--- Begin Message ---
Where did you buy that stuff? I would love to do the same thing!
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adrian DeLeon
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 2:05
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Buss Bars
I'm using 1" x 1/16" Cu bar with T-105 batteries in a 114V system. They
are easy to bend by hand, and sharp corners can be made by clamping the
bar in a vise. Drilling accurate holes with a hand drill was
problematic.
A punch helped, but the holes still came out a bit sloppy.
The bars are covered in clear heatshrink to prevent accidental shorts,
and the exposed ends are covered in anti-oxidant compound. Each bar has
at least two bends so it can flex with any battery movement. I can
easily move adjacent batteries by 1" or more without fear of snapping a
lead post. My average current draw is 125A, but I've done 350A for over
a minute and the bars are never warmer than the batteries. Cu is a great
heatsink, so maybe they cool down by the time I open the hood...
$30 was enough to connect 19 batteries with lots of material left over.
It's also great for wiring circuit breakers, contactors, and shunts into
small spaces. The best part - no crimping lugs onto 2/0 cable! So much
for the crimp vs solder debate :)
Ampacity charts show 1" x 1/16" as:
187A (30C temp rise)
250A (50C temp rise)
285A (65C temp rise)
3/16" might be too stiff to flex with battery movement, but you could
leave space between batteries to allow them to expand without stressing
the posts. Something like 1/4" wooden or plastic spacers between the
batteries (at the bottom only) to keep them from shifting around in your
battery box.
My battery wiring can be seen here - http://www.evalbum.com/776
Adrian
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED--- *
* This post contains a forbidden message format *
* (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting) *
* Lists at sjsu.edu only accept PLAIN TEXT *
* If your postings display this message your mail program *
* is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
------_=_NextPart_001_01C6EEBA.6D5213F4"
Subject: RE: Buss Bars
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:26:28 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Buss Bars
Thread-Index: AcbuklBJ873sq9E7SU2cDxudQK4mogAKBHIg
From: "Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G--
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 04:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dave Cover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: finally working
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Moths were attracted by the heat and light of the vacuum tubes, or so they say.
--- Danny Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was told in school that the term "debugging" came from the original
> enormous relay-based computers which actually had bugs crawl into the
> relay contacts.
>
> Could be an urban legend, though.
>
> Danny
>
> Ted C. wrote:
>
> > Debugging is always fun.
> >
> > (Sorry, I had too)
> >
> > Ted
> > Olympia, WA
> > N47 02.743 W122 53.772
> > Thank GOD for Thomas Edison. Without him we would all be watching TV
> > by candle light.
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Calvin King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:51 PM
> > Subject: finally working
> >
> >
> >> A few weeks back I wrote how my car simply would not start. After a
> >> lot of help from David Brandt and a whole lot of going around in
> >> circles with my meter, I am finally mobil again.
> >> I finally narrowed it down to the contactor even though it gave every
> >> appearance of working. Following David's suggestion I removed it to
> >> clean any possible corrosion buildup. I did not find much in the
> >> way of corrosion on the contacts, but I did not a dead bug caught
> >> between the bottom contacts. After removing the bug and cleaning
> >> the contacts. I am back on the road.
> >> Thanks to all for the overwhelming support and interest.
> >>
> >> Calvin King
> >> Leesburg, GA
> >> '81 Jet Electrica 96 volts
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 04:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What EV would you do with big funds?
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
1969 AMC Javelin (there was one 2 seater model that was 2900 lb. or so, but
VERY hard to find, according to the specs available on the web. The rest were
portlier). - $ 6000 or thereabouts - the difficult part is finding one.
Direct drive using siamese 11's (one normal, one transwarp style). 3600 + 3000
= $ 6600
Z2K with series-parallel shifting = $ 4600
300V of orbitals - 25 * 170 = $ 4250
PFC charger - $1500
Contactors - up to 6 at $ 120 = $ 720
Regs = 25 * 45 = $ 1125
So the basics cost $ 24745
New rear end to get the right ratio - $ ?
Metallic or pearlescent bright red paint job
The rest would be $5k or less, so a total under $30k.
If you wanted to use it for something other than racing, you could couple an AC
drive to the transwarp. Add $12k or so.
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: Ryan Bohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: EV List <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 10:58:56 PM
Subject: What EV would you do with big funds?
Hi EVerybody,
I've been wondering what type of a setup I'd do with virtually unlimited
funds. I'd like to hear what type of an EV all of you would put
together with a big chunk of money. Maybe "unlimited" is a bit too
lofty. How about you get to pick your donor car (no limit on $ for
that), and $40k for everything else. That will at least make it
somewhat creative and semi-practical.
