'm building a system with this.
Cory Cross
Roger Stockton wrote:
>Victor Tikhonov wrote:
>
>
>
>>So your average (over many days if you will) driving
>>pattern calls for 200Wh consumption in mixed freeway
>>and slow speed driving. Thus this is the size of your
>>fuel tank. YEs it will be smaller if you suddenly
>>decide to run on freeway all day long, but a) it is
>>out of ordinary, and b) you *know* you won't have as
>>many Wh available as usual if you do that.
>>
>>
>
>Ah, but that is the point, I think: the average person will not
>understand that the size of their EV's tank varies depending on their
>driving habits, and even if they do, they will not know by how much.
>This variation is, however, something that software in a meter can
>easily compute.
>
>You've assumed an example to illustrate a situation where Peukert
>correction may provide little benefit, however, I think the important
>thing to note is that the *worst* case is that including the correction
>provides little benefit in certain situations, but in many other
>situations the correction will improve the accuracy/usefulness of the
>guage. At no point does including it make the guage *less* useful.
>
>
>
>>>if incorporating a Peukert correction into the
>>>*fuel guage* display can help to make the size of my
>>>tank more nearly constant then the usefulness of this
>>>guage truly does approach that of the ICE fuel guage.
>>>
>>>
>>No, it won't make it constant because it isn't constant.
>>It will only visualize its shrinkage/expansion as you average
>>(per 4 min I think) consumption changes.
>>
>>
>
>I think you misunderstood me. It will not make the actual capacity of
>the battery constant, but it will make the apparent size of the fuel
>tank, as indicated by the fuel guage, more nearly constant.
>
>I think the usefulness of a vehicle's fuel guage comes from the fact
>that while it may drop more rapidly when you consume energy/fuel at a
>faster rate, in the ICE case, when the guage indicates 1/2, you can look
>at how far you have travelled and know that you can go about the same
>distance more before running out of energy/fuel. This is the behaviour
>that an EV fuel guage should be striving to provide.
>
>You are correct in observing that in order for the EV guage to correct
>the energy remaining indication based on the consumption rate, it must
>first observe the rate of consumption over some interval. The 4 minute
>window may be referring to [one of] the interval[s] you can configure
>the E-Meter for, but this does not mean it is the only, or the optimal,
>window that all fuel guages must use.
>
>A useful feature would be for the guage to 'learn'/remember the average
>consumption over the last 1 (or N) trips and use that value to base its
>initial caapcity remaining estimate on when you start the next trip,
>until it has a chance to observe the actual consumption rate for this
>[portion of this] trip.
>
>It might also be useful to address the 'shrinking/expanding' fuel tank
>effect by having the guage provide both at 'miles remaining to empty'
>indication that is updated over relatively short intervals, while the
>fuel guage itself updates more slowly over longer intervals. Or, have
>the software control the rate at which the fuel tank size varies
>(perhaps allowing for rapid decreases, but slower increases) to make the
>variation less dramatic.
>
>While the fact that your EV's fuel guage might go *upwards* while you
>are driving as a result of pulling off the freeway onto surface streets
>is completely unlike an ICE's fuel guage behaviour, I would suggest this
>is completely acceptable and appropriate behaviour provided the guage
>accurately reflects the energy remaining while I'm on the freeway as
>well as when I am on surface streets.
>
>
>
>
>>>As for Peukert only being useful/applicable to PbA, this
>>>doesn't mean it shouldn't be supported by the meter's
>>>software
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>I agree with that, except that if it cost more because of
>>amortization of the software development time, I'd rather
>>not to pay for something I won't be using.
>>
>>
>
>Well, just how many of your eVision guages do you *personally* plan to
>buy from yourself? ;^>
>
>If you intend to sell it to *others*, then what is more important is
>what *they* will be using. How many Brusa Ah counters (no Peukert) have
>you sold to EVer's compared to how many Evers have bought E-Meters
>(includes Peukert and a fuel guage display in addition to uncompensated
>Ah/Wh counting)?