Bonus points for the coolest EV at the lowest price :)
-Ryan
--
- EV Source <http://www.evsource.com> -
Professional grade electric vehicle parts and resources
E-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Toll-free: 1-877-215-6781
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 05:03:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: finally working
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
This was a puzzling one for sure. I initially discounted the contactor because
Calvin heard it 'clack' as it pulled in. But then all his readings indicated
that it was the problem - the circuit wasn't electrically closing. The only
thing that could cause that was something in/on the contactor tips. He did
read 3.3V across the terminals with the key on. I guess that's how much the
bug conducted. Guess he can call his EV 'the bug zapper' now!
One more thing to look out for if using open frame contactors, I guess.
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: Calvin King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 11:51:58 PM
Subject: finally working
A few weeks back I wrote how my car simply would not start. After a
lot of help from David Brandt and a whole lot of going around in
circles with my meter, I am finally mobil again.
I finally narrowed it down to the contactor even though it gave every
appearance of working. Following David's suggestion I removed it to
clean any possible corrosion buildup. I did not find much in the way
of corrosion on the contacts, but I did not a dead bug caught between
the bottom contacts. After removing the bug and cleaning the
contacts. I am back on the road.
Thanks to all for the overwhelming support and interest.
Calvin King
Leesburg, GA
'81 Jet Electrica 96 volts
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 05:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wiring a Ceramic Heater
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Yep, that's it. switch polarity every terminal, winding up with 1,3,and 5
being one and 2 and 4 being the opposite polarity.
Yep, a fuse and a relay rated for pack voltage. KTA's relay package includes
arc snubbers and a fuse for both the positive and negative side. Add a
fuseholder and you have all the parts you need.
David Brandt
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 12:55:37 AM
Subject: Wiring a Ceramic Heater
I just got my 120v 1500 watt DC ceramic heater, and I'm not 100% sure
how to wire it up.
The other heater I have (which I took apart) has 3 "cells", and 3
leads. The 2 outside leads are wired to positive, and the middle is
negative.
This heater core has 5 cells and 5 leads. I did a little googling
for ceramic heaters but never found anything which said specifically
how to wire them. I guessing that I alternative positive and negative
across the leads.
Postive to 1 3 and 5, and negative to 2 and 4. Is this correct?
Do I need to do anything special other than putting a fuse inline to
the battery pack, and probably a relay for the on-off switch?
Chris
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 06:39:19 -0700
From: Matt Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Power Technology
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I cannot find it on the website now, but I remember reading that this
company does not actually intend to manufacture batteries, but intends
to license the technology. They also have a big part of the website
devoted to the plant they are building so who knows. I don't think you
can buy the battery yet.
Curtis Muhlestein wrote:
>How do these batteries compare to Odyssey batteries?
>
>http://www.pwtcbattery.com/technology/
>
>
>
>Curtis Muhlestein
>
>
>
>
From: "Rick Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Buss Bars
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 09:40:03 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-us
I have plenty on stock in 1/16" X 7/8" and 1/8" X 3/4" CU bar If anybody
needs some let me know how many inches and I can send it out. Also if you
want it precut into pieces that makes shipping even easier!
-Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dewey, Jody R ATC COMNAVAIRLANT, N422G5G
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Buss Bars
Where did you buy that stuff? I would love to do the same thing!
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adrian DeLeon
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 2:05
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Buss Bars
I'm using 1" x 1/16" Cu bar with T-105 batteries in a 114V system. They are
easy to bend by hand, and sharp corners can be made by clamping the bar in a
vise. Drilling accurate holes with a hand drill was problematic.
A punch helped, but the holes still came out a bit sloppy.
The bars are covered in clear heatshrink to prevent accidental shorts, and
the exposed ends are covered in anti-oxidant compound. Each bar has at least
two bends so it can flex with any battery movement. I can easily move
adjacent batteries by 1" or more without fear of snapping a lead post. My
average current draw is 125A, but I've done 350A for over a minute and the
bars are never warmer than the batteries. Cu is a great heatsink, so maybe
they cool down by the time I open the hood...
$30 was enough to connect 19 batteries with lots of material left over.
It's also great for wiring circuit breakers, contactors, and shunts into
small spaces. The best part - no crimping lugs onto 2/0 cable! So much for
the crimp vs solder debate :)
Ampacity charts show 1" x 1/16" as:
187A (30C temp rise)
250A (50C temp rise)
285A (65C temp rise)
3/16" might be too stiff to flex with battery movement, but you could leave
space between batteries to allow them to expand without stressing the posts.
Something like 1/4" wooden or plastic spacers between the batteries (at the
bottom only) to keep them from shifting around in your battery box.
My battery wiring can be seen here - http://www.evalbum.com/776
Adrian
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Bob Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: GWiZ 5th gear review, an' Stuff
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:06:25 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philippe Borges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 3:57 AM
Subject: Re: GWiZ 5th gear review
> i think this was not biased at all and it's a very important opinion as it
> come from an "alien people" for us
> which are living ina perfect pluged world :^)
> Yeah! Alotta Alians out there<g>!Sorry, couldn't resist!
> it clearly and simply show ...with 1 pence humor, poor childs...what this
> Gwiz (Reva) car can and cannot do, that we need charging
> infrastructures to bring EV available for everybody, changing friends look
> about tiny city cars etc...
> The charging will come, like the Field of Dreams Movie" Build it and
they will come?"
> For me its a very educational video about what non EV passionnate can feel
> about little city EV as such.
> We need to learn from this and adapt our speech, products, etc. to attract
> these people to the good side of the Ev-force...
> Well put!
> cordialement,
> Philippe, about 860km distance from London without recharging, helped by
> most powerful world EV...
> French TGV train :^)
> Hi EVerybody;
Surf into " Trains" on You Tube for some stunning "Driver's(engineer's)
View" on TGV, as well as the Reva review. Anybody know how to post to You
Tube? This would be a great media for the White Zombies PIR runs!All you
computer geek guyz on here could post stuff?Drool over TGV and sleep well,
it will never happen here? Sigh. (retired Acela Driver,here, only 150 MPH,
Rhode Island goes by pretty fast, on only about 30 miles of it's 400 mile
route.)
My two Acela's Worth
Bob
TGV fun stuff; NY Chicago in about 5 hours,Chicago Denver7
hours,NYC Miami-6hrs.IF the Good Folks in France built us one! I mean we PAY
them to<g>!A 5 sense a gal gas tax would pay for it!!!
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: "Flaps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: EAA Meeting.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:13:06 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi EVerybody;
The usual late reminder of our regular EV Club meeting, tomorrow, Sat. at
my place in Ct. Killingworth. Around 2pm we get started , usually. Bill G.come
earlier if ya want to charge longer. Good old Bad Boy awaits With the right
Anderson plug!Plenty of OTHER nice juicy outlets for any other EV's that want
to come!Any Electrac' ers come along too. I like to include you guys in EV
stuff as we have alot in common.
Seeya
Bob.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:26:34 -0700
From: John Wayland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [email protected]
Subject: Electrovair Corrections
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello to All,
This response is a bit delayed and is now not all that timely, but I
thought I'd send it out anyway. In what appears to me to be a trend of
misinformation being spread on the EVDL...everything from a megadollar
capacitor powered race-prepped EV1 that barely matched the stock battery
powered car's 1/4 mile performance being hailed as a huge success (not),
to a '3700 lb. Corvette conversion with less than 150 hp projected to be
a 'performance' EV (not) , I'm concerned that newbies are getting
incorrect info. We can normally can count on Lee Hart to be steadfastly
accurate, but as I read Lee's comments concerning the '66 GM prototype
'Electrovair' I found myself disagreeing with nearly all he wrote. With
deserved respect towards Lee, I thought I'd present another view...
Ryan Stotts originally wrote:
>> [Electrovair] Impressive voltage, range, and decent top speed. Even
>> used an AC motor. All back in 1966!
Response from Lee Hart:
> It's more amazing than that. The Electrovair was the same size, same
weight, same top speed, same range, same oil-cooled 3-phase AC
>induction motor, same 100kw 3-phase inverter, same transmissionsless
13,000 rpm motor setup, and same high voltage battery pack as >the
highly touted GM EV1!
Perhaps Lee was generalizing with his comments. Perhaps I'm taking the
word 'same' too literally. Perhaps he was going with the generalized
view that both were small cars, both had high voltage battery packs, and
both had AC drives. For me however, saying that a 512V silver-zinc pack
is the 'same' as a 343V NiMH pack, or that 0-60 in 16 seconds vs 0-60 in
8 seconds is the 'same', is going too far. Maybe in regards to pack
voltage - both the Electrovair and the EV1 had high voltage packs, the
compared to an average conversion's 120-144V pack they are the same, but
in the context of this EVDL being a place where good information can be
counted on, they are far from being the same.
Let's examine the following:
(1) same size?
Not correct, unless you consider a car more than a foot longer than the
other, the same size! The '66 Electrovair was 13 inches longer at 183
inches vs the EV1's trimer 170 inches. The Electrovair was also two and
a half inches taller, and in automotive size terms, that's a lot.
(2) same weight?
Way off here. The Electrovair was a porky 3400 lbs. while the EV1 even
with its much larger and heavier battery pack that either weighed 1310
lbs. or 1147 lbs. depending on chemistry (lead acid or NiMH) only tipped
the scales at 2910 lbs. A difference of 500 lbs. is HUGE.