>
>(Please note that I am not trying to tell you what features you should
>include in your product; I am suggesting that Peukert compensation is a
>useful feature for an EV fuel guage, whether yours or someone else's.)
>
>Cheers,
>
>Roger.
>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
With just a Ah gauge you do this in your head. I had a Solectria with 18,000
miles on the original batteries. During the winter 15 to 20 mile range was
tops. You had to think and watch the Ah and know what you could do. If you
were not an EV driver you would have no idea but most on this list would.
Personally I would like to have both a Ah gauge and a SOC such as are in the
factory vehicles.
I am sure someday it will use a GPS and your directions and tell you if you
can make it. The temp hills and speed will all be figured out for you.
Don
In a message dated 10/11/2006 11:37:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time, crc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why not have (arbitrarily) 3 mileage gauges at 25 mph, 40 mph, and 60 mph?
It addresses almost all the issues without requiring the driver to
understand anything about batteries. If I'm ten miles from home and the
gauges read 14 miles, 11 miles, and 8 miles (respectively) I can easily
interpret that driving 45 mph will get me home. Temperature
compensation, internal resistance, and Peukert's factor are all in
software. Driving habits can be learned (add a multiplicative factor
based on predicted versus actual distance).
Stop-and-go traffic is the only thing not predicted by this, but that
could be learned for each speed range. In my experience, you either got
a lot of it in one area or you don't.
I'm building a system with this.
Cory Cross
Roger Stockton wrote:
>Victor Tikhonov wrote:
>
>
>
>>So your average (over many days if you will) driving
>>pattern calls for 200Wh consumption in mixed freeway
>>and slow speed driving. Thus this is the size of your
>>fuel tank. YEs it will be smaller if you suddenly
>>decide to run on freeway all day long, but a) it is
>>out of ordinary, and b) you *know* you won't have as
>>many Wh available as usual if you do that.
>>
>>
>
>Ah, but that is the point, I think: the average person will not
>understand that the size of their EV's tank varies depending on their
>driving habits, and even if they do, they will not know by how much.
>This variation is, however, something that software in a meter can
>easily compute.
>
>You've assumed an example to illustrate a situation where Peukert
>correction may provide little benefit, however, I think the important
>thing to note is that the *worst* case is that including the correction
>provides little benefit in certain situations, but in many other
>situations the correction will improve the accuracy/usefulness of the
>guage. At no point does including it make the guage *less* useful.
>
>
>
>>>if incorporating a Peukert correction into the
>>>*fuel guage* display can help to make the size of my
>>>tank more nearly constant then the usefulness of this
>>>guage truly does approach that of the ICE fuel guage.
>>>
>>>
>>No, it won't make it constant because it isn't constant.
>>It will only visualize its shrinkage/expansion as you average
>>(per 4 min I think) consumption changes.
>>
>>
>
>I think you misunderstood me. It will not make the actual capacity of
>the battery constant, but it will make the apparent size of the fuel
>tank, as indicated by the fuel guage, more nearly constant.
>
>I think the usefulness of a vehicle's fuel guage comes from the fact
>that while it may drop more rapidly when you consume energy/fuel at a
>faster rate, in the ICE case, when the guage indicates 1/2, you can look
>at how far you have travelled and know that you can go about the same
>distance more before running out of energy/fuel. This is the behaviour
>that an EV fuel guage should be striving to provide.
>
>You are correct in observing that in order for the EV guage to correct
>the energy remaining indication based on the consumption rate, it must
>first observe the rate of consumption over some interval. The 4 minute
>window may be referring to [one of] the interval[s] you can configure
>the E-Meter for, but this does not mean it is the only, or the optimal,
>window that all fuel guages must use.
>
>A useful feature would be for the guage to 'learn'/remember the average
>consumption over the last 1 (or N) trips and use that value to base its
>initial caapcity remaining estimate on when you start the next trip,
>until it has a chance to observe the actual consumption rate for this
>[portion of this] trip.