The first two categories above, from Lee Hart's perspective, suggested
the two cars' body types were similar, I say they were not. Even more
dissimilar, are the suspension systems of the two cars being compared.
Most notable is the more conventional front and rear track widths of the
old Corvair, where the EV1 had a wider front stance in front and a much
narrower rear stance to go along with the car's teardrop-shaped body.
The rear track was 9 inches narrower than the front! The 2000-2006 Honda
Insight emulates this approach with a teardrop shaped body and a rear
track that's 4 inches narrower than the front.
(4) same high voltage battery pack?
As covered above...not remotely the same. The Electrovair had a rare
silver-zinc battery pack, the first gen EV1 had a common lead acid
battery pack with the 2nd gen EV1 getting a more advanced NiMH battery
pack. These chemistries are not close to being the same. As to the
voltage, again, not remotely the same. The Electrovair's silver-zinc
pack was at a lofty 532 volts...more then 200 volts higher than the
highest voltage NiMH 343V EV1 pack, and 230 volts higher than the 312
volt lead acid pack!
(4) same range?
Way, way off! The Electrovair was rated at 40-80 miles. Though the 1st
gen. lead acid powered EV1 was rated at 60-90 miles, the 2nd gen EV1 was
officially rated at 100-130 miles. I personally drove a NiMH powered
gen. 2 EV1 at an average speed of 70 mph for 110 miles and had 29%
charge left when I plugged it it at the trip's end. Had I kept going to
100% of the calculated range, the car was good for 150+ miles on that
day! At a more conservative 55-60 mph I imagine that particular EV1
could have nailed 160 miles on one charge.
Though I have not seen the Electrovair in person, let alone drive it, I
imagine that driven the way I drove the EV1, it probably would have
yielded 40 miles at the same speeds I drove the EV1 at. Anyone think 40
miles @ 70 mph is the 'same' as 150 miles @ 70 mph?
(5) same 0-60?
>The 0-60 mph time was an artificial limit set by the inverter control
logic. Their goal was to exactly duplicate the performance of the >stock
Corvair.
Again, w-a-a-ay off! The stock Corvair (non-turbo model) ran 0-60 in
10.8 seconds. The Electrovair ran those same numbers in 16
seconds...argghh! If GM's goal was to 'exactly duplicate the performance
of the stock Corvair', they were far off that mark. As to 'an artificial
limit set by the inverter control logic', this is possible, but it would
have only been so as to limit current draws so they could extract as
much possible range from that battery pack as they could. It was not
done to restrict the acceleration numbers. I imagine the GM engineers
working on the project at the time probably wrestled with the two tough
goals of giving the car 'the same 0-60 acceleration as a stock Corvair'
and achieving the best range per charge so as to make the electric car's
range seem acceptable to most. If they had turned up the screws to give
the car 0-60 in 10 seconds, the range at the hands of road testers
probably would have dropped to 20-40 miles, an unacceptable range
performance to those involved, I'm sure. Leaving it where it was (0-60
in 16 sec.) and getting the 40-80 miles per charge stats was certainly a
compromise.
> The inverter was built with SCRs.....It growls, whistles, and sings
to you. :-)
Though forklift technology has gone from growling SCR controls through
series-wound motors, to squealing transistor control through either
series-wound type or sep. ex. type motors, to higher frequency silent
transistor controls through sep. ex. motors, to the current push into AC
drives, the majority of forklifts still on the job are the
SCR-series-wound motor types, and yes, they growl, moan, and hum along.
I can only imagine the racket the SCR based AC drive in that Corvair
made! If ever there was an EV candidate for being more obnoxious
sounding than a squealing Curtis 1231C powered conversion, this would be
it :-(
In closing, here's a bit of stats for anyone who's still interested:
'66 gasoline Corvair: 183" long, 69.7" wide, 52.8" high, 108" wheel
base, 55" front track, 56.6" rear track, 2720 lbs., 110 hp, 0-60 in 10.8
sec.
'66 Electrovair: 183" long, 69.7" wide, 52.8" high, 108" wheel base, 55"
front track, 56.6" rear track, 3400 lbs., 115 hp, 0-60 in 16 sec.
532V silver-zinc pack, 40-80 miles
'98 Gen II EV1: 170" long, 69.5" wide, 50.4" high, 98.9" wheel base,
57.9" front track, 49" rear track, 2910 lbs., 137 hp, 0-60 in 7.6 sec.
(best time of road test data found, average is closer to 8.5 seconds),
343V, 26.4 kwhr, 1147 lb. NiMH pack, 100-130 miles
See Ya......John Wayland
From: "Michael Trefry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Fuel gauge Peukert correction, was: lee's emeter companion?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:49:59 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-us
Just thought I'd throw my two cents in here (not that it's worth much around
here).
I have an 88 BMW 325, and one handy feature it has is a gauge that tells me
what my current MPG consumption is. (I think it's based on RPM and MPH, but
it could be something more complex).
This little gauge has an enormous psychological effect on me. If I really
step on the gas, the thing drops to sometimes under 5 MPG, if I let it
coast, I can get it to say 50 MPG, but on a normal straight away at about 40
mph, it stays at around 30.
With the cost of gas, believe me, I try to keep that needle as high up in
those numbers as possible, and it's really affected the way I drive the car.
I think that providing an estimate of the remaining "tank" or time left
driving based on your current driving behavior would also have this effect.
If I were to step on the pedal and see that needle tell me I've got 10
minutes of driving like this left, I'd let off and breathe easier when it
told me I had 45 minutes of driving left (or whatever it would be).
Just a thought.
Mike
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 10:54:50 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: finally working
From: "Chris Robison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Well, there was that famous moth that flew into a relay in Harvard's
MarkII mainframe in the 40s. But the colloquial engineering term "bug"
meaning "technical glitch" predated that by decades.
So what was really funny about that incident was that the term "bug"
already existed, and the engineers had found that the problem they were
troubleshooting was caused by a real, physical bug. So they amused
themselves by taping it to their log book, with the phrase "First case of
actual bug being found."
--chris
On Fri, October 13, 2006 12:06 am, Danny Miller said:
> I was told in school that the term "debugging" came from the original
> enormous relay-based computers which actually had bugs crawl into the
> relay contacts.
>
> Could be an urban legend, though.
>
> Danny
>
> Ted C. wrote:
>
>> Debugging is always fun.
>>
>> (Sorry, I had too)
>>
>> Ted
>> Olympia, WA
>> N47 02.743 W122 53.772
>> Thank GOD for Thomas Edison. Without him we would all be watching TV
>> by candle light.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Calvin King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 8:51 PM
>> Subject: finally working
>>
>>
>>> A few weeks back I wrote how my car simply would not start. After a
>>> lot of help from David Brandt and a whole lot of going around in
>>> circles with my meter, I am finally mobil again.
>>> I finally narrowed it down to the contactor even though it gave every
>>> appearance of working. Following David's suggestion I removed it to
>>> clean any possible corrosion buildup. I did not find much in the
>>> way of corrosion on the contacts, but I did not a dead bug caught
>>> between the bottom contacts. After removing the bug and cleaning
>>> the contacts. I am back on the road.
>>> Thanks to all for the overwhelming support and interest.
>>>
>>> Calvin King
>>> Leesburg, GA
>>> '81 Jet Electrica 96 volts
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 10:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: john bart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cheap motors for Lawnmowers, E-bikes
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
AS&S told me that the torque rating of 2150 oz/in was a continous torque rating
at the rpm of 3200 i believe it was. But its probably the stall rating like
you said. Anyhow, wouldn't having larger wire improve the power output of the
motor, and resist heating of the motor wires? I'm not only going to make one
pass on these motors, probably many, just not right after each other.
I am currently planning on using 660 1600 mah gp 160sck nicad cells that can
do 30 amps continous. I'm figuring each cell will give me 48 watts peak.
Performance at 60 amps the voltage drops to .8 , so about 31.6 kw peak power.
So the configuration will be 60 cells in series, then 11 of those in parallel,
so under full load the voltage drops to 48 and 660 amps. So the motors wont
really even really be able to draw enough amps to fry it.
I'm no motor expert though, let me know what you think of this configuration.
I also have some pics of the internals of the motor if anyone is interested let
me know and i'll send you them.
Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, I';m speculating here. AS&S
states that the motor has 2150 oz/in of
torque. I'm going to assume that is the stall torque when run on 24V.
If so, then the motor probably draws 250 amps stalled. The 10ga wire is
probably sized to handle that....briefly.
Pushing these motors to 48V will probably push more current through them,
but you said you'll have 3 motors on the bike? That's 750 amps already.
What are you planning on using for batteries if you are expecting to draw
MORE than 750 amps without sagging down to 24V?
Four Orbitals will do it, but that's almost 200lbs of batteries.
Anyway, I'd bet if you pushed much more than 250 amps through this motor,
you'd run the risk of permanently weakening the magnets, even if you
didn't melt the windings.
> Well the idea was to have more amp flow to the motor. I'm only running
> the motors for 1/8 mile runs, not continous so im not sure if the motor
> would burn out or not with higher current. I'll also be running the
> motors at 48 volts and limiting the rpm to 4k to avoid self destruction.