>
>It might also be useful to address the 'shrinking/expanding' fuel tank
>effect by having the guage provide both at 'miles remaining to empty'
>indication that is updated over relatively short intervals, while the
>fuel guage itself updates more slowly over longer intervals. Or, have
>the software control the rate at which the fuel tank size varies
>(perhaps allowing for rapid decreases, but slower increases) to make the
>variation less dramatic.
>
>While the fact that your EV's fuel guage might go *upwards* while you
>are driving as a result of pulling off the freeway onto surface streets
>is completely unlike an ICE's fuel guage behaviour, I would suggest this
>is completely acceptable and appropriate behaviour provided the guage
>accurately reflects the energy remaining while I'm on the freeway as
>well as when I am on surface streets.
>
>
>
>
>>>As for Peukert only being useful/applicable to PbA, this
>>>doesn't mean it shouldn't be supported by the meter's
>>>software
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Does not address incline and required acceleration issues, which may be
just as important.
The current required to maintain 40 mph on level ground is also not
constant. It will change with air temp, tire inflation, bearing
condition, and also battery voltage. If it takes 10KW to run the motor,
a colder or older battery which produces a lower voltage will have to
put out more amps to produce 10KW.
Danny
Cory Cross wrote:
Why not have (arbitrarily) 3 mileage gauges at 25 mph, 40 mph, and 60 mph?
It addresses almost all the issues without requiring the driver to
understand anything about batteries. If I'm ten miles from home and the
gauges read 14 miles, 11 miles, and 8 miles (respectively) I can easily
interpret that driving 45 mph will get me home. Temperature
compensation, internal resistance, and Peukert's factor are all in
software. Driving habits can be learned (add a multiplicative factor
based on predicted versus actual distance).
Stop-and-go traffic is the only thing not predicted by this, but that
could be learned for each speed range. In my experience, you either got
a lot of it in one area or you don't.
I'm building a system with this.
Cory Cross
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
spinning headache? hate those
(insensitive remark following)
hope you don't play tag with your dog
HA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dmitri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 10:01 PM
Subject: my head feels like a frisbee
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I was wondering for safety sake if I could design a
battery system on 42 volts?
Supposedly 42volts DC won't kill you?
So if had two banks each consisting of either 7 6volts
PbA or 5 8volts.
Then I'd use some heavy duty diodes to make the boost
"voltage doubler"
Has anyone else done this. I was wondering for
liability it might be better if the voltage was lower.
Thanks
Michael Golub
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For an EV like a car, the power levels involved already require
incredibly high currents even with batteries in the 100V range.
The high current levels create significant difficulties with wire and
interconnect resistance. Halving the pack voltage requires doubling the
current, which presents additional problems. It will increase resistive
heating of wires/terminals by a factor of 4. Also losing 5v off a 100v
pack due to resistive voltage drops is quite manageable, that's only 5%
of the voltage. At twice the current with a 50V pack, you'd drop 10v
through the same connections but that's now 20% of your original voltage!
Diodes themselves do not make a voltage doubler. There are capacitive
voltage doublers and inductor/transformer based DC/DC converters. The
design requirements for these power levels are phenomenal.
Fine for an EV scooter though! At lower currents it's much easier to
build interconnects and a controller that have negligible losses.
Danny
mike golub wrote:
I was wondering for safety sake if I could design a
battery system on 42 volts?
Supposedly 42volts DC won't kill you?
So if had two banks each consisting of either 7 6volts
PbA or 5 8volts.
Then I'd use some heavy duty diodes to make the boost
"voltage doubler"
Has anyone else done this. I was wondering for
liability it might be better if the voltage was lower.
Thanks
Michael Golub
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
True, but at $2.90 per cell (a recent quote for the 2400 mAh) that's $17400
for a 53.2 kWh pack.
That doesn't include the required BMS, charger or cell balancer.
While the range and weight are great it's not affordable for everyone.
Yet.