>
> Peter VanDerWal wrote: Why would you want to change
> the pigtails? Granted lareger wires are less
> likely to melt, but all that means is that you melt the windings INSIDE
> the motor instead.
>
>> I just bought one of these motors also, but i got mine from american
>> science and surplus for 50 bucks. :) I'm also wondering what kind of
>> peak performance i can get out of this motor, im lookin to use 3 for a
>> drag pocket bike. I'll be putting on larger cable of course, probably 6
>> gauge, maybe 4 if i can fit it in there somehow. Let us know how these
>> motors work out for you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>> HI Folks,
>>
>> A while back someone posted a link to a surplus 24V DC lawn mower motor
>> at
>> Supluscenter. Silly me I went out and bought one, before I checked
>> around.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong, this is a great motor, and surplus center had them
>> for
>> a decent price. The thing is, the day after I ordered it, I found the
>> EXACT same motor at American Science and Surplus for $20 less.
>> http://www.sciplus.com/category.cfm?subsection=18&category=173
>>
>> This is a 24V DC 1.5hp motor. It's a totally enclosed, non venting
>> motor,
>> so it must be pretty efficient. I can't test this right now, because I'm
>> in the middle of moving house.
>>
>> Anyway, the motor weighs 12lbs including the large aluminum flange. This
>> is actually the end bell of the motor, so you can't just remove it. You
>> could trim it down though, if you wanted to.
>> The wires coming from the motor are 10ga, which according to my charts
>> are
>> good for about 55 amps. That sounds about right for 1.5 hp output.
>> Apparently the motors are made by Tecumseh(at least that's what's
>> printed
>> on the box they come in), and I believe they were used in Toro battery
>> powered mowers.
>>
>> Obviously these would be excellent for a battery powered mower.
>>
>> I'm planning on seeing how well they work on my trike, I'll let you
>> know.
>> The 7/8" dia shaft should make it easy to find sprockets, from go-carts,
>> etc.
>>
>> Anyway, $50 seems like a really good price for a 1.5 hp motor.
>>
>> Cheers, Pete.
>>
>> --
>> If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
>> junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever
>> I
>> wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
>> legalistic signature is void.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
> junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
> wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
> legalistic signature is void.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
starting at 1¢/min.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 10:02:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: john bart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cheap motors for Lawnmowers, E-bikes
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
AS&S told me that the torque rating of 2150 oz/in was a continous torque rating
at the rpm of 3200 i believe it was. But its probably the stall rating like
you said. Anyhow, wouldn't having larger wire improve the power output of the
motor, and resist heating of the motor wires? I'm not only going to make one
pass on these motors, probably many, just not right after each other.
I am currently planning on using 660 1600 mah gp 160sck nicad cells that can
do 30 amps continous. I'm figuring each cell will give me 48 watts peak.
Performance at 60 amps the voltage drops to .8 , so about 31.6 kw peak power.
So the configuration will be 60 cells in series, then 11 of those in parallel,
so under full load the voltage drops to 48 and 660 amps. So the motors wont
really even really be able to draw enough amps to fry it.
I'm no motor expert though, let me know what you think of this configuration.
I also have some pics of the internals of the motor if anyone is interested let
me know and i'll send you them.
Peter VanDerWal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, I';m speculating here. AS&S
states that the motor has 2150 oz/in of
torque. I'm going to assume that is the stall torque when run on 24V.
If so, then the motor probably draws 250 amps stalled. The 10ga wire is
probably sized to handle that....briefly.
Pushing these motors to 48V will probably push more current through them,
but you said you'll have 3 motors on the bike? That's 750 amps already.
What are you planning on using for batteries if you are expecting to draw
MORE than 750 amps without sagging down to 24V?
Four Orbitals will do it, but that's almost 200lbs of batteries.
Anyway, I'd bet if you pushed much more than 250 amps through this motor,
you'd run the risk of permanently weakening the magnets, even if you
didn't melt the windings.
> Well the idea was to have more amp flow to the motor. I'm only running
> the motors for 1/8 mile runs, not continous so im not sure if the motor
> would burn out or not with higher current. I'll also be running the
> motors at 48 volts and limiting the rpm to 4k to avoid self destruction.
>
> Peter VanDerWal wrote: Why would you want to change
> the pigtails? Granted lareger wires are less
> likely to melt, but all that means is that you melt the windings INSIDE
> the motor instead.
>
>> I just bought one of these motors also, but i got mine from american
>> science and surplus for 50 bucks. :) I'm also wondering what kind of
>> peak performance i can get out of this motor, im lookin to use 3 for a
>> drag pocket bike. I'll be putting on larger cable of course, probably 6
>> gauge, maybe 4 if i can fit it in there somehow. Let us know how these
>> motors work out for you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter VanDerWal wrote:
>> HI Folks,
>>
>> A while back someone posted a link to a surplus 24V DC lawn mower motor
>> at
>> Supluscenter. Silly me I went out and bought one, before I checked
>> around.