The propulsion is at least 150 kW, likely more as that is
a pretty old number from AC Propulsion.
divide 150000 by 6000 cells and we get 25 Watt per cell.
My guess is that a Lithium cell will sag to 3V or lower
under max load, so to get 25W it needs to deliver 25/3
or more than 8 Amps.
Where did you get the 2A number?
Was that during charging?
Cor van de Water
Systems Architect
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Private: http://www.cvandewater.com
Skype: cor_van_de_water IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +1 408 542 5225 VoIP: +31 20 3987567 FWD# 25925
Fax: +1 408 731 3675 eFAX: +31-87-784-1130
Proxim Wireless Networks eFAX: +1-610-423-5743
Take your network further http://www.proxim.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Lawrence Rhodes
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:55 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
The 18650 is the way to go. Springs and tubes if you can believe it. Each
cell never sees more than two amps. Lawrence Rhodes........
----- Original Message -----
From: "GWMobile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
> I thought so. Plus with the chrysler patent blocking deployment in cars
> it seems homemade is the way to go.
>
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 2:33 pm, Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
> > Exactly. For instance the Tzero & Tesla Roadster have each over 6000
> > batteries. Lawrence Rhodes.....
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "GWMobile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 12:22 PM
> > Subject: Re: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
> >
> >
> >> Anybody run the numbers on assembling an ev from small nickal metal
> >> hydrides?
> >> As in consumer electronic equipment types? Or is that what you are
> >> doing?
> >>
> >> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 8:41 am, Lawrence Rhodes wrote:
> >> > I goofed on the weight & ah of their pack.
> >> >
> >> > But, by referring to capacity of Optima battery, you could get
(in
> >> > theory)
> >> > a 50-cell pack (10s x 5p config) with 12V 45Ah at estimated weight
> >> > ~10Kg (22
> >> > pounds). Given a careful housing design, this pack could be
> >> discharged
> >> > at
> >> > 50A continuously, and be recharged at 3.6A per 10-cell sub-group.
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Lawrence Rhodes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>;
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 8:11 AM
> >> > Subject: Intelect 9 ah D cells.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> 3.85809 is the weight of one string( each cell is 175 gram) at
12v
> >> > equaling
> >> >> 9ah. Just multiply by the ah you need. It would be in units of
> >> >> 9ah. So
> >> > an
> >> >> Optima sized pack would be around 23 pounds & 54 ah. 60
> >> batteries. 20
> >> >> batteries or about 8 pounds for a BB 17 ah sized battery that
is
> >> >> 18ah for
> >> >> the d cells. At 5 dollars per cell that is 300 per battery. At
> >> 10
> >> > dollars
> >> >> per cell that is 600 dollars or what you'd spend for a used
> >> Panasonic
> >> >> NiMh
> >> >> from a Rav4. Lawrence Rhodes.....
> >> >>
> >>
> >> www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily updated facts about hurricanes,
> >> globalwarming and the melting poles.
> >>
> >> www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake data.
> >>
>
> www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily updated facts about hurricanes,
> globalwarming and the melting poles.
>
> www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake data.
_________________________________________________________________
Search—Your way, your world, right now!
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&FORM=WLMTAG
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi, Sharon. Out of curiosity, would you mind letting us in on some details,
like where your shop is in the country, and how you got started in the business?
Obviously, you're making enough to live on - that in itself is fantastic, and
more than many have been able to acheive. Personally, if I could convert cars
to electric full time, I'd jump at the chance.
Also, do you have some sort of standard package? All your conversions seem to
go together very quickly, at least compared to those of us doing it an hour or
two at a time in our garages. Do you consider any vehicle or only certain
types?
Thanks!
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: Sharon G Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:44:37 PM
Subject: #22
,,Hi Number 22 for a conversion just made it to our shop, we have 2 in there
now, one almost finished. one 1/2 way done. So it will sit out side till next
week when we can start on it,,Its much better building them than talking about
tail gates or tail lights.
LOL LOL
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Where did you see a price?
On the web site I read that it has two independent 9" motors, but I do not
see where it says no transmission (or reduction gears).
"200mi and more on a charge"? Thats pretty good. I wonder if this is a
claim or an actual result.
Front wheel is "non-load bearing" - wonder how this will handle on wet
surfaces?
Can't say much for the looks though...
Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of GWMobile
Sent: October 11, 2006 4:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Electricvette.com homebuilt electric trike in popular science this
month
Think it is electrivette.com without the c
I just saw this in the magazine.
He used two independent electric motors - one on each rear wheel with no
transmission. Controls them with a joystick.
Lead acid batteries.
Looks good and is inexpensive.
Electricvette.com homebuilt electric trike in popular science this month
www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily updated facts about hurricanes,
globalwarming and the melting poles.
www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake data.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I know all about this one!
It is a bit of a beat-up. He certainly knows how to use the media.
Either that or the media must just make up whatever they feel like to
fill in the space!
It doesn't comply with any ADRs, and I understand he has been advised by
engineers that it would be a major redesign to get it close to meeting
them. Similar sized cars like the SMART all have to comply and do, but
he has been avoiding it probably due to the cost of modifications
exceeding the value of the car.
I believe it was actually imported by someone else who had no import
approval... He saw one in London and thought "Great, I'll order one from
India and get it sent to Australia so it is there when I get back". With
no paperwork it stayed on the docks while he tried to get it released,
but as it met no standards it was not going anywhere.
I heard that owner 'gave' it to the current owner if he could get it
released, which he did as an "Engineering Evaluation Vehicle" which
means it is to be tested, but not driven on public roads. He drove it on
roads and incurred the wrath! If it is not made to comply, the
conditions of import stipulate "export or destroy". Even as a "one-off"
type import, it still needs to meet the safety requirements.
He tried to get it accepted here in this State, as the Feds said "If
they say it is OK, it will be OK anywhere". They know we are thorough
here! We had a real good look at it before we said 'no', so he took it
to Western Australia where they register just about anything... go for
the weakest link.
But at the end of the day, if it is not meeting the minimum safety
requirements, the Federal Government will not give an import approval
anyway.
Personally, I want to be driving electric... but I don't think I would
not buy one of these.
Tim.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Fowler
Sent: Thursday, 12 October 2006 3:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: REVA (not) in Australia
I just spoke to Tom at DOTARS
http://www.dotars.gov.au/utilities/contact.aspx
He's going to find out what they actually said to Mr Ferraretto about
the Reva and give me a call tomorrow.
Let's see what happens...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Massey
> Sent: Thursday, 12 October 2006 1:49 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: REVA (not) in Australia
>
>
> At 01:13 PM 12/10/06 +1000, Mark wrote:
> >I don't get the crushing bit.
> >
> >The three articles that came up on Google News when I asked
> about "Reva
> >Australia" all mentioned that the car would have to be exported or
> >crushed.
> G'day Mark, and All
>
> It wouldn't be the first time our local rag got it wrong,
> but, page 82 of
> Launceston Examiner (Thursday October 12, 2006)
>
> ================
>
> Title: Electric car off the roads
> CANBERRA - Bureaucracy is denying Australian motorists the
> chance to drive
> electric, Labor says.
> The Reva electric car has been imported from India by an
> Adelaide company,
> but must be either crushed or exported next month under a
> ruling from the
> Department of Transport and Regional Services.
> Federal Roads Minister Jim Lloyd said the Reva did not meet
> Australian
> safety standards and could not be run on Australian roads.
> Opposition transport spokesman Kerry O'Brien said the Reva,
> built for urban
> commuting, should not have to stand up to the same safety
> standards of open
> road vehicles capable of doing 200kmh.