>>
>> Don't get me wrong, this is a great motor, and surplus center had them
>> for
>> a decent price. The thing is, the day after I ordered it, I found the
>> EXACT same motor at American Science and Surplus for $20 less.
>> http://www.sciplus.com/category.cfm?subsection=18&category=173
>>
>> This is a 24V DC 1.5hp motor. It's a totally enclosed, non venting
>> motor,
>> so it must be pretty efficient. I can't test this right now, because I'm
>> in the middle of moving house.
>>
>> Anyway, the motor weighs 12lbs including the large aluminum flange. This
>> is actually the end bell of the motor, so you can't just remove it. You
>> could trim it down though, if you wanted to.
>> The wires coming from the motor are 10ga, which according to my charts
>> are
>> good for about 55 amps. That sounds about right for 1.5 hp output.
>> Apparently the motors are made by Tecumseh(at least that's what's
>> printed
>> on the box they come in), and I believe they were used in Toro battery
>> powered mowers.
>>
>> Obviously these would be excellent for a battery powered mower.
>>
>> I'm planning on seeing how well they work on my trike, I'll let you
>> know.
>> The 7/8" dia shaft should make it easy to find sprockets, from go-carts,
>> etc.
>>
>> Anyway, $50 seems like a really good price for a 1.5 hp motor.
>>
>> Cheers, Pete.
>>
>> --
>> If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
>> junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever
>> I
>> wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
>> legalistic signature is void.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
> junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
> wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
> legalistic signature is void.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 12:03:20 -0500
From: Ralph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: finally working
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Awesome!
This is the original way in which the first computors got a 'bug' and the term
stuck.
-Ralph
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 23:51:58 -0400
Calvin King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A few weeks back I wrote how my car simply would not start. After a
> lot of help from David Brandt and a whole lot of going around in
> circles with my meter, I am finally mobil again.
> I finally narrowed it down to the contactor even though it gave every
> appearance of working. Following David's suggestion I removed it to
> clean any possible corrosion buildup. I did not find much in the way
> of corrosion on the contacts, but I did not a dead bug caught between
> the bottom contacts. After removing the bug and cleaning the
> contacts. I am back on the road.
> Thanks to all for the overwhelming support and interest.
>
> Calvin King
> Leesburg, GA
> '81 Jet Electrica 96 volts
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ricky Suiter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What EV would you do with big funds?
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
New Mini Cooper, I'd somehow make the AC propulsions controller fit under the
hood. It of course would be lithium powered. Keep the weight down low and it
would probably out handle a stock Mini and be faster than the limited
production JC Cooper Works edition. I'd be find with 250 miles range, thats all
I need to go to Vegas.
The Mini market finally came down from insane not too long ago. They wern't
cranking them out all that fast so the resale value was very good. They finally
hit market saturation so you can actually buy one now. And yes I know they
built a few electric Mini's for the Italian Job movie. And there was also the
one with 4 wheel motors they demonstrated in Europe. I want my own!
I actually toyed with the idea of a mini conversion, but there just wasn't
quite enough room of GVW for a decent size lead pack.
Later,
Ricky
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:23:55 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Re: Cheap motors for Lawnmowers, E-bikes
From: "Peter VanDerWal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> AS&S told me that the torque rating of 2150 oz/in was a continous torque
> rating at the rpm of 3200 i believe it was.
Can't be continuous. That would work out to almost 7hp.
> Anyhow, wouldn't having larger wire improve the
> power output of the motor, and resist heating of the motor wires?
Nope, not really. Total length of both pigtails added together is about 3
feet. That works out to 0.0029967 ohms of resistance. 6ga will be about
1/2 of that.
Thew difference will get maybe 0.5% more power out of the motor and this
is only at really high current levels. At normal power levels, it's maybe
0.2%.
It would help with the heating a lot at the really high current levels,
however the 10ga wires would probably melt shortly before the internal
windings did. Switching to 6a means that the internal windings melt
first. Your choice.
> I am currently planning on using 660 1600 mah gp 160sck nicad cells that
> can do 30 amps continous. I'm figuring each cell will give me 48 watts
> peak. Performance at 60 amps the voltage drops to .8 , so about 31.6 kw
> peak power. So the configuration will be 60 cells in series, then 11 of
> those in parallel, so under full load the voltage drops to 48 and 660
> amps. So the motors wont really even really be able to draw enough amps
> to fry it.
220 amps into the motor /will/ fry it, the only question is how long until
it happens.