> "restricted to low speeds, quadricycles won't be for
> everyone, but have the
> potential for short trips or commuting to work at low cost
> with a minimum
> impact on the environment" Senator O'Brien said."But the
> Howard Government
> is saying the Reva has to be measured against the same standards as
> petrol-powered cars such as the Commodore or Falcon, weighing
> four times as
> much and capable of speeds well in excess of the legal limits."
>
> ================
>
> That's all I know.
>
> Regards
>
> [Technik] James
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
They learned to used sub c cells because D cells can't deliver the
peak amps :)
Mike
> <smart_ass>
> Imagine that, a little toy D-cell doing 250amps, maybe those R/C guys
> know something others don't
> </smart_ass>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Having braking only on the rear wheels makes the front wheel a load
bearing member as the it gets more weight during the consequent weight
transfer during braking. Not to mention it cannot stop nearly as well
only using rear brakes as the weight transfer moves the weight from the
rear wheels to the front wheel.
I like the body style.
Mike
--- Don Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where did you see a price?
>
> On the web site I read that it has two independent 9" motors, but I
> do not
> see where it says no transmission (or reduction gears).
>
> "200mi and more on a charge"? Thats pretty good. I wonder if this is
> a
> claim or an actual result.
>
> Front wheel is "non-load bearing" - wonder how this will handle on
> wet
> surfaces?
>
> Can't say much for the looks though...
>
>
>
>
>
> Don Cameron, Victoria, BC, Canada
>
> see the New Beetle EV project www.cameronsoftware.com/ev
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On
> Behalf Of GWMobile
> Sent: October 11, 2006 4:00 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Electricvette.com homebuilt electric trike in popular
> science this
> month
>
> Think it is electrivette.com without the c
>
> I just saw this in the magazine.
>
> He used two independent electric motors - one on each rear wheel with
> no
> transmission. Controls them with a joystick.
>
> Lead acid batteries.
>
> Looks good and is inexpensive.
>
> Electricvette.com homebuilt electric trike in popular science this
> month
>
>
>
>
> www.GlobalBoiling.com for daily updated facts about hurricanes,
> globalwarming and the melting poles.
>
> www.ElectricQuakes.com daily solar and earthquake data.
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I will throw my name into the hat to be on the RAV4 EV purchasing list,
even if it means a second mortgage or leasing my wife's womb!
I find it absolutely aggravating, frustrating and maddening, that as a
consumer I cannot go to my local Toyota dealer and lease a RAV4 EV.
Within the last two years I have purchased 50 thousand dollars worth of
vehicles from General Motors yet I would MUCH rather lease an EV1 and
Rav4 EV, but this option is not available today. These two vehicles
would meet my needs completely and utterly. Furthermore, the auto makers
would have an unending monthly stream of income due to a lease as
opposed to the 0% purchases I now have.
Obviously, Big Oil and Big Auto have conspired against the US consumer
by continually foisting gigantic, fuel inefficient vehicles upon the
public. This creates unnecessarily high demands for gasoline with the
resultant price inflation at the pump. I dream of the day when there is
a RAV4 EV, EV1 and/or small electric pickup in everyone's driveway AND
the stoppage of American dollars traveling overseas to oil producing
nations AND the disappearance of the plethora of gas stations that we
now see.
This is certainly no revelation to the readers of this mailing list, but
it frosts my pumpkin that I do not have a choice in this matter.
However, I have called AND written my representatives in Congress to let
them know how I feel and to urge them to write legislation more
favorable to the production of ZEV and BEV's.
I wish Doug the best of luck and hope that his fellow Californians will
put the heat on LADWP.
doug korthof wrote:
Hello,
Los Angeles DWP has operations in 5 states, spreads from the Owens Valley to
Orange County, and has a special exemption written into Prop 218 to accomodate
its power.
LADWP has been returning fleet-leased Toyota RAV4-EV, placing them at the mercy
of:
TOYOTA POLICY ON LEASE RETURN RAV4-EV
"...When a customer does return a RAV4 EV that is in good condition, it will
continue to be put into service through community groups and our company fleet.