I'm assuming you are going to use some kind of PWM controller. A binary
controller (i.e. contactor/big knife switch) would definitely blow
something quick.
The problem with PWM controllers is that they do current amplification.
You'll probably want to limit the output current from the controller to
something like 750-1000 amps. Of course with your battery setup, this
probably means that each motor will be seeing 250+ amps for the entire
run.
So if the run takes, say, 15 seconds, can the motors survive 15 seconds at
250 amps?
--
If you send email to me, or the EVDL, that has > 4 lines of legalistic
junk at the end; then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I
wish with the message. By posting the message you agree that your long
legalistic signature is void.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:22:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Bath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wiring a Ceramic Heater
To: [email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I'm looking at the wiring diagram taht came with mine
from KTA:
--- Chris Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just got my 120v 1500 watt DC ceramic heater, and
> I'm not 100% sure
> how to wire it up.
>
> This heater core has 5 cells and 5 leads. I did a
> little googling
> for ceramic heaters but never found anything which
> said specifically
> how to wire them. I guessing that I alternative
> positive and negative
> across the leads.
>
> Postive to 1 3 and 5, and negative to 2 and 4. Is
> this correct?
>
YES!
> Do I need to do anything special other than putting
> a fuse inline to
> the battery pack, and probably a relay for the
> on-off switch?
No. Fuses are a good place to start, but you need a
P&B relay to handle the combination of
current/voltage, but also a snubber to suppress the
arc as you switch it on. (2) 1 uF mylar caps, (2) 100
ohm 1W resistors, and two diodes.1N1188.
Hope that helps get you going.
peace,
Converting a gen. 5 Honda Civic? My $20 video/DVD
has my '92 sedan, as well as a del Sol and hatch too!
Learn more at:
www.budget.net/~bbath/CivicWithACord.html
____
__/__|__\ __
=D-------/ - - \
'O'-----'O'-'
Would you still drive your car if the tailpipe came out of the steering wheel?
Are you saving any gas for your kids?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Cor van de Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Fuel gauge Peukert correction, was: lee's emeter companion?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 11:33:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Mike,
Correct. The electronic equivalent of this MPG display
can be found in the consumption display of the Prius.
On some cars it was no more than a green light on the
dash, which made is almost completely useless.
Originally this "efficiency gauge" was based on motor vacuum
the higher the vacuum, the lower the consumption so higher MPG.
Today the sensors report the rate of fuel injection, so it can
be calculated.
I agree that a display "miles to go with current rate of driving"
is a very useful feature. Only question is how it should average,
whether it makes sense to average for minutes to avoid the
freeway on-ramp merging to destroy your range, although it should
quickly climb up once easing up on the pedal, so you get a more
stable reading but it can be mistaken for a while when you
switch driving modes from fast freeway / slow surface roads or
from descending to ascending a mountain ridge.
In the BMW it responds within a few seconds to a change in throttle,
there is a little delay but it settles in about 3 seconds if I
recall the behavior from my 325i correctly.
In the Prius you have three displays in one screen:
- instantaneous MPG
- average MPG per 5 min of the last 1/2 hour of driving
- numerical average MPG and miles since last reset (usually per tank)
It does not have the here suggested "how much is left"
indicator, nor how far it can take you. You can (and I do) this
math in the head by multiplying the estimated gallons left from
the fuel gauge with the MPG average...
But now we are talking about a "miles left" indicator.
Very useful, but mainly in addition to a "fuel gauge" as
that is a universal present and appreciated instrument.
I would certainly like both.
Indeed the efficiency meter has influenced my driving a lot,
especially the Prius display.
I routinely got close to 25 MPG in the BMW although I
drove that a lot different than the Prius or the EV.
It also is in the type of car....
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 Michael Trefry
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Fuel gauge Peukert correction, was: lee's emeter companion?
Just thought I'd throw my two cents in here (not that it's worth much around
here).
I have an 88 BMW 325, and one handy feature it has is a gauge that tells me
what my current MPG consumption is. (I think it's based on RPM and MPH, but
it could be something more complex).
This little gauge has an enormous psychological effect on me. If I really
step on the gas, the thing drops to sometimes under 5 MPG, if I let it
coast, I can get it to say 50 MPG, but on a normal straight away at about 40
mph, it stays at around 30.
With the cost of gas, believe me, I try to keep that needle as high up in
those numbers as possible, and it's really affected the way I drive the car.
I think that providing an estimate of the remaining "tank" or time left
driving based on your current driving behavior would also have this effect.
If I were to step on the pedal and see that needle tell me I've got 10
minutes of driving like this left, I'd let off and breathe easier when it
told me I had 45 minutes of driving left (or whatever it would be).
Just a thought.
Mike
--- End Message ---