Because many are reaching the end of their sustainable life, we need to keep close
tabs on every car and we would not want to burden a customer with the technical
costs associated with an aging vehicle.
"...When these cars reach the end of their sustainable life, we feel we have a
responsibility to recycle certain materials and dispose of hazardous materials, such as
the battery pack, properly. Toyota has a rigorous process for retiring the EVs that
maximizes the recovery of recyclable components and minimizes the exposure of substances
of concern. For instance, all fluids and refrigerants are removed, the battery is
deactivated and sent to a certified battery recycler, and the de-contented vehicle is
then sent to a certified destruction facility. All recyclable metals, plastics, fibers,
glass and rubber are separated for re-use...documented at our National Headquarters under
file #200610091351..."
The best fate for lease-returns is to be evaluated by Toyota: if "good", they
get sent to remote locations, such as Catalina Island, where ironically all electric
comes from diesel generators subsidized by the mainland ratepayers. If they fail these
unstated criteria, and eventually, they are dismantled, crushed, and, ultimately, JUNKED.
Instead of losing these great cars, and the EV-95 Panasonnic NiMH batteries
that are irreplaceable since Chevron-Ovonyx-Cobasys-ENER-Texaco's legal action
against Toyota-Panasonic, we'd like to see the leases assumed by an EV-oriented
entity, and, ultimately, purchased for use by individual EV drivers. If, in
the fullness of time, they get scrapped, there are many parts on board that
might be of interest for EV converters or builders. Especially, the batteries.
Currently, Toyota wants to control all spare parts and the fate of these
vehicles. Once they are sold, as they should have been originally, their
disposition is up to their owners. For some reason, Toyota hates this idea,
and is bitterly opposed to letting the vehicles go on the open market.
Next Tuesday, Oct. 17, at 1:30 PM, the LADWP Board has asked Staff to report on why they
were returning these vehicles (Staff stated that they don't want them, they no longer
have a use for them) and to report on the condition of them, so that the Board can decide
whether they should cherry-pick the "good ones" and dispose of the rest.
Here is the letter I'm sending out:
Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power
Board of Commissioners
Barbara Moschos [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TEL 213-367-1356, FAX 213-367-1423
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO THE COMMISSIONERS
RE: 74 fleet lease-return Toyota RAV4-EV
Dear Board of Commissioners,
These 74 RAV4-EV are the last of the fleet of EVs once used by DWP. They were being returned routinely to Toyota, the current batch of 24 had been slated to be returned on Sept. 30.
Thank you for asking Staff to report on the condition of the 74 RAV4-EV
currently leased by DWP. Your timely intervention has so far saved these
irreplaceable clean cars from being returned to Toyota and an uncertain fate --
either donated to far away agencies, used at Toyota plants, or, usually,
dismantled and demolished. At the next meeting, a chilling account from Toyota
will be read about how Toyota strips and crushes these much-wanted clean
Electric cars.
But these RAV4-EV are not wanted by DWP Staff. Testimony by Staff at the last meeting indicates that these RAV4-EV no longer meet Staff needs. At the next meeting, members of the public plan to commit enough resources to guarantee lease payments and to purchase all the RAV4-EV.
The Board will be asked to transfer the leases to an entity set up for that
purpose. This request will be in accordance with Staff testimony that with the
limited range and maintenance, the RAV4-EV are a cost item, and were replaced
by rental cars and by a recent purchase of 90 Prius non-plug-in hybrid vehicles.
We propose to take that burden from DWP.
After we assume the leases, we will use the existing precedent and request that
Toyota sell them to us at the established residual value of approximately
$22,000 each. Whether this is successful or not is our problem, not DWP.
We ask for your cooperation in transferring the leases from Toyota to us,
and/or in facilitating the conversion of these leases to purchases, a precedent
set by Toyota and other lease-purchasers in the past.
Thank you very much,
Doug Korthof
1020 Mar Vista
Seal Beach, CA 90740-5842
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cell phone 714-496-1567
cc. many
--- End Message ---
